What would a flat earth engineering school look like?

No, a level and horizontal path of flight

Means it follows the curve of Earth. Lying about that won't change it.

Once more, the circle around Earth is a level and horizontal path.
You cannot show any part of it not being horizontal or level.
Instead you can just repeatedly lie to everyone.

Again, if you wish to disagree, draw such a hypothetical level and horizontal flight path for a round Earth.
If you can't do this, stop lying about it.

No, it’s impossible to fly level over a non level curved surface.

Again, lying wont help you.
It just shows how utterly pathetic and dishonest you are.

Does a ball have a level flat horizontal surface on it?

Notice how you are throwing in an extra word?
It does not need to be flat to be level and horizontal.

It doesn’t work at all. Your tiny measurements of a slight curve may measure as level, but that’s because it’s not accurate enough to measure the curve over a tiny distance. It doesn’t measure as level, it’s inaccurately measuring as level.

No, it is accurate enough to measure level. And it shows it as level.

Again, if you wish to disagree show what a level path should have to look like for a round Earth.
Again, if you can't you are just lying to everyone.

Adjustments you mean.

They are different on every flight, some have few adjustments others have more adjustments.

We adjust for them, return to level flight once again. That’s what we adjust for.

I guess you think flights have all sorts of adjustments on every flight that the curve is magically flown as level!!!

Is this meant for me?

Yes, flight control changes (i.e. inputs from the flight crew or far more comon the autopilot) are adjustments to cope with those factors I describe, which are thousands of times more significant than any adjustments required to stay level over, say, the curve of the ocean's surface.

You use the word 'we' - are you a pilot?

Could you re-state your point here please? It's difficult to understand it the way you've phrased it.

There isn’t level flight over a globe, it’s impossible to do that.

A curved path would be flown over a curved surface, period

Yes, if we discount altimetry and all the other forces acting on an aircraft in flight, and only consider an aircraft flying at exactly 10,000ft above the surface of the ocean, it does follow the curvature and nobody feels any adjustment because that adjustment is so small, and the radius of the curve is so large.

A flat earth engineering school would look like a class of special education students putting blocks of Lego together.

Turbonium would be top of his class with hos snot dribbling down onto all the Lego, which the other students are then using. If Turbonium, could stop from trying to shove Lego blocks up his own nostrils, he could really be a high achiever.

A flat earth engineering school would look like a class of special education students putting blocks of Lego together.

Turbonium would be top of his class with hos snot dribbling down onto all the Lego, which the other students are then using. If Turbonium, could stop from trying to shove Lego blocks up his own nostrils, he could really be a high achiever.

literal lol. well done.

Measurements cannot be twisted and used in separate tiny individual segments.

Measurements cannot be faked or so small to not measure correctly and then combined as if valid.

A curve cannot be sliced into tiny pieces of a straight line and combined together as a straight line!

That’s what you’re trying to do here, and it never works out!

Measurements cannot be twisted and used in separate tiny individual segments.

Do you even understand how to measure something for level? Or flatness?
That MUST measure each tiny segment.
You can't just ignore it all.

A curve cannot be sliced into tiny pieces of a straight line and combined together as a straight line!

We are talking about level, not straight.
Again, the curve is level.
Your hatred of reality will not change that.

Measurements cannot be twisted and used in separate tiny individual segments.

Measurements cannot be faked or so small to not measure correctly and then combined as if valid.

A curve cannot be sliced into tiny pieces of a straight line and combined together as a straight line!

That’s what you’re trying to do here, and it never works out!

But nobody has said this is the case, nor is anyone 'trying to do that'.

As I said, discounting altimetry, an aircraft flying level, at a fixed altitude above the sea, will be flying a curve; respecting the curve of the earth, as gravity always acts towards the centre of the earth.

Quote from: turbonium2 on September 10, 2025, 10:29:16 PM

Measurements cannot be twisted and used in separate tiny individual segments.

Do you even understand how to measure something for level? Or flatness?
That MUST measure each tiny segment.
You can't just ignore it all.

Quote from: turbonium2 on September 10, 2025, 10:29:16 PM

A curve cannot be sliced into tiny pieces of a straight line and combined together as a straight line!

We are talking about level, not straight.
Again, the curve is level.
Your hatred of reality will not change that.

You can keep on saying a curve is level again and again  forever, it won’t change the fact that any curve is never level.

Only a horizontal line or surface can ever be level, being a horizontal path or line.

You really believe a ball has a horizontal surface? Thanks for being a complete idiot!

it won’t change the fact that any curve is never level.

Repeatedly asserting pathetic crap, wont make it true.
Even look at what you are saying now:

Only a horizontal line or surface can ever be level, being a horizontal path or line.

How does this exclude the possibility of being curved?

You really believe a ball has a horizontal surface? Thanks for being a complete idiot!

You mean thanks for not being a complete idiot and not just accepting your pathetic BS.

Once more, horizontal is perpendicular to down.

So taking a perfectly spherical ball, where "down" is towards the centre, the surface is horizontal and level.

Do you have anything to refute that?
No.
Of course not.
All you have is your pathetic denial.

Quote from: turbonium2 on September 12, 2025, 05:11:50 PM

it won’t change the fact that any curve is never level.

Repeatedly asserting pathetic crap, wont make it true.
Even look at what you are saying now:

Quote from: turbonium2 on September 12, 2025, 05:11:50 PM

Only a horizontal line or surface can ever be level, being a horizontal path or line.

How does this exclude the possibility of being curved?

Quote from: turbonium2 on September 12, 2025, 05:11:50 PM

You really believe a ball has a horizontal surface? Thanks for being a complete idiot!

You mean thanks for not being a complete idiot and not just accepting your pathetic BS.

Once more, horizontal is perpendicular to down.

So taking a perfectly spherical ball, where "down" is towards the centre, the surface is horizontal and level.

Do you have anything to refute that?
No.

Of course you are wrong, the one center point atop the gyro will ever be or could ever be level, it is one point atop a sphere, so it constantly seeks to be level on a ball but will never be level, it is used as close to where level is or would be, gyros don’t measure for level or ascent or decent, other instruments like the VSI measure for that.

What they are used for IS INDEED DRIFT. Which means, any drift of the plane is indicated as a drift on the gyro, and path drifting off its close to level path is shown on the gyro. 

It is yet another instrument helping to measure for level flight over the fkat and level Earth below, just like their other instruments measure for.

How many excuses have you tried to dispute our very instruments on planes as not measuring for level and horizontal flight paths?

I can’t wait to hear the next load of crap your side comes up with, if there’s any left to try by now, because I’ve seen everything from what level means instead of what it’s always meant, to tiny little measurements on a curve to try and get away with it measuring as level, and hoping no by realizes it’s just not an accurate instrument, and on and on..

Of course you are wrong

If I am wrong, why are you incapable of explaining how what I have said is wrong, with direct reference to what I have said, and instead need to deflect to other pathetic crap like a gyro, which has no bearing on the discussion here.

How many excuses have you tried to dispute our very instruments on planes as not measuring for level and horizontal flight paths?

Absolutely none. I have just provided reasons you can't refute.
Meanwhile, how many pathetic attempts have you made, bringing up the same pathetic refuted BS?
So many I have lost count.

Grow up.
Deal with the topic at hand, or get lost.
All your continued deflections do is confirm to everyone that you are a worthless, lying, subhuman POS that doesn't give a damn about the truth at all, and that you have no way of honestly and rationally defending your pathetic, dishonest, delusional BS.

Once more, deal with the issue at hand. The idea of a horizontal or level surface on a round Earth.

Why don't you try defining what those words mean without lying by claiming it means flat.
Horizontal is talking about a direction. So what direction is it?

And for a hypothetical perfectly spherical Earth, what direction would it be?
Try drawing it.

There’s no horizontal to a curved surface or line, only to a flat and level and horizontal surface or line.

Our Earths surface is our reference to being horizontal and flat.

It was created that way, and so it is.

How it was created only our Creator knows, but I know it exists and is flat and level andhorizontal over the surface of Earth.

We measure for level on the surface which is level, or in air above earth which flows above the level surface

There’s no horizontal to a curved surface or line

Again, more pathetic deflection, and just a pathetic baseless assertion.

There IS horizontal with a curved surface.
You not liking that wont change it.

Our Earths surface is our reference to being horizontal and flat.

So a rough and irregular surface, which is in no way flat, is somehow your reference to horizontal and flat?
So is the side of a cliff face horizontal?

created

Baseless asserting your delusional fantasy wont help you either.
There is absolutely no reason to think this world was created, and it still doesn't mean you can't have horizontal on a round surface.

Again, just what do you think horizontal/level mean?
Try doing it without saying flat.
Try drawing it.

Again, the fact you continue to dodge these simple issues demonstrates that YOU are the one who is wrong.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on November 14, 2022, 08:41:23 AM

How would flat earth make better bridges, more efficient aircraft, better navigation systems, and targeting systems with better tactical advantages?


What tactical advantages would flat earth bring to a modern navy?  For bringing ships faster and more efficiently on station?  Saving time and money while beating competing navies to the punch?   

Everything always HAS been based on the flat Earth, that's the reason it DOES work out.

We've NEVER used a ball Earth, a curving surface, for anything we've done, we've designed, or built on Earth. Look through any of our past documents, that were used to build something, and see if you can find 'curvature' mentioned at all, because it's rarely found, and when it IS mentioned at all, it's only in RECENT papers, because they're trying to back pedal for nothing supporting 'curvature' in our documents, or drawings...

Think about how ridiculous it is -

'Curvature' is claimed to have an ACTUAL RATE, of curve, which is 8 inches per mile, squared.

Having this as your 'rate of curvature', means it would be USED, DOCUMENTED, and accounted for, BEFOREHAND. It would be known as curving at that rate, because it WOULD exist, as being the real surface of Earth. There'd be no possible reason it would NOT be considered that way, taken that way, used that way.

Every design would be more complicated, harder to make accurately, IF there actually was 'curvature' of Earth's surface, which you'd only understand, if it was there to BE accounted for, because you believe there IS 'curvature', some sort of 'phantom' that cannot be seen, cannot be measured, isn't relevant to account for in SMALL areas, completely ignoring it.....

But the main problem with your argument, is that you have said it has an actual RATE, and if there IS a rate for 'curvature', it WOULD be mentioned, documented, stated as an actual rate, because what other actual rate, from the countless OTHER actual rates we have, or have hijacked for a made up 'force' called 'gravity', is the only 'rate' that's never once been MENTIONED, as an actual 'rate', or any 'rate' at all, because it's NOT mentioned anywhere, even when 'curvature' IS spoken of! 

When they DO mention 'curvature', you think it supports your argument for it existing. But in fact, by pointing it out in a textbook, for example, they do NOT mention a 'RATE of curvature', something that WE ALL KNOW, is 8 inches per mile squared!

If WE know the 'rate of curvature', THEY would obviously know it, but when they don't even MENTION this rate, after they mentioned 'curvature' in the textbook, that means it is a ruse, a sham, say the word 'curvature', and all is good!

Would anyone like to take the time to fact check this?

It would most likely be a waste of time as the actual real and true facts are somewhat irrelevant. Anyone who has studied engineering or a branch of science to any great extent will soon realize that knowledge in very much interconnected with one fact supporting a number of others.
Though why let facts get in the way?

What this clown obviously fails to realize that all the physical laws we have come to understand and are the basis for all our knowledge and learning would not be possible on a planet that was flat. What the clown fails to understand is the laws that’s govern the earth as it currently exists can’t be taken and transplanted on to an earth that is flat.

Why? The conditions and natural laws would need to be very different for a flat planetary object to be created. In this reality the natural laws state that all planetary bodies have to be spherical, like it or not. The problem is that realisation takes some thinking that is most likely beyond that of a clown brain.

For a planet to take on a flattened form the laws of nature would therefore have to be very different to the ones we currently observe and experience on our own planet. If the earth were flat then all other observed planets would also have to be flat….. that would have course have to apply to the sun! This is a simple fact that the flat earth mind had never been able to cope with.

They have always imagined that their simple belief transcends facts.
The problem is they now have a point as in the world if today facts count for little. If that is indeed the case then opinion rather than any facts will determine the shape of the earth.

To go back to the original question concerning the flat earth approach to engineering….. the simple answer is that would not be possible. Why?

Science and engineering have come about through accumulation of knowledge based on validated research which all fly in the face of a flat earth.

Belief in a flat earth has no factual basis relying on nothing more than conspiracy while Engineering is based on hard and proven facts. The two are totally incompatible.

Would anyone like to take the time to fact check this?

The FE mantra is "I've made up my mind.  Don't confuse me with the facts."

Quote from: Timeisup on September 17, 2025, 12:45:59 AM

Would anyone like to take the time to fact check this?

The FE mantra is "I've made up my mind.  Don't confuse me with the facts."

i couldnt find that quote in the official FES constitution or charter. can you link me to this crazy quote? i may have to reconsider my membership if that is now the mantra.

i couldnt find that quote in the official FES constitution or charter. can you link me to this crazy quote? i may have to reconsider my membership if that is now the mantra.

It is unspoken but closer to the truth than would be in a perfect world.

Quote from: markjo on September 17, 2025, 02:11:58 PM

Quote from: Timeisup on September 17, 2025, 12:45:59 AM

Would anyone like to take the time to fact check this?

The FE mantra is "I've made up my mind.  Don't confuse me with the facts."

i couldnt find that quote in the official FES constitution or charter. can you link me to this crazy quote? i may have to reconsider my membership if that is now the mantra.

While not exactly that, it is certainly a lot like this from the wiki (which unfortunately, has now been entirely removed):

Essentially the reasoning boils down to -
P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated
P2) The FET (Flat Earth Theory) is an obvious truth
P3) There is personally unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET
C1) The unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET is fabricated evidence
P4) If there is large amounts of fabricated evidence then there must be a conspiracy to fabricate it
P5) There is a large amount of fabricated evidence (see C1)
C2) There must be a conspiracy to fabricate it.

Where they just assert Earth is flat, and reject anything that contradicts it as fabricated and part of a conspiracy.

The conditions and natural laws would need to be very different for a flat planetary object to be created. In this reality the natural laws state that all planetary bodies have to be spherical, like it or not.

It’s complete bs.

There are no other planets but our Earth alone.

The others are stars, not planets, we called them wandering stars before the liars came along.

Saturn is a ball shaped star with a ring, Jupiter is roundish, but if an orb isn’t shown, as yet, a round disk maybe, an orb maybe.

Moon and Sun are round in shape, and so is the Earth round in shape, and flat on its surface.

But if you look close up at mars or Venus, they’re not even close to this NASA garbage!

A red dusty ball planet, what a joke! Venus and the rest are made up bs stories.

We’ve now seen them up close, filmed them up close, and they lied about them to us, big time lies.

Earth is unique and special, life is given to us and is most special of all.

Same old bs story, as always.

See what they really look like close up on our own videos, not the bs fake ball shit from NASA.

They’re such liars, fakers, and this again proves them liars and con artists.

Unless you’ve seen Mars as a red ball planet, not a shape changing star, nothing close to their story….

It’s complete bs.

Why, because you don't like it?

Or are you just summing up your post?

What seems to be entirely missing from your post is anything to do with the topic.

Again, just what do you think horizontal/level mean?
Try doing it without saying flat.
Try drawing it.

Again, the fact you continue to dodge these simple issues demonstrates that YOU are the one who is wrong.

Earth’s very surface is our horizontal path of direction, and so is the air above the surface at horizontal to the surface of Earth.

Our instruments are designed to measure for level, using both the surface and the air as our references for level and horizontal.

Aerodynamics is flowing through air at level paths within it.

When a pilot adjusts a flight, he knows why he’s adjusting the flight for a reason, it’s not just adjusted for no reason.

They don’t just ‘adjust for curvature’ along a flight, that’s just stupid

Earth’s very surface is our horizontal path of direction

So you think the face of a cliff is horizontal?

You think a mountain side, or the side of a hill is horizontal?

Then you are a complete imbecile.

But we both know that isn't the case.
Instead, we both know you are wilfully lying to everyone.
Desperate to try to pretend Earth is flat, so you come up with this pathetic lie, all to avoid admitting what horizontal actually means.

But notice the bigger problem with that claim for you.
Image Earth is a perfect sphere.
If the surface is our horizontal path, and the air also provides a reference for that; why does that mean that that can't happen on this hypothetical, perfectly spherical Earth?

When a pilot adjusts a flight, he knows why he’s adjusting the flight for a reason

So all pilots are men now?
And yes, they do. For example, they know they need to trim the aircraft to pitch up/down if their attitude is not correct.
They don't care why it isn't correct.
It could be because a fat guy came to the front of the plane, or it could just be the curve of Earth.

Likewise, if they are climbing, they adjust to maintain altitude. They don't care why.
That will naturally account for the curvature of Earth.

But what does any of that have to do with what horizontal and level means?

Again, what does horizontal and level mean? Try not using stupid crap like Earth's surface which is known to be rough and irregular; and don't say flat.

When a pilot adjusts a flight, he knows why he’s adjusting the flight for a reason, it’s not just adjusted for no reason.

They don’t just ‘adjust for curvature’ along a flight, that’s just stupid

Your last sentence there is actually functionally correct. They don't really need to do so. Any adjustment required to pitch down to follow the gradual curvature is negligible compared to the adjustments made due to the forces and accelerations experienced in flight, and completely unnoticed, especially given the change in forces that would occur if an aircraft were to fly 'straight' (so as to begin climbing, rather than follow the curvature). This is again discounting how aircraft fly with reference to a pressure datum.

I'll ask for a fifth or maybe sixth time on this board; are you a pilot? What is your experience level  in aviation?

When a pilot adjusts a flight, he knows why he’s adjusting the flight for a reason, it’s not just adjusted for no reason.

They don’t just ‘adjust for curvature’ along a flight, that’s just stupid

How much 'adjustment for curvature' would be required during 5 minutes of flight, in degrees? Do you know?

If you think about it, the curvature at 35,000 feet is a bit less than the curvature at sea level.  Therefore, the adjustment would be even less noticeable than you might expect.

When a pilot adjusts a flight, he knows why he’s adjusting the flight for a reason, it’s not just adjusted for no reason.

They don’t just ‘adjust for curvature’ along a flight, that’s just stupid

there are many reasons for adjusting, yes. From Air Traffic Control requirements (to be in different flight corridors / heights), to weather, to fuel economy and even turbulence.

Flight paths also curve like a stretched rainbow to go from ground, to sky, to ground again.

If you think about it, the curvature at 35,000 feet is a bit less than the curvature at sea level.  Therefore, the adjustment would be even less noticeable than you might expect.

Yes it does, by 0.15%.

My question is, what have we as humans built that would require us to take in the curvature of the earth into account?