Can the stars be seen more clearly when flying at 40,000 feet?
December 15, 2015 4:14 AM Subscribe
In relation to reading a recent article on the Skydeck, I wondered if flying at 40,000 feet and thereby removing an equivalent chunk of the Earth's atmosphere, made a significant difference in how clearly one can view the stars.
There are also Airbourne Observatories, such as Kuiper Airborne Observatory and the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy.
The altitidue is particularly helpful for telescopes imaging in the infrared region; there would presumably be a smaller improvement in how much clearer the stars looked to your naked eyes.
posted by James Scott-Brown at 4:23 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]
The altitidue is particularly helpful for telescopes imaging in the infrared region; there would presumably be a smaller improvement in how much clearer the stars looked to your naked eyes.
posted by James Scott-Brown at 4:23 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]
The atmosphere does distort/blur starlight, so it can both make stars appear blurrier and, because the light is spread out, it can make them appear fainter. At 40K feet, you are up about 1.5 scale heights, so there is only about 20% as much air at that altitude. This can definitely make stars appear brighter/clearer. However, more significant than the lack of air in general is the fact that there is much less water vapor in the atmosphere at the cold temperatures of the upper atmosphere.
The view from 40K feet shouldn't be markedly better than the view from a desert location (i.e. dry) far from the city lights. The altitude makes a much more important difference for infrared light, which is why the IR observatories that James Scott-Brown links to gain a ton from flying at altitude.
Most important I suspect, though, is just being away from light pollution. At 40K feet, you are many miles away from the nearest lights and, more often than not, are flying over regions where there is not significant light pollution.
posted by Betelgeuse at 7:08 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]
The view from 40K feet shouldn't be markedly better than the view from a desert location (i.e. dry) far from the city lights. The altitude makes a much more important difference for infrared light, which is why the IR observatories that James Scott-Brown links to gain a ton from flying at altitude.
Most important I suspect, though, is just being away from light pollution. At 40K feet, you are many miles away from the nearest lights and, more often than not, are flying over regions where there is not significant light pollution.
posted by Betelgeuse at 7:08 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]
What about the effect of vibration of an aircraft based platform?
posted by Jahaza at 7:21 AM on December 15, 2015
posted by Jahaza at 7:21 AM on December 15, 2015
Vibrations from the aircraft can certainly lead to extra blurring of light (see, e.g., Section 3 of this paper for how SOFIA deals with it). However, the effect when "looking at the stars" with your naked eye is small enough such that the increased altitude and decreased light pollution are more than worth it.
posted by Betelgeuse at 7:35 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Betelgeuse at 7:35 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
(it's not just the opacity of the atmosphere - although being higher does help view certain wavelengths - but that the air "shimmers" slightly, making the stars blurred and so fainter)
posted by andrewcooke at 4:20 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]