if at the hub he is standing upright with his head facing 'north' and his feet toward 'south'
In the globe model, "down" and "up" refer to the directions directly towards and away from the hub (centre of gravity) of the globe, and therefore depend on where the observer is, rather than being the same for all observers, so you have to provide some arbitrary definition (as you did) of "upright" for a hypothetical observer positioned at the hub. It's easy to see that nothing impossible or even strange is occurring in the globe module. You just get minor complications of wording when you describe a bunch of observers at different locations. If two such observers arrive at the same location, their "up" and "down" directions match.
In the globe model, a person standing on the equator "flips over" once per day from the point of view of some imaginary observer who isn't rotating with the earth. From the point of view of the person on the equator, they haven't flipped at all, but the sun, moon and stars seem to be rotating round them. Neither observer has any reason to assert that the globe model is impossible or implausible. However, such observers might prefer to say that they are rotating with the earth, and also with respect to each other. There's nothing illogical or absurd about that, especially in the hypothetical situation of the earth being transparent.
You've yet to explain what people are seeing in the sky when they directly observe the International Space Station (which anyone can do). On the next occasion when there's a clear sky, why not look out for it yourself?