Flat Earthers think planes can't work on a globe 

BTW as a pilot, you can't use 550mph to make your points. 550mph doesn't matter as your talking about groundspeed really. All that matters in the air is the indicated air speed.

Dave, there’s a bit more to this, and it may not satisfy astute flerfs (is that an oxymoron?). Pitch stability by design prevents a correctly trimmed plane from deviating from a constant distance from the centre of the Earth. In reality, trim is never perfect so the autopilot maintains pressure altitude in cruise flight. And because (ignoring weather effects) air pressure remains constant at constant distance above mean sea level, the autopilot adjusts the pitch trim to maintain a constant pressure altitude, and follow the curvature of the Earth. So yes, in reality a plane is constantly pitching down (at a _very_ slow rate) as it flies around the globe.

Good video as always, but... Another VPN scam ad = Another thumb down.

@@cosmefulanito5933 How is it a scam?

30 seconds in and there is a typical scam VPN sponsorship. Thats why I stopped my Patreon because you clearly make enough from them paying you to advertise.

So ignorant they don't even know how much they don't know.

This^ Keep on truckin'. 🤙

My favorite argument is their failure to understand speed in a frame of reference. I had an argument with a flerf one time and even showed physical models to explain the issue. No matter how hard he tried, he couldn't wrap his head around the idea of a frame of reference. The scenario was the speed of a car vs the speed that the Earth is rotating. The rotational speed at the equator on average is roughly 1000 mph West to East. He couldn't understand how a car heading East to West on the surface would still be traveling West to East. I used the math and directions (as well as models that I referred to earlier) to show him how it works. I even dumbed it down to a 3rd grade level and he still couldn't get it. It is quite simple, when heading the same direction as the rotation you add the cars speed to the rotation speed, so a car going 60mph in relation to the surface of the Earth, the car would actually be traveling 1060mph in the same direction as the rotation, but when heading the opposite direction as the rotation you subtract the cars speed from the rotation speed, so a car going 60mph in relation to the surface of the Earth, the car would actually be traveling 940mph in the same direction as the rotation. He kept asking how a car driving forward could be travelling backwards and couldn't grasp the concept that frames of reference are not only separate, but also required.

@@jasonpenn5476 Next time just ask him how he thinks people are able to walk up and down a railroad car in motion.

@jasonpenn5476 Gravity alone answers that for a 3rd grader. You're using math that is a bit higher (7th grade). But, yes. Gravity is also a downward pull that is constant around the globe. So, despite its spin, that force is enough to control and dictate speed. Of course, this isn't *always* true, due to elevation and thrust. Point being, traveling 600mph on a plane or 60mph in a car, when you throw a ball uo, it comes back down to you. Flerfers ignore or simply do not know how large the earth is.

😂brilliant joke

WAIT THIS IS BRILLIANT

Well, the scriptures do not say anything about a sphere.

God is a conspiracy. Wake up.

God is not a conspiracy, however, the fake virus is certainly a conspiracy against humanity!@@sophiafakevirus-ro8cc

Nice seeing you here, David

You must be the intelligent one. A ship is operating at sea level not 40,000 above it there DA.

@@tommosher8271 It doesn't matter how high it is, Tom. I don't know why you thought it would.

Never expected to see you here. Hi David!!

​@@tommosher8271Yeah? Boats don't all float at exactly the same height, some dip further into the sea, some stay closer to the surface. Submarines can control a ballast that changes their normal depth beneath the sea. The same is true for airplanes to some extent, they have a standard cruising altitude relative to their speed, lift, and weight.

"Literally no flat earthers has ever claimed that" - referring to claims you can find in every single flat earthers video.

​@@privateinformation2960so why did a NASA employee said that all space content is literally CGI ? Why did I spot the cable from the harness of the scientist in "orbit" ? Why did we "go" on the moon woth a washing machine microchip in 1972 but still.dont have a moon base in 2024 ? Before you call the nasa whistleblower a liar remember, edward snowden, remember julian assange, chelsea manning, the guy from.boing who was executed recently, and be a decent human being.

Yeah but have you considered how NASA uses 50 million dollars per day to make comments like this and also photoshop

I have the same observation with ballistics. Gunners have been doing computations assuming that the Earth is round and they regularly hit their targets.

Ahh that explains the Bermuda Triangle 😂, joking btw.

​@ghost307 oh, you think artillery is accurate? The only thing more accurate than enemy incoming fire is friendly incoming fire! 😂😂😂😂

​@@qlqnenwhere can I get some of that NASA cash?

A big globe the earth is

Yeah, I've marvelled at some of the flat earth videos where they hold a toy plane next to a globe which would be the length of Southern America and somehow think that is meaning full (not to mention some of them appear to think it's like flying "down" a hill)

This one is easy to counter anyway... does a plane flying along the equator needs to steer north permanently to follow it? :P

@@timolynch149 There's a video of a guy holding a small plane over a small globe complaining about how it's "flying upside down". Never mind the fact that the plane he was using was bigger than Australia.

Just a smidgen bigger. A wee tad larger, just by a bit

so... the scale makes the curvature disappear?

​@OskarTBrand in short, yes. From one end of my yard to the other, the curvature of the earth is negligible.

science and logic are not your strongest sides, are they @@wickederebus

@@OskarTBrand that is genuinely how scale works. the earth is far bigger than it is even possible for us to comprehend as humans. you can literally do this same thing on a graph. open up desmos (website), and type in a formula that makes a circle (x^2 + y^2 = [any positive number]). then start zooming in. there comes a point where there is no more curve visible. it's still a circle, you've just zoomed in too much to be able to tell now. this is you. you are a very tiny human on a huge earth. you can't see enough of it.

@@OskarTBrand "science and logic are not your strongest sides, are they" Thanks for stealing a round-Earther's argument commonly levied at you. A lot of you can't just stop with simply lying.

This is actually a way more coherent argument than many that I've ACTUALLY heard from flat earthers

I'm surprised they won't debate you ... Usually they'll accept the debate and then just yell 'nu-uh' at everything

@@DaveMcKeegan I tell them in advance that for the debate they will need to produce a flight plan and explain the non globe equations they used to derive the distances and directions. I'll bring my Globe based equations and the corresponding flight plan. Showing up empty handed is an instant defeat...

They're not going to debate a trained, experienced, and articulate pilot on matters of air travel, because they know that they'll get absolutely shredded.

You may also get responses like "bUt MAtHs iS oNlY NumBErS oN pApEr" because using formulas and equations to predict things and succeeding every single time isn't proof. Proof is only stuff like.. spraying water on a a beach ball or floating eggs in water and drawing wrong conclusions from it.

Oh Wolfie you just reminded me. Last week Mike Jones was trying to claim that haversine equation and vincenty's formula are Euclidean and only work for a flat earth. Pointed out that they are spherical trigonometry and dealing with the surface of a sphere for haversine and oblate spheroid for vincenty's and thus non euclidean. He is still convinced that he knows better though.

"But that's just peanuts compared to space!" R.I.P. Douglas Adams. You are missed more as the years pass.

@@John.0z Miss him too! Met him a few times...

Ahhhh, see, gotcha there. Australia doesn't exist. So you proved you're a NASA/Illuminati schill. Sarcasm. We all know the Earth is perched on a turtle's back!

One thing flerfs have never been able to explain to me.... If my sister has flown from Australia to Los Angeles, and I have flown the opposite direction from Australia to the UK, and my UK ex has flown from London to New York.... Then the east edge of the earth must be on the other side of California and the west edge must be on the other side of New York. So how the fuck do flerf Americans drive east out of California, fall off one side of the earth, and then suddenly appear on the other side and drove to new York. Is it a Pacman type thing where you magically appear on the other side, or a cylinder earth And if we live on a cylinder or a Pacman plane..... *WHY THE FUCK CANT WE BE LIVING ON A GLOBE*

Plus the fact that they keep on with the simple parabolic formula for 'drop' (which works to all intents and purposes for quite a distance... thanks surveyors and mathematicians,,,) yet refuse to use R? ,,, have been to Antarctica and I never saw a penguin with an AK47!

They are really good at insulting people with their complete misunderstanding and denial of basic sciences.

Good you should feel insulted I'm insulted by the chemicals you spray on us so you can keep flying or that you help hide the flat earth with your ignorance.

Buzz Aldrin had a great way to handle people like that. OK, strictly speaking he was a moon hoaxer, but still applicable.

@@tomstamford6837 - oh yeah, he was dope when he gave that moon hoaxer a healthy serving of his knuckle sandwich 🤜

@@tommosher8271 The chemicals they spray on you? Poor little insect. 😂🤣🐞

It's oftem not so much "missed" and more "but I don't agree with physics because I want reality to be different / feel special so I just make up some nonsense I can't prove"

Being a professional photographer gives him some very relevant specialist knowledge.

​@@timolynch149 To be fair, the answers to some of the questions they pose can seem a bit unintuitive - But I agree that it's basically a gesture of defiance, and there's no excuse for pretending that the sun vanishes in the distance.

Not to mention that there are no flat earth surveyors. He did a video on that topic as well.

@@gerontodon Also, going through the English school system gives you at least basic physics, which can be entirely lacking for Americans.

Perhaps if you frame it this way... "The Earth is round and smooth like your brain." they would have a better chance at undrstanding.

I think I've seen explanations for flerfs about where down is for like 10 years, they still aren't getting it.

@@nightmareTomek They wil never get it as long as they deny the existence of gravity. They know full well that if they admit to gravity existing they will have to give up their flat Earth delusion.

​@@chrisantoniou4366 Well, how stupid must someone be to not get where gravity points to, after all these explanations, and while he's trying to debunk the model. I know they won't get it. However if they'd come up with some fantasies how gravity is working differently than science says, it would be far less stupid than deny it altogether. Like I don't know, they could claim the gravitational pull is just 1/10th of what science is saying, and the pizza is standing on a giant iron turtle. That would be idiotic of course, but LESS idiotic than trying to explain it with density.

@@nightmareTomek "Density" does explain why gravity isn't necessary for flat Earthers... just not in the way they think... 😂😂😂

Chem trail proponents will not believe you. Condensation trails are basic physics and chemistry but they would rather believe a baseless, complicated conspiracy theory than apply Occam's razor.

Of course... That is why you get paid hush money on top of your salery every month, just to deny this. 😉

Of course you would say that. You're in on it. The last people we should trust on this are pilots because they are part of the hoax. *Wake up people! Do your own research!*

alright Jared we gotta start asking the government for our hush money, ive been keeping the true shape of earth a secret for too long without compensation

- "1: on long distance flights I am not constantly pushing the nose down" Well, actually YOU ARE, but it is automatic. Aircraft pitch forward about the pitch axis by ~one degree for every 70 miles flown, all while the aircraft maintains "Level flight". Old school gyros (artificial Horizons) will NOT show this while modern fiber-optic gyros WILL. However, the pilot will never see this raw data from the FOGs, only "derived" values that have a moving reference frame that rotates with the changing gravity vector.

You were on a plane going over 1000 mph ? Be fr ? Most commercial fly a few hindered mph

@@LegaciesLiveForever At midsummer, Dillenger's long sunset is very possible at those lattitudes. Not at midwinter, of course. Remember, it's a globe with a tilt.

Flying to Sydney from LA, I've seen dawn over the China Sea that also lasted for hours. It's beautiful.

@@nycbearff why do we have to take a plane in the first place if we rotating so fast we could stay stationary in the sky and wait for certain places to reach us right ? Also what’s direction does earth curve ? Is it south east to west , north ? I’ll wait ?

​@@LegaciesLiveForeverI'm confused why a curve should have a direction.. The earth is spherical. Anything away from you is curving downwards.

From failed photographer to Professor. Professing bunkum 😁

You cant teach dumb people who's got there minds set

And children … they are uneducated too but they have an excuse . I mean come on it’s okay that you have to go to school to learn to become a doctor because you have to get educated but other people that are uneducated it’s not acceptable. How do you decide what group of uneducated people get a reprieve?

@@sd9295 Most children know more about physics and aerospace engineering than the average flatty.

But watch out for flying parties.

Yes I agree. Thinking a plane could fly off into space shows a complete lack of understanding of basic physics and aerodynamics. Even when you explain it to them the average flat Earther is not smart enough to get it.

and then they blatenly claim that their stupidity has the same value as facts and understand.

or reality.

@@Wolfie6020Although your expertise in physics in aerodynamics is unquestioned, to be more precise one also needs to grasp orbital mechanics (I.E. leaving a planetary body involves great velocity, not just direction) as well.

Have none of the left the country? Gone on holiday attended conferences in different countries??

Yes, in fact the pilot and or the avionics are making adjustments constantly, even if the earth were flat they would have to. Plus as I think you are saying, even in perfectly level flight, that is not key, key is that lift is just enough to maintain altitude.

funny that NASA uses documents that purport to aeroPLAINS flying over a static flat non-rotating earth....

They don't even understand lift because they don't believe that gravity even exists.

yeah that called stalling and falling out of the air that relates to NOT MAINTAINING CONSTANT ALTITUDE! DUH! have you ever been of the ground?When is your next shot due>? I'll advise against it....

@@stanlee4217 Have you ever studied to become a pilot or an airplane mechanic? I've done both and there are MANY people who have. But please, do explain us how we're all wrong.... And I suppose you're also much more knowledgeable than the people who've dedicated their lives to creating vaccines and other medications.... again, please do explain how you've become so much more knowledgeable than people who've specialized for DECADES in their fields. I think it's a nice trick, you should teach me :)

Imagine a plane flying around a huge sphere with constant gravity all over its surface- This is easier and more logical than any Flat-earth model

If you look at the flat earth disk you see the shortest distance paths are very similar to the great circle routes used on the spherical earth.

So basically you need to be an SR-71 pilot to feel it.

@@just9911 Not even the Blackbird was fast enough to generate that effect.

@@lukemills237 the max speed (unclassified) of an SR-71 was over 3500 kilometers per hour.

@@lukemills237 I should have been clear - I mean to feel 1% lighter, not needing to nose dive.

For example, the orbital velocity for 10km (~35000ft) is 7.8km/s. That is around Mach 22 for reference.

yeah its a super common misconception and even pilots will repeat it

Correct. The best way to explain lift is to skip Bernoulli (because most people don't know how to use it correctly) and use Newton's third law: The wing pushes the air downwards, and the opposite reaction is lift.

yup, I'm not sure why the "longer path" theory is bounded around so much, as it doesn't really make a load of sense, there's no reason a fluid should speed up just because its on a longer path than the flow it was seperated from. At least the way I've been taught and think about it is that it happens because of the high pressure experienced at the front of the airfoil. The oncoming stream of air "squishes" the air against the airfoil. Part of this creates the stagating air at the front but above that is the air is essentially forced to accelerate faster like a nozzle, and sticks to the surface because of the boundary layer. The same thing happens on the bottom too except the friction is greater because of its angle into the airstream, so it goes slower. And then the pressure differencial combined with the downwash gives you your lift.

Actually he did a pretty good job of correctly explaining Venturi and Bernoulli. According to Venturi, when restricted, air will speed up so as to attempt to appear to travel en mass at the rate of unrestricted air. To do this the restricted air must move faster. How successful a wing is at getting the air above and below to match up after the wing while creating measurable amounts of lift determines how efficient it is. Less efficient wings create less drag and require more air speed. More efficient wings create more drag and require less air speed.

I totally agree. Though it does play a small part if the Bernoulli effect was the only reason for lift there would be no downwash under a helicopter and no air felt behind a propellor. When I was a flying instructor we explained this to our students and focussed on the simple deflection of air and the opposite reaction on the wing creating lift and induced drag.

yEaH bUt tHeN WhY dOesN'T tHe PlAnE fALl ofF tHE eArTH?!

More like towards the centre of the earth. Human perception of down is not an accurate perception of reality.

​@@LineOfThybecause of thrust and pressure

@@Frizzleman Down (general): The direction pointing towards the most significant center of mass within the current relevant reference frame. Down (specific, Earth): The direction pointing towards the exact center of mass of the planet Earth. You're wrong. And, frankly, you _really_ should have known better.

I literally had a flerf on Reddit argue that because gravity is down, people not at the North Pole would just fall off, because they would get pulled "down". I pushed them to explain which way is "down" and why gravity would work in that direction. They just kept saying "because that's down". It was like talking to a parrot.

flattard: "clocks are not real, its an illusion, fish-eye lenses and holograms and such"

​@@fredthe47thYeah, they can't comprehend that "down" means "in" towards the Earth's core on a spherical model. To them, gravity points "down" past the South Pole on a globe into nothingness for no reason at all. This means, in their view, all of Africa, Australia and South America would get instantly spaced, and everyone else in the northern hemisphere should be tumbling away or walking at a constant tilt. It's very incorrect and cartoonish to think about, but that same imagined ridiculousness is what they use to justify their "less" ridiculous models.

Flat Earth is so fucking stupid I cant believe its even a subject in 2023!!!! I love it!!!

"How come South isn't downhill? Earth must be flat!"

My uncle said earth was flat so. Must be true. No further information needed. 🤷‍♂️

Actually, it’s not a matter of scale or velocity, but simply of geometry. No aircraft, regardless of size or velocity, must dive in order to maintain level flight over the spherical Earth. In level flight, the aircraft remains at a constant altitude throughout, so no it makes no upward _or_ downward movement (dive).

It depends on reference frame, really. When your reference frame is relative to the Earth’s surface, you won’t notice that you’re “losing altitude” to an observer in a fixed position outside of the Earth’s atmosphere. The plane only appears to lose altitude *because* it’s not losing altitude relative to the surface - and given the only reference frame inside the plane is the ground, you cannot perceive the drop from a reference frame you cannot see.

Also, we can see just how deep the lack of basic cognition is in the flat earth brain. You have to go deep into Africa to find a lower IQ.

I hate to say it, but I have to give credit where credit is due. Even Kent Hovind is smarter than a Flerf, but only marginally.

Rusty started out smarter than every Flat Earther.

@@Mark_Agamotto1313_Smith "Even Kent Hovind is smarter than a Flerf, but only marginally." Only marginally, yes, but certainly not smart enough to fool the IRS.

im still new around here... can i assume Rusty is the cute doggo?

Flat Earth is so stupid it is simutaneously making humanity both smarter and dumber

Can you imagine what the "nearby sun" would do for long airline routes?

That is also true on a globe. Lines of latitude are not geodesic or straight. If you simply point east in the the northern hemisphere and move forward without a continual turning correction to the north, you will end up heading more and more south. Only lines of longitude point straight, due to them being “large circles” all focused on ONE point of the globe (a north or south pole). Of course you still need to make navigation corrections to make sure you are oriented directly at your pole of choice. The only exception traveling East/West on a globe is the Equator, simply due to it’s size (maximum circumference of the sphere) where no North/South corrections are needed to travel straight (assuming perfect directional stability).

@@DoctorShocktorThe amount of left/right that would be required on a globe is minimal, though, such that I'd bet money that no human could detect it without the use of external instruments.

​@@DoctorShocktorairplanes don't fly directly east or west. They travel "great circle" routes which don't require left/right directional changes. But the currently fashionable disk shaped flat earth has it's own direct routes which don't go directly east and west and which, in the northern hemisphere are very similar to great circle routes.

Maybe even slightly up for all I know. 🤷‍♂️

@@michaelsorensen7567 For sure!

@@michaelsorensen7567 Yes. Typical cruise attitude is slightly nose up, depends on type and load, of course. Having the nose exactly on the horizon normally would result in a gentle descent, afaik.

It's dips it nose when descending. Once it gets to crushing altitude it's not dipping down. Flat

Constantly having to turn left AND right, any time they cross the equator

This was my thought as well. Flat Earthers never discuss flying east or west and not having to correct the turn to stay in their model.

But planes don’t fly directly east-west in either model. They fly in great circles arcs on the globe, and if the earth were flat they’d fly in straight lines. Traveling along a latitude line on the globe would also require turning left or right, except on the equator.

@@origamiswami6272 On the flat earth maps that I have seen, lines of lattitude are circular, otherwise how does a flat earther account for flying continually East or West and never coming to the edge?

@@MaxGrey03 Because planes don’t have to follow lines of latitude. On a flat earth of that type, you’d start going east, and if you travel in a straight line your heading would eventually drift towards south. The same thing happens on the globe too, just to a different degree and the direction of drift depends on your hemisphere. Think about what would happen on the globe if you went a mile away from the South Pole and started walking east in a straight line. If you don’t turn to the right, your heading will drift northward.

Any plane that stays up long enough to click "EVA" and "Deploy parachute" is a good one. Any plane that Jeb survives without bailing out is a great one!

Flat earthers should try playing KSP, they might actually learn something 😂

@ Nah, they'd lose their shit at all the handwaving estimations the physics engine has to make to stay realtime. That or they'd try to build a kraken drive in real life and kill us all.

@ them two seconds into playing "Look at that, I see the curvature, Kerbin is the exact same size as Earth and I dont see any curvature on Earth"

KSP overall is an exellent teacher. As a noob the first thing is to lauch a rocket straight up but as you progress you need nobody to tell you that curving your rocket is the best way to get into orbit. It is funny how, even if you do not understand this concept, you will naturally adapt do this just as Rocket scientist did while learning spaceflight.

You've forgotten how many flerfs genuinely don't believe in gravity. You are absolutely correct though. Not slamming into the dirt at the speed of sound is definitely a nontrivial task.

​@@dustinbrueggemann1875disbelief has yet to provide levitation, however

@@michaelsorensen7567 I think Douglas Adams was on to something when he wrote that the secret of flying was merely forgetting to fall.

​@dustinbrueggemann1875 How to fly in 2 easy lessons. As per Douglas Adams. 1. Very easy. Throw yourself at the ground. 2. Not so easy, and involving forgetting why. Miss the ground. Achieved lesson one years ago. Still practicing for lesson two.

@@dustinbrueggemann1875 Or rather throwing yourself at the ground and missing.

Most underrated comment in this thread.

I still wouldn't trust Ryanair 🤣

And let's be clear and fair here. They would also completely mask the slight turns that would be required to stay on the equator of a flat earth of the UN flag design (assuming a compass that works the way that compasses do on our Earth).

@@CorwynGC Maybe so, but that just means that most arguments about how avionics works on a flat vs globe earth are, at best, inconclusive. I do say 'most' because some claims such as "the horizon always rises to eye level" pretty easy to debunk as one gains elevation. It's not a claim specific to aircraft, but certainly includes them if you want to get higher than mountains.

@@synthetic240 Not really. There are plenty of arguments that still work. Flight distance is one such example.

@@CorwynGC Good point. Distances in the south on an AE map are very distorted.

@@CorwynGCThose minute adjustments would not, however, mask the MASSIVE turns that would be required for a flight path originating in and ending in somewhere further north - for example, Edinburgh to Stockholm.

Still waiting for a flerf pilot to debunk it. Flerfs swear they have pilots in their ranks.

The funniest part of that argument for me is they say space can't exist without a barrier because the air pressure would equalise into space 🤔

One tried to tell me that plants give off oxygen and that increases pressure at ground level.

@@stephenolan5539Plants use most of their oxygen up for themselves, so tell the flattards to try again. Most of the Earth’s oxygen comes from microorganisms in the sea, and no, that doesn’t account for the majority of the increased pressure either. Tell them to put oxygen in a closed container at 1 ATM and measure the density. More pressure will appear at the bottom, are there little plants in there making oxygen?

Flat earth doesn't deny gravity.

@@jimwhelan9152 You haven't seen many arguments from flatties, then.

Once I flew in a small plane after a thunderstorm from Chicago to Niagara Falls. I listened to the pilots channel the whole way. The corrections added up to 28 feet. I think it must have been air pressure changes because of the storm. The control tower would say something like, we have you at twenty niner niner seven.

@@stephenolan5539 29x97 would be a local altimeter setting. US altimeters have a calibration scale set in inches of mercury. They take off and land with the local altimeter setting and if they go above a certain altitude, they switch to the standard setting which I think is 29x92. In the UK, we use millibars as a pressure calibration, with the standard setting being 1013mb... which is the equivalent value of the US setting. It just makes sure that everybody in the same area is flying on the same setting.

@@ma9x795 All correct. Altimeter settings have nothing to do with earth's curvature, it's as you said, a value to make sure everyone's altimeter shows the same numbers. It depends on the local weather (air pressure). It is in most countries not the actual local air pressure, but a value that makes sure that when you are on the ground on the airport, the altimeter shows the field elevation. E.g., landing in Munich, your altimeter would show something around 1500 ft.

@@givmi_more_w9251 When I learnt to fly, we took off and landed on QFE, not QNH ;)

Better start reading NASA and Air Force documents stating that earth is flat and stationary. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hKw0b5vFXYI.html

Except it's not automatic, it's just too small to detect. A ship floats on the ocean and based on it's weight, it will stay at that level of equilibrium with the ocean and of course follow the ocean's curve. Not so with an aircraft. There is nothing that makes an aircraft stay at any pressure level. Trimming the aircraft helps neutralize the forces as much as possible, but just like you can't take your hands off the wheel of a car, no matter how straight you point it down the road, there is no way to not have to make continual control corrections while flying an airplane. That's why autopilots are so important. It would dramatically increase fatigue if the pilot had to manually control the aircraft during teh enitre level flight. Holding altitude is something that takes time to develop the skill. Private pilots only need to mainating altitude plus or minus 100 feet of desired, commercial pilots, plus or minus 50 feet. No matter how well you trim out the aircraft for level flight, take your hands off the controls and turn off the autopilot for a minute or two and you are in for the ride of your life.

Not even comparable. The ship is supported by the curved water, so is adjusted automatically. A Plane is free to move vertically within limits, so it DOES need to be adjusted, albeit in very small increments.

@@cryptojihadi265 Wrong

Wrong

@@dnomyarnostaw Have you not watched the video?

Just saw one here in the comments claiming "the ball would be rapidly dropping away".

Even for non-flerfers, the size of the world is really hard to grasp. People in general have issues wrapping their head around large quantities.... even millions or billions doesn't quite compute in our brains. But normal people have a way of accepting answers supported by logic, except for flerfers. Anything their brains can't handle becomes a conspiracy, a falsehood or something the government wants them to believe to keep them dumb. Problem is, no matter what happens or what is being said, they ARE dumb.

And the effects of local gravity.

Explain , how a compass works on a constantly moving globe ? I’ll wait

You have to be 8 to be dumb enough to believe this,

@@tommosher8271 I guess you will have to wait until you are eight years old to understand it, then.

@@LegaciesLiveForever Present your theory on why a compass cannot work on a planet. Everything in the universe moves, sparky.

@@LegaciesLiveForever Planetary rotation defines the direction north. A gyrocompass could not work without the rotation of he Earth.

What I appreciate flying here in Australia is that there is few flerfs, that, and people that hire you on a private jet are generally not flerfs... hope that I don't have to deal with them when I start flying airline sometime next year.

Next time, just answer the first question, "Because of the globe map you and I use to drive around." If he persists, just keep asking to see his map. After all, their map is the one and only proof they have of the globe Earth. All of them. :)

loonies!

@CaptainJammo Please, please, please, for your own safety and the safety of your passengers, don't let people like that in your cockpit again.

"Plumb" changes by one degree for every ~70 miles moved across the surface of the earth. We measure this with fiber-optic gyros.

Just a quick comparison: smallest model airplane in a cursory search i did was 1:400. At that scale, earth would be a 20-miles wide ball (having a 10 mile radius). :-)

It's because they never go outside. They think the Earth is the same size as the pictures they see on the Internet.

yeah, i mean, they're both flying through a liquid. submarines just fly through a lot denser of a liquid, and have to deal with buoyancy.

@@pharynx007 Planes have to deal with buoyancy too, they just have bigger problems.

Hmm... What? 🙄😬😵‍💫 I won't be flying any time soon in a plane you attempt to pilot!

​@@frontenac5083 When planes land, is the nose of the plane pointing down?

​@@MrEjwheelerbut in that example the plane tries to fly up, so im also sceptic of the claim 😅

@@frontenac5083 Most planes achieve "level" flight with a positive pitch angle where the nose is pointed slightly higher than the actual direction of travel. When you combine that with the possibility of crosswinds it can make it so that the plane is moving through the air in a direction that is to one side or the other of where the nose is pointed.

@@frontenac5083 Er... he's right, a planes direction (where it is going) is usually different to its heading (where the nose is pointing).

They can't model flat earth that allows plane flight to maintain consistent speed between similar distances on a North vs south hemisphere flight. Any map projection they choose, set a target of say 1000km, and you can show them a generally equivalent flight across country (say, from LA to NY in the northern hemisphere, and across Australia in the southern) that would be impossible on a flat earth model. If they use one that's correctly adjusted for east to west trips, you just need to go from pole to equator on the same projection. It's ridiculous.

Most flerfers argue that gravity as we know and define it does not exist. It's just the inertia from the great earth disk flying upward really fast. How that works they can never really answer with math.

@@chrismaverick9828 I usually hear arguments about buoyancy and density, rather than upward inertia

​@@chrismaverick9828 Gravity is a great debunker of the flat earth 'theory' which is why they refuse to acknowledge it exists.

@@michaelsorensen7567 I think they tried upward inertia first but over the years shifted to the slightly less stupid explanation with density.

Agreed. But I would have stopped at "Could I ask the flat earth community to explain their model". Just asking them to come up with one is already a lot to ask.

@@daddy4934So true

As long as that dog will live❤

I am sad that a movement to debunk flat earth even needs to exist

@@lawrencelopez9839 as long as they milk out innocent people... 💰we need to expose them

It's not a matter of scale. No aircraft, regardless of how large, would have to "nose down" to follow the Earth's curvature.

@@cardinalRG did you watch the full video? i think you didn't, but let me sum it up: Due to changes in aair pressure following the earth's curvature, the planes thrust and lif change very slightly cauusing the plane to basically self correct course WITHOUT NEEDING TO DO A FUCKING NOSEDIVE the self correction is so small it's unnoticeable, being 0.002 degrees per second MEANING PLANES DON'T NOSEDIVE.

@@cardinalRG I was referring to the scale model they used in the demonstration If the plane was truly to scale with the globe that he was using, the plane would've ben as small as the point of a pin next to a 12 inch diameter globe. Instead, it would be, if it were to that scale, a 5000 mile long plane or longer, which would mean that it would have to dip

@@leschatssuperstars1741 --Your comment is addressed to me, but was apparently meant for someone else. It doesn't address anything that I said.

@@dragonweyr44 --No, friend. The aircraft wouldn’t have to dip no matter how large it is compared to the Earth. Remember, a _downward_ movement means getting closer to the Earth’s mean surface, and in level flight, no part of the aircraft does that, but instead remains at the same altitude. This is true of an A380 circling the Earth or a tennis ball, or any other spherical object regardless of relative size.

Also Australia. I know that to fly from one end of Europe to the other, eg UK to Cyprus, takes about 4 hours and crosses numerous countries. To go from Perth in western Australia to Sydney in eastern Australia takes a similar amount of time.

The aircraft rotates about its own lateral axis while following the Earth's curvature, but this isn't a downward movement.

I think you were wrong with the second word of your comment. "Flerfs trying..." Hmmmmm? Sorry, if just doesn't feel right to me. Flerfs don't 'try' at all. What about the words flailing and failing? I know Flerfs are experts with those words! Flerfs are the perfect embodiment of those words. Let's try it: "Flerfs flailing and failing to explain science..." is both predictable and understandable. AND hilarious. What do you think?

You mean across/above a hill-top?

@@irrelevant_noob No, I do not.

@@Kyrelel and why would cars be "doing that" (dip their nose) when going "around a bend" then? 😕

@@irrelevant_noob Exactly. They don't.

@@BrianWelch-vc7xy ... well ofc they don't, since a "bend" would be flat. Why would *_anything_* be dipping on a flat road?! 🙄

Problem is, flerfs fight among themselves about how the flat earth thing works. So getting one representative probably not gonna happen. And I have a vision of a flerf flying to the ISS, gazing through the cupola and suddenly screaming and scraping with their nails to "remove the paint" that must be what NASA uses to make it look like a curved Earth. No proof will ever be enough. Ever.

Send them to Antartica to find the ice wall instead, let them suffer a little, why should they have the privilege of having a space flight

Just make sure you give the other side a fair study, oh thats right youtube has cancelled all the educated people on the FE train, now all u get is one sided censorship, hmmm wonder why that is

So true, since FE is imaginary.

You lost them at "maintains" lol