Advance planning for an aurora trip

I'm starting to suss out where to go in 2011 or 2012 for the
peak of the solar cycle to see some really good aurorae. If
I recall correctly, the viewing is actually better below the
polar circle, right? (In this case, I'm aiming for the Arctic.)
Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

Also, if anyone has heard murmurs about astronomer-led trips
for solar max, let me know. I plan to keep an eye on the web-
sites of some astronomy and other scientific organizations,
but they so far only list trips up to 2009.


Thanks!

Patty

On Feb 22, 3:56*pm, (Patty Winter) wrote:

Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

I'm not aware of any practical differences.

If I were to go to Alaska (or Canada) to view aurorae I would avoid
the cities -- expecially the major cities;-) Some friends a year or
two ago went to Alaska on business that involved flying (in a *small*
plane) to *remote* parts of the state. They were hoping to see at
least one spectacular aurora. They failed in the aurora department
due to weather, but while they were gone I saw a nice display from my
rural Montana yard!

There are plenty of decent places to view the northern lights from
Montana and North Dakota as long as you get away from city lights and
their resulting light pollution. Of course, in addition to being at a
suitable location you have to be there when the sky is clear,
preferrably when the moon isn't anywhere near full, *and* when a
decent aurora is present. In other words, it's best to not be limited
to just a small number of nights. Being able to stay as long as it
takes would be best.

Canada and Alaska are likely to be better at times than North Dakota
or Montana, but anything north of South Dakota, Wyoming, etc. --
provided you're away from the effects of light pollution -- will
gaurantee, sooner or later, that you'll see some decent displays.

Also, if anyone has heard murmurs about astronomer-led trips
for solar max, let me know. I plan to keep an eye on the web-
sites of some astronomy and other scientific organizations,
but they so far only list trips up to 2009.

Continue keeping an eye in the astronomy magazines and their
websites. They sometimes organize aurora cruises, trips, vacations,
etc. The publications themselves occasionally contain advertisements
for independent cruises, etc.

Bill Greer
To sketch is to see.
http://cejour.blogspot.com
http://www.rangeweb.net/~sketcher

In article ,
wrote:
On Feb 22, 3:56=A0pm, (Patty Winter) wrote:

Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

I'm not aware of any practical differences.

Okay, that's good to know!


If I were to go to Alaska (or Canada) to view aurorae I would avoid
the cities -- expecially the major cities;-)

Oh, sure, that's why I mentioned getting away from light pollution.
I had a lovely time on the beach near the Glacier Bay Lodge one
evening for an hour or so. The aurorae weren't strong, but they
were pretty. And other than the lodge, there were no lights anywhere
in the evening.

Some friends a year or
two ago went to Alaska on business that involved flying (in a *small*
plane) to *remote* parts of the state. They were hoping to see at
least one spectacular aurora. They failed in the aurora department
due to weather, but while they were gone I saw a nice display from my
rural Montana yard!

:-)


Of course, in addition to being at a
suitable location you have to be there when the sky is clear,
preferrably when the moon isn't anywhere near full, *and* when a
decent aurora is present. In other words, it's best to not be limited
to just a small number of nights. Being able to stay as long as it
takes would be best.

Yeah, I was thinking that. Perhaps that's a good reason to do a trip
on my own instead of a planned trip with a group. Last time I was
there, it was rainy most of the time. :-( I'll also pay attention
to moon rise and set times.


Continue keeping an eye in the astronomy magazines and their
websites. They sometimes organize aurora cruises, trips, vacations,
etc. The publications themselves occasionally contain advertisements
for independent cruises, etc.

Thanks, I will. I found one northern lights tour earlier today,
but of course it was for this year. And it also went to Iceland.
That would be fun, but I'll be content with something closer (and
less expensive!)


Patty

Patty Winter wrote:
I'm starting to suss out where to go in 2011 or 2012 for the
peak of the solar cycle to see some really good aurorae. If
I recall correctly, the viewing is actually better below the
polar circle, right? (In this case, I'm aiming for the Arctic.)
Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

Also, if anyone has heard murmurs about astronomer-led trips
for solar max, let me know. I plan to keep an eye on the web-
sites of some astronomy and other scientific organizations,
but they so far only list trips up to 2009.


Thanks!

Patty


I'm at 50.15 N, in a rural setting. I usually get a decent auroral
display whenever Mr. Wormley informs the group of an event. I've
been much further north and can't recall ever seeing a significantly
better display than I've seen here. I've never had the opportunity to
compare notes with someone at a more northern location during any
particular event.

You didn't say what time of the year you want to go. Summer isn't too
bad at my location, we do get a few hours of total darkness at night.
As you get further north the daylight lasts longer. Go a few hundred
miles north of here and it justs fades from evening twilight into
morning twilight.

You would be more than welcome up here in winter. Lots of hours
of pure black sky. 5.5 magnitude on an average clear night.

I was out walking with my dogs watching the eclipse a few days ago.
It was a balmy -26 deg C with hardly any wind. Mind you we're having
a bit of a heat wave. It hasn't been below -40 deg C for a week now.

You want to plan out a northern trip very carefully. It can get very
inhospitable at times. If your trip works out 100% perfect or 100%
wrong, you'll have a time you won't forget.

LdB

In article ,
L D'Bonnie wrote:

You didn't say what time of the year you want to go.

I was thinking late summer/early fall. I arrived in Fairbanks
on Sept. 2nd last time I visited Alaska, and the mosquitoes
had just gone away. :-) We got a fair bit of rain and some
snow, but overall, the temps were just fine. And, of course,
quite a bit of nighttime.

I was out walking with my dogs watching the eclipse a few days ago.
It was a balmy -26 deg C with hardly any wind. Mind you we're having
a bit of a heat wave. It hasn't been below -40 deg C for a week now.

:-) From the "mts.net" address, I'm guessing Manitoba? I actually
thought today about Gull Harbour Resort, where I went for the solar
eclipse in 1979. We had fun watching the aurorae during that trip,
although they weren't spectacular.


Patty

Patty Winter wrote:

:-) From the "mts.net" address, I'm guessing Manitoba? I actually
thought today about Gull Harbour Resort, where I went for the solar
eclipse in 1979. We had fun watching the aurorae during that trip,
although they weren't spectacular.


Patty


If I get lost I hope they put you in charge of the search party.

Gull Harbour would be a fine spot. Standing on the north shore you
could almost see eternity. Of course you will have to get the
weather and Old Sol to co-operate.

My hideout is in cottage country about 120 Kilometers South-Eastish
of that area

LdB

On 22 Feb 2008 22:56:14 GMT in rec.travel.usa-canada,
(Patty Winter) wrote:

Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

Yes. Fairbanks is at the best latitude, and since it is away
from the coast, has fewer cloudy days in the winter.

In article ,
Dennis P. Harris wrote:
On 22 Feb 2008 22:56:14 GMT in rec.travel.usa-canada,
(Patty Winter) wrote:

Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)

Yes. Fairbanks is at the best latitude,

Is that because it's closer to where aurorae are being generated?

and since it is away
from the coast, has fewer cloudy days in the winter.

Ah, good to know, thanks!


Patty

Patty Winter wrote:
I'm starting to suss out where to go in 2011 or 2012 for the
peak of the solar cycle to see some really good aurorae. If
I recall correctly, the viewing is actually better below the
polar circle, right? (In this case, I'm aiming for the Arctic.)
Assuming that one gets away from light pollution, would there
be any substantial difference in the quality of the aurorae
in, say, Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau? (Or Canadian cities
at equivalent latitudes.)


I'm planning a trip to northwest Canada and Alaska this year, and also
hope to get some aurora viewing in. Of course, the long nights of winter
are likely best, but here's some links:

http://www.gi.alaska.edu/aurora_predict/worldmap6.html
http://www.spaceweather.com/
http://www.aurorachasers.com/
http://www.auroraborealisyukon.com/auroracast/
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/Aurora/index.html
http://www.gedds.alaska.edu/AuroraForecast/
http://www.salatshots.com/aurora-prediction.php
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/lights.html

Best months statistically are March and September.

In article ,
Gary Gapinski wrote:

I'm planning a trip to northwest Canada and Alaska this year, and also
hope to get some aurora viewing in. Of course, the long nights of winter
are likely best, but here's some links:

Thanks!

Best months statistically are March and September.

That's perfect, as I was thinking of September.

Let us know how your trip goes!


Patty