Scientific Curiosity

[toat in a burtle]

One of my friends in lower sixth form said that the rotation of the Earth should be affecting our travel times. I was really confused, but now I'm actually curious. Does its rotation affect how long it takes us to get to or from somewhere, depending which way we're going?

[em_t_hed]

Look at what you type and tell me you make sense to yourself... plz wake up... seriously

things called head winds slow plane down, things like tail winds speed plane up....

and you say... wait.... what was it you typed.... 'deals with wind speed...'

LMFAO

please...

God, owner of the universe a écrit :

em_t_hed a écrit :

no... you need to wake up... you can't take a straight path and expect to hit your target flying

https://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es1904/es1904page01.cfm?chapter_no=visualization

The Coriolis effect deals with wind speed due to Earth's rotation, not with what you keep repeating. All sources I presented are wrong to you, huh? Well, I don't quite accept yours then. Partly because I ended my use of the Flash Plugin for good at home and in the office in June 2016 and have hardly ever found that to be a problem.

[God, owner of the Universe]

Well, one thing is for sure: Your explanation of why they fly curves (If they do. The video I linked of actual planes that flew actual courses shows that they don't.) is incorrect.

You are imagining it like this, right? I'm the plane over here. I look at that point over there, thousands of miles away. I start flying. But the Earth turns, so the point I aimed at is now wandering to e.g. the right, so I have to follow it and therefore constantly change course.

Is that your concept? If so, it would be terribly wrong. Because the plane and the air that surrounds it moves with the dot it's aiming at. A curve would only be necessary for a north/south flight, because due to the Coriolis effect (which you may or may not have understood), the air orbits the Earth faster at the equator than to the north/south of it, so if it moves north/south, it now orbits faster than the air that was already there, so it becomes wind that blows eastward. But regardless, planes have to correct for winds of all kinds, they have to regard existing flight paths, they have to stay near certain spots (e.g. airports) ... whatever path they fly might be curved, but not because of the so obviously wrong reason you gave.

Now, in case you still have something to say, as long as you don't explain it with your own words, I'm not interested, like you're not interested in my links, so why should I read yours?

[Sticky Honeybuns]

em_t_hed a écrit :

and yes... the rotation of the earth is still why flight paths are not straight lines

direct or indirect effects...

Well, I had to come back. You and Agni are both morons and should not comment on these forums anymore. I already answered the question at the start of this thread so just let it die.

You are wrong, the reason flights don't fly straight is because of the curvature of the earth. The rotation does not matter. It all goes back to frame of reference which I already discussed. If you were to map the distance you would see why the flights take the curve path, it is actually a shorter distance.

Weather conditions do obviously affect flight times but that is not what this thread is about.

[em_t_hed]

You're wrong.... yes the rotation does matter

Sticky Honeybuns a écrit :

em_t_hed a écrit :

and yes... the rotation of the earth is still why flight paths are not straight lines

direct or indirect effects...

Well, I had to come back. You and Agni are both morons and should not comment on these forums anymore. I already answered the question at the start of this thread so just let it die.

You are wrong, the reason flights don't fly straight is because of the curvature of the earth. The rotation does not matter. It all goes back to frame of reference which I already discussed. If you were to map the distance you would see why the flights take the curve path, it is actually a shorter distance.

Weather conditions do obviously affect flight times but that is not what this thread is about.

and clearly when i mention transoceanic flights... clearly they have to stay near airports flying over oceans

i guess that's why i saw endless miles of ocean looking down out of the plane window...

CLEARLY.... staying near airports

by your logic... no transoceanic flights should ever happen even if for emergency/saftey reasons...

staying near airports...


OMG

God, owner of the universe a écrit :

Well, one thing is for sure: Your explanation of why they fly curves (If they do. The video I linked of actual planes that flew actual courses shows that they don't.) is incorrect.

You are imagining it like this, right? I'm the plane over here. I look at that point over there, thousands of miles away. I start flying. But the Earth turns, so the point I aimed at is now wandering to e.g. the right, so I have to follow it and therefore constantly change course.

Is that your concept? If so, it would be terribly wrong. Because the plane and the air that surrounds it moves with the dot it's aiming at. A curve would only be necessary for a north/south flight, because due to the Coriolis effect (which you may or may not have understood), the air orbits the Earth faster at the equator than to the north/south of it, so if it moves north/south, it now orbits faster than the air that was already there, so it becomes wind that blows eastward. But regardless, planes have to correct for winds of all kinds, they have to regard existing flight paths, they have to stay near certain spots (e.g. airports) ... whatever path they fly might be curved, but not because of the so obviously wrong reason you gave.

Now, in case you still have something to say, as long as you don't explain it with your own words, I'm not interested, like you're not interested in my links, so why should I read yours?

[Washell]

You know what this reminds me of? A couple of monkeys with tools. They have no clue how to use them and they get everything horribly wrong, but it's certainly entertaining to watch them hammer their own thumb.

Also, there's no point in trying to teach them the correct way through the medium of a forum, though I applaud your efforts.

[em_t_hed]

http://upgrd.com/images/upload/image/aerospace/dl-all.gif

CLEARLY lots of airports being kept close to... NOT

[em_t_hed]

on another not... no im not imagining anything...

you're trying to push the idea to others reading that im imagining things....

the flight paths look curved because the maps aren't moving... if the maps were to be rotating, you'd see the flight path is straight and is taking into account the earths rotation...

so yes... they're curved because they're showing the straight path if the map were to be rotating

which includes earth rotation...

[Washell]

em_t_hed a écrit :

the flight paths look curved because the maps aren't moving... if the maps were to be rotating, you'd see the flight path is straight and is taking into account the earths rotation...

No. They're curved because a straight line on a globe is a curved line on the common map projections used. Your fallacy is the assumption that the map is an accurate representation of Earth. It isn't. The curve is an artifact of squashing a 3D globe into a 2D map.

Awww crap... I promised myself I wouldn't get into this. :(

Also, leading a target (even if it was needed) doesn't require flying in a curve.

[em_t_hed]

no... it's not a cartography issue... and it's not an assumption

they're curved bacause it's showing a straight path if the map were to be rotating as the earth does

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball3.htm

Meteorologists and sailors aren't the only ones who have to contend with the Coriolis effect. Since aircraft cover large distances in a short period of time, pilots must also take its influence into account when charting the paths for their flights. For instance, a plane headed from Miami (where the Earth's rotation is more pronounced) to New York would end up in the Atlantic Ocean if the pilot ignored the effects of the Earth's rotation.

[em_t_hed]

http://nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/coriolis-effect/

Fast-moving objects such as airplanes and rockets are influenced by the Coriolis effect. Pilots must take the Earth’s rotation into account when charting flights over long distances. This means most planes are not flown in straight lines, even if the airports are directly across the continent from each other. The line between Portland, Maine, and Portland, Oregon, for instance, is very long, and fairly straight. However, a plane flying from Portland, Oregon, could not fly in a straight line and land in Portland, Maine. Flying east, the Coriolis effect seems to bend to the right, in a southerly direction. If the Oregon pilot flew in a straight line, the plane would end up near New York or Pennsylvania.

Military aircraft and missile-control technology must calculate the Coriolis effect for similar reasons. The target of an air raid could be missed entirely, and innocent people and civilian structures could be damaged.

[God, owner of the Universe]

em_t_hed a écrit :

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball3.htm

Meteorologists and sailors aren't the only ones who have to contend with the Coriolis effect. Since aircraft cover large distances in a short period of time, pilots must also take its influence into account when charting the paths for their flights. For instance, a plane headed from Miami (where the Earth's rotation is more pronounced) to New York would end up in the Atlantic Ocean if the pilot ignored the effects of the Earth's rotation.

So, that's a flight northward. Not a trans atlantic flight. Therefore Coriolis force affected. But not only is this something else than you described, you were talking about trans oceanic flights, not north<->south flights.

[em_t_hed]

this exaxt eperiment done to me at NASA space camp

https://youtu.be/dt_XJp77-mk

[Washell]

em_t_hed a écrit :

no... it's not a cartography issue... and it's not an assumption

they're curved bacause it's showing a straight path if the map were to be rotating as the earth does

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball3.htm

Meteorologists and sailors aren't the only ones who have to contend with the Coriolis effect. Since aircraft cover large distances in a short period of time, pilots must also take its influence into account when charting the paths for their flights. For instance, a plane headed from Miami (where the Earth's rotation is more pronounced) to New York would end up in the Atlantic Ocean if the pilot ignored the effects of the Earth's rotation.

Now you're conflating real life route planning with a map projection of the shortest distance between two points.

[El poco nuez del muerte]

Agni a écrit :

The Rock God a écrit :

A bird in a plane does not have to fly forward to keep from smacking into the back of the plane. Neither does a fly.

Yes it does.

No it doesn't. What you are saying is this: If you take a balloon and fill it with helium, attach a small weight to keep it floating, take it into an aircraft and fly at constant speed, the balloon will move backwards.

This is not the case. Like, at all.

Agni a écrit :

But thank you for using the helicopter as an example.

Imagine the helicopter taking off from an aircraft carrier. If it did not move with the carrier and hovered do you think the ship will drag it along with it?

And this, good lord, that is not even close to a fitting analogy. The helo / carrier situation would be comparable to the balloon being let go OUTSIDE of the aircraft.

The balloon / bird IN an aircraft is still integral part of the entire reference frame. A Helicopter starting from a carrier stops being part of that reference frame when it lifts off. It becomes it's own.

[em_t_hed]

El poco nuez del muerte a écrit :

Agni a écrit :

Yes it does.

No it doesn't. What you are saying is this: If you take a balloon and fill it with helium, attach a small weight to keep it floating, take it into an aircraft and fly at constant speed, the balloon will move backwards.

This is not the case. Like, at all.

you get the opposite effect due to air pressure differences and density differences. you're forgetting that helium is density sensitive to air. as the air moves backwards the helium filled balloon moves forward.