What have you heard about aviation?
Think about some of the paradoxes in the globe model. On one hand you have the so called coriolis effect, which globe proponents suggest has to be calculated for with long distance shooting due to the earth moving under the bullet. Why isn't this calculation made for flight, something like a chopper or hot air balloon?
There is no correction made during flight for the constant dip the plane would face by following the so called curve.
A balloon defacto travels by air currents and has no manipulation features to change course, except up and down.
Most Choppers have a max distance of under 1000 miles and fly in such low altitudes that they constantly course correct due to more surface level changes in winds.
Every modern aviation vehicle has gps which according to the internet accounts for long distance accuracy.
Back in time before gps planes more often had to recalculate mid air or drastically course correct near destination due to historical documents. (See other post)
I just can’t see one person benefiting from this conspiracy. Maybe this is a simulation and the gods made it all up, I’m open to that idea, but ether way why would I care than. People are much easier to manipulate so why come up with a useless global generational expensive conspiracy?
So wait let's step back for a minute. If a hot air balloon or chopper are hovering in the air, is the ground below them moving?
No and yes. Globe is spinning, therefore “moving”. Same principle as when I hold a rope with something heavy on the bottom and I spin, my hand is moving around my axis and the object on the rope is also spinning but fixed to my hand holding the rope. That’s how I learned it, what’s the counter argument?
I was always told that in an enclosed system like on earth, you wouldn't feel or experience the rotation, much like throwing something in a car maintains momentum of the direction of motion. It makes sense and we can all observe and replicate the claim.
So why are we then also told planes and snipers have to make corrections for rotation when they are in the enclosed system?
Documented **navigational errors in aviation history** have mainly resulted from general navigation mistakes—like misreading instruments, weather misjudgments, or equipment failure—rather than directly from uncorrected Coriolis effect. However, the Coriolis effect does cause measurable errors in celestial navigation and dead reckoning over long distances if not properly accounted for, especially before the age of modern inertial navigation and GPS.
Notable points:
- **In early aviation**, especially for long transoceanic flights using celestial or bubble sextant navigation, failing to correct for the Earth’s rotation (including Coriolis error) could result in positional inaccuracies of several miles by the time a flight reached its destination. For example, at certain latitudes and speeds, a navigational error of about 3–3.4 statute miles could occur if no correction was made, which increased for higher speeds and longer distances[2].
- **Historical records from the RAF during WWII** mention that navigation errors—sometimes “enormous”—were quite common due to the limited accuracy of navigation methods, with only a small fraction of aircraft successfully finding their targets or convoys. Corrections for Coriolis (called “Z” correction) were a recognized part of long-range navigation, and omitting them could add to cumulative navigational errors[5].
- **Errors over the North Atlantic**, discussed in aviation journals, commonly occurred due to a combination of factors, including miscalculated winds, instrument errors, and occasionally unaccounted-for rotational (Coriolis) effects, leading to aircraft arriving off-course and sometimes drastically correcting near destination, especially before widespread radar and GPS[8][9].
While **most major navigation errors involved a mix of factors**, uncorrected Coriolis effect could add several miles of error, enough in the days of manual navigation to result in missed landfalls or forced corrections late in flight[2][5][8]. The widespread implementation of computerized and radio-based navigation has largely eliminated Coriolis as a direct cause of such incidents in modern aviation.
Sources
[1] How Airplanes correct for the Coriolis Effect - Walter Bislins https://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=How+Airplanes+correct+for+the+Coriolis+Effect
[2] Earth's Rotational Effect on the Bubble Sextant | Proceedings https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1940/october/earths-rotational-effect-bubble-sextant
[3] The coriolis effect and air travel - Physics Forums https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-coriolis-effect-and-air-travel.705337/
[4] Coriolis effect - The Dreadnought Project http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/tfs/index.php/Coriolis_effect
[5] [PDF] A History of Navigation in the Royal Air Force - RAF Museum https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/documents/Research/RAF-Historical-Society-Journals/Journal-17A-Air-Navigationin-the-RAF.pdf
[6] Aircraft Navigational Errors https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/5B030FFD893667B0B446EDBAF6B44166/S037346330003112Xa.pdf/aircraft_navigational_errors.pdf
[7] Do planes have to compensate for the earth's rotation? : r/askscience https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/g0iq4/do_planes_have_to_compensate_for_the_earths/
[8] Challenges of Air Navigation | Time and Navigation https://timeandnavigation.si.edu/navigating-air/challenges
[9] Abnormal Errors and Aircraft Separation over the North Atlantic | The Journal of Navigation | Cambridge Core https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-navigation/article/abs/abnormal-errors-and-aircraft-separation-over-the-north-atlantic/3A64C4CC70C70B23A92651681DBF5E88
[10] [PDF] Inertial Navigation - Forty Years of Evolution https://www.imar-navigation.de/downloads/papers/inertial_navigation_introduction.pdf
The thing about these debunks is they are consistently inconsistent.
Here's a steelman from a flat earth debunking website.
So, we do make corrections, or the effect is so small they can safely ignore in flight planning?
You probably have much more hours of knowledge on that. Do you have your top 3 documentaries on that? Saw one with a bunch of experiments which made me more curious but I still haven’t found a real conclusion and also a real reason why it would be a big lie
I have always preferred discussions or debates rather than documentaries, so that you can hear both sides of the argument. This was a pretty good discussion I saw recently.
There are no doubt observations that can be made which aren't explained by any flat earth theories, but the same is true on the opposing side.
The paradox with flights is that when hot air balloons are brought up, the claim is that you have to be much higher so the earth moves under you, but at the same time we are told about coriolis corrections for snipers, where sudden height isn't a factor any more. This is more of a "Earth is stationary" argument rather than one about shape.
The coriolis effect is about as selective in action as the traditional explanation for gravity and uncontained pressurized systems existing next to a near perfect vacuum.
