They cannot simulate what we’d see when rising above a ball Earth, from the ground up to ‘space’ with a ball Earth seen at the end.
You sure love repeatedly contradicting yourself.
Previously you claimed it is easy.
You just refuse to do it.
I'm not going to do it here, because it has no bearing on the thread, which is the FE's inability to produce a horizon.
You keep appealing to it as if it is your get out of jail free card.
The main problem they cannot solve for, or skip past, is how the horizon looks when we rise up in planes and see them rise up to us.
You mean the problem you cannot solve, is that it doesn't.
Instead, it has a measurable angle of dip, clearly showing your delusional BS is wrong.
And where do they start to show a curved horizon, after it’s still flat by that point?
The horizon is always curved, and is always flat.
It is a circle.
A circle is 2D shape, so it must be flat.
But it is a curve.
The issue what angle you look at it from.
This also provides a very simple alternative than a computer simulation. You can try a model.
Go get a nice big ring, set it up so your eye is in the centre (ideally just have one eye open for the closest match), and then see what it looks like as your eye height changes.
As a comparison, if the ring has a radius of 1 m, then to match the horizon at an observer height of 2 m for a RE would require your eye to be 0.8 mm above the ring.
For a plane at 10 km, it would require your eye to be 5.6 cm above the ring.
It’s a spin to make people think they are curved there, don’t see them horizontal anymore, we’ll show you it’s curved until you believe it!
You mean it is reality you hate so you need to lie about it, so you continually lie, repeating the same false claim that the horizon is always magically seen level with your eyes, even though you have NOTHING to show that to be the case.
You tried it with aeroplane windows, and it showed it was not what you claimed. It showed you were lying to everyone.
You were shown clear photographic evidence that it is NOT level, and you dismiss it as fake.
The one repeatedly lying here is you.
You lie about reality to pretend it matches your delusional fantasy, even though you have nothing to support those lies.
Yet you ignore that and continue repeating your lies.
You really love saying there’s an ‘angle of dip’ to the surface, but it’s just more bs.
What do you mean by a ‘dip’? Are you again trying to reinvent another meaning of a word, as you tried with ‘level’
No, it is a simple fact that destroys your delusional BS.
It is simple geometry.
A dip means a slope or downward angle
It means a downwards angle.
If you are standing on level ground, what is the angle to the ground 1 m in front of you?
Is it downwards?
Or is that magically not down?
Likewise, the photos clealry demonstrate the horizon is angled down from the viewer, it is not level. It is at a downwards angle.
Dips are downward, not less upward than before. That is a lesser rise or upward slant.
No why don't you try that honestly?
The "rise" you continually appeal to is actually a lesser downwards angle.
The ground directly below your eyes is straight down.
That is a downwards angle of 90 degrees.
Then as the ground goes off into the distance, the ground is less downwards. Not physically, just based upon angle.
i.e. the angle of dip reduces.
Until it reaches the horizon and then starts going back down.
The surface is entirely flat
No it isn't. That is your entirely baseless claim.
You cannot explain just how this appears magically perfectly flat.
and visible up to a horizon.
i.e. the very thing you keep fleeing from which clearly shows Earth is round.
Perspective isn’t your magical excuse machine like gravity is
The one trying to use it as a magic excuse machine is YOU!
YOU cannot change how it works.
It is basic geometry.
Basic geometry which demands that for a flat surface it will continue to rise forever, never producing a horizon.
But that doesn't stop blatantly lying about it.
Likewise, it is basic geometry which works on points, as explained.
It doesn't matter what the shape of the surface is.
All that does is tell you how far you can see the surface.
For a flat surface, you can see forever, with no horizon ever forming (until the edge of the surface).
For a round surface, which is large enough compared to your height, you can see a distance of sqrt(2*r*h) along it before the horizon.
For a smaller round surface, or for greater distance, the formula is more complicated.
But it remains basic geometry.
It is not the magical get out of jail free card you want to pretend.
Perspective does not magically decide to magically stop working and magically produce a horizon on a flat surface.
make it flatten curves into flat surfaces until the curve comes out of nowhere and destroys perspective
That is just your pathetic strawman.
Back in reality, curvature is always there. It makes the ground appear slightly lower than it would if it was flat. But at short distance, that difference is negligible.
Here is a comparison, showing the angles expected for an observer height of 2 m (with a boat height of 1 m if I recall correctly).

This has 5 lines.
The green and red represent a hypothetical flat Earth and a hypothetical round Earth.
This is the angle of dip to a point on the surface a given distance away.
This is basic geometry, the geometry that perspective relies upon.
These curves start out overlapping, only being slightly different when they reach a small enough angle to be shown on this graph.
That is because the difference between h0/d and h0/d+d/2r is basically nothing when r is much much larger than d.
But eventually they do start showing a significant difference, but that is only when the angle is already tiny.
But the important difference is that the red trace, representing a flat Earth continues to rise forever, while the green trace representing reality stops going up and instead starts going down.
The peak of that green trace is the horizon, with the angle of that shown as the black line.
Importantly, when an object is above Earth, we can see that eventually it drops below that black line and is hidden from view.
But for your fantasy Earth, that never happens. There is never ground in front of the object at the angle of the object.
Again, the RE model works and is consistent and coherent.
All you have are incoherent lies you continually repeat to avoid reality.
Science at work, no doubt. Lol
No, your dishonest, delusional BS at work yet again, where you continually lie about as many things as you need to pretend your delusional BS works, and avoid answer simple questions which show you are spouting pure BS.
Again, care to answer the questions that show you have been lying to everyone?
Why does the horizon form at 5 km?
Why does it vary with altitude?
What is this magical formula you claim you have?
Why does the angle of dip increase with increasing altitude?
Can you honestly answer any of these, or are you only capable of repeating the same pathetic lies again and again?