It’s tooken off.

Track it here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA14/2965a97d

Woodie said:

It’s tooken off.

Track it here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA14/2965a97d

What sort of plane is it?

Peak Warming Man said:

Woodie said:

It’s tooken off.

Track it here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA14/2965a97d

What sort of plane is it?

A long one obviously

Peak Warming Man said:

Woodie said:

It’s tooken off.

Track it here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA14/2965a97d

What sort of plane is it?

It’s on the thingy, Mr Man. A Boeing 7867 Dreamliner.

Woodie said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Woodie said:

It’s tooken off.

Track it here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA14/2965a97d

What sort of plane is it?

It’s on the thingy, Mr Man. A Boeing 7867 Dreamliner.

Ta, I didn’t delve deep enough.

Wonder if it’ll fly down low to give everyone a good view of the penguins.

Woodie said:

Wonder if it’ll fly down low to give everyone a good view of the penguins.

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Woodie said:

Wonder if it’ll fly down low to give everyone a good view of the penguins.

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

OTOH Change perspective..

Ian said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Woodie said:

Wonder if it’ll fly down low to give everyone a good view of the penguins.

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

OTOH Change perspective..

is projection a metaphysical concept

Notice the flight avoids the Antarctic exclusion zone that the round-earthers put in place

SCIENCE said:

Ian said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

OTOH Change perspective..

is projection a metaphysical concept

Dua Lipa thinks so.

SCIENCE said:

Ian said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

OTOH Change perspective..

is projection a metaphysical concept

Mr Mercator might have something to say about that.

dv said:

Notice the flight avoids the Antarctic exclusion zone that the round-earthers put in place

Dragons there as well

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

Ian said:

OTOH Change perspective..

is projection a metaphysical concept

Mr Mercator might have something to say about that.

Mercator?!

What would he know about it?

Because of him, a lot of countries think that they’re a lot bigger than they are.

https://brilliantmaps.com/mercator-vs-true-size/

captain_spalding said:

Woodie said:

SCIENCE said:

is projection a metaphysical concept

Mr Mercator might have something to say about that.

Mercator?!

What would he know about it?

Because of him, a lot of countries think that they’re a lot bigger than they are.

https://brilliantmaps.com/mercator-vs-true-size/

I don’t believe in Greenland, it’s mostly a lie, it’s forests and size and stuff.

Peak Warming Man said:

captain_spalding said:

Woodie said:

Mr Mercator might have something to say about that.

Mercator?!

What would he know about it?

Because of him, a lot of countries think that they’re a lot bigger than they are.

https://brilliantmaps.com/mercator-vs-true-size/

I don’t believe in Greenland, it’s mostly a lie, it’s forests and size and stuff.

Yeah. Iceland is all green, and Greenland is all ice.

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Ok, oblate spheroid earther.

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Because then you’d be standing around.

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

So you flatly refuse, hey what but.

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Hmm…how about, as an alternative, ‘sane people’?

captain_spalding said:

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Hmm…how about, as an alternative, ‘sane people’?

sure.. I think it’s because it implies that not being a round earther is a viable option… it hating all over science.. and I don’t like it

Arts said:

captain_spalding said:

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Hmm…how about, as an alternative, ‘sane people’?

sure.. I think it’s because it implies that not being a round earther is a viable option… it hating all over science.. and I don’t like it

Arts said:

captain_spalding said:

Arts said:

I do not like the term ‘Round Earthers’. I don’t know why exactly, but I don’t like it and I won’t stand for it..

Hmm…how about, as an alternative, ‘sane people’?

sure.. I think it’s because it implies that not being a round earther is a viable option… it hating all over science.. and I don’t like it

I put flat earthers & con trails in the same humour providing category.

That certainly is quite a long flight. I was wondering what the various colours on the flight path meant, and this is what I found.

“Why does the aircraft’s trail change colour?
When you click on an aircraft icon, the path that this particular aircraft has taken is displayed on the map. The color of the trail behind the aircraft differs depending on the altitude the aircraft had at that position. The numbers are in meters. If the aircraft is below 100 meters in altitude, the trail will be white. If it is above 100 meters, the trail will yellow, and with increase in altitude, will be green and so on. If the aircraft’s position surpasses 2500 meters in altitude, the trail will be light blue, and will then change to dark blue, purple and finally red for the highest possible altitude. If the trail is a black dotted line, the aircraft is outside our coverage area and its position is being estimated.”
https://www.flightradar24.com/faq

They must have at least two complete sets of crew on that flight, for flight & duty time requirements.

Almost time to shutdown the laptop and safely store it in the overhead locker.
I’ll store the jumper as well, it’ll be hot in Darwin.

No way we’ll land on time, I might go and freshen up, splash a bit of California Poppy about.

Are we there yet?

Woodie said:

Are we there yet?

12,000 km. Pfft.
That’s not even long enough to circumnavigate Australia, is it?

mollwollfumble said:

Woodie said:

Are we there yet?

12,000 km. Pfft.
That’s not even long enough to circumnavigate Australia, is it?

That depends on the increments on your ruler.

Spiny Norman said:

mollwollfumble said:

Woodie said:

Are we there yet?

12,000 km. Pfft.
That’s not even long enough to circumnavigate Australia, is it?

That depends on the increments on your ruler.

An object’s length depends on which ruler you use?

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

mollwollfumble said:

12,000 km. Pfft.
That’s not even long enough to circumnavigate Australia, is it?

That depends on the increments on your ruler.

An object’s length depends on which ruler you use?

With a coastline, it sure does.

Anyway the Big Red Rat is about to land in Darwin.

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

That depends on the increments on your ruler.

An object’s length depends on which ruler you use?

With a coastline, it sure does.

Anyway the Big Red Rat is about to land in Darwin.

The scale of your map/chart…yeah, i can see that being a factor.

But, from my limited hydrographic experience, a coastline is this many nautical miles/km long, no more, no less.

Woodie said:

Are we there yet?

Just coming in now Woodie.
Over.

The coastline paradox is the counterintuitive observation that the coastline of a landmass does not have a well-defined length. This results from the fractal curve-like properties of coastlines, i.e., the fact that a coastline typically has a fractal dimension (which in fact makes the notion of length inapplicable). The first recorded observation of this phenomenon was by Lewis Fry Richardson and it was expanded upon by Benoit Mandelbrot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

captain_spalding said:

Spiny Norman said:

captain_spalding said:

An object’s length depends on which ruler you use?

With a coastline, it sure does.

Anyway the Big Red Rat is about to land in Darwin.

The scale of your map/chart…yeah, i can see that being a factor.

But, from my limited hydrographic experience, a coastline is this many nautical miles/km long, no more, no less.

Sure, but imagine if you could somehow instantly measure the length of the coastline without the tide going up or down, just make it about halfway. Grab a 100 mm ruler and do a lap around the country and see what you get. Then try it with a 1 kilometre ruler. Then factor in how far inland you have to go for the various river & other waterway mouths. For example how much of the coastline of Botany Bay, etc, do you include? How much of the Murray River?
You can get anywhere from (say) 20,000 km to weeeelll over 42,000 km quite easily. The higher number is still valid, but it’s more than the circumference of the Earth.

Bogsnorkler said:

The coastline paradox is the counterintuitive observation that the coastline of a landmass does not have a well-defined length. This results from the fractal curve-like properties of coastlines, i.e., the fact that a coastline typically has a fractal dimension (which in fact makes the notion of length inapplicable). The first recorded observation of this phenomenon was by Lewis Fry Richardson and it was expanded upon by Benoit Mandelbrot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

You beat me to it.

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

dv said:

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

You haven’t included sm and bubblecar in your circumnavigation.

Michael V said:

dv said:

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

You haven’t included sm and bubblecar in your circumnavigation.

Well now did we mean Australia the continent or Australia the country?

Michael V said:

dv said:

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

You haven’t included sm and bubblecar in your circumnavigation.

well, if we start including dependencies we’ll up in the air all day.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

You haven’t included sm and bubblecar in your circumnavigation.

Well now did we mean Australia the continent or Australia the country?

Well, it’s kind of rude to exclude genuine Australians, but then, the Federal LibNats have already set a precedent.

Bogsnorkler said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

Of course to circumnavigate Australia you will not travel a length that is equal to its coastline at any particular scale. The minimum possible distance path might look something like this: mostly great circle lines with a few curved segments at capes. Of course a real path a ship would take couldn’t meet this ideal.

You haven’t included sm and bubblecar in your circumnavigation.

well, if we start including dependencies we’ll up in the air all day.

I see.

I take it this is a one-off??

Hard to see that Buenos Aires to Darwin would be a regular profitable route with high enough demand to result in more seats with bums on than seats empty.

About 12,500 km, according to my quick Google Earth measurement.

Michael V said:

About 12,500 km, according to my quick Google Earth measurement.

“The 18-hour flight from Buenos Aires has touched down at Darwin International Airport.

It’s carrying 107 Australians who’ve been stranded overseas. They will now be taken to the Howard Springs quarantine facility where they’ll quarantine for two weeks.

The is a historic flight for Qantas, as it is the airline’s longest ever non-stop commercial flight.

At a distance of about 14,680 kilometres it’s almost 200 kilometres longer than the airline’s Perth to London flight, which held the previous record.”

So, about 2,000 km more than a simple Google Earth circumnavigation of Australia.

Ian said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Woodie said:

Wonder if it’ll fly down low to give everyone a good view of the penguins.

Well no wonder it’s a long trip with a flight-path like that… Great-circle my arse. It’s not even a good-circle.

OTOH Change perspective..

The passengers would have been flat out changing their watches every 3 minutes at about the halfway point.

Did it land the day before it took off?