Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Joe Cipriano
Entropy Personified
   
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 3818
Loc: Uh... anyone have a GPS?
|
|
Quote:
I'm extremely fortunate to live in a very rural area, with only one neighbor. My night skies average mid 21. SQM.
Carol
I don't think there's a 21 SQL in my entire state. I'd have to drive over 7 hrs (400mi) to northern Wisconsin to get skies that dark; the Iowa Star Party site is a little closer - 6h30m (about 390mi) away.
Not exagerating or looking for sympathy by any means, but I can read my equipment instruction manuals in my backyard at 2am by ambient light...
Just ain't worth it.
-------------------- In the Land of Eternal Light Pollution & Great Pizza (Chicago)
SN-6, ED80, WO 66SD
Meade 208xt, SBIG ST-4
D70 (modified)
CGE (way modified)
A Wife who understands (unmodified)
Some other stuff...
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
Douglas Adams
|
Spaz
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/19/07
Posts: 758
Loc: New Zealand
|
|
Quote:
Not [...] looking for sympathy...
Well, you get mine anyway.
|
Holst
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 1318
Loc: Portland, OR
|
|
How do we find out how bad our light pollution is? I mean I know I can click on the clear skies map but is there a way to find out what it is exactly where we live (e.g. based on our address)?
-------------------- Marya
10" f/5, 1250 FL Hardin Optical dob named "Clifford the Big Red Dob"; *6.0mm Orion Expanse; 7mm Pentax XW; 9.0mm Orion Expanse; 9.0mm Optical plossl; 14mm Meade 4000 UWA, *26mm 1.25" Meade super plossl; 32mm 2" GSO; 2x 2" Powermate; *Swift "Sea Wolf" 10x50 binoculars
(*gifts from very kind and generous CN members! :-)
|
Tony Flanders
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/18/06
Posts: 1792
Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA
|
|
Quote:
How do we find out how bad our light pollution is? I mean I know I can click on the clear skies map but is there a way to find out what it is exactly where we live (e.g. based on our address)?
Clear Sky Chart simply interfaces to the World Atlas of Light Pollution, which is based on decades-old satellite measurements. It's really not bad at all, but the data is old, and the resolution is hopelessly inadequate in and around urban areas.
The short answer is that if you live inside the boundaries of a major U.S. city, your light pollution is really bad.
The long answer is that the only way to find out for sure is to measure it yourself. You are then faced with the dilemma of how to express that measurement in terms that will be meaningful to other people.
In my opinion, the best method to date is to use the Sky Quality Meter (Google for it). But this has to be used with great care, as it can be fooled by nearby streetlights or obstructions.
-------------------- Tony Flanders
eyeglasses
6x15 and 8x32 monoculars
8x25, 7x35, 10x30 IS, 10x50, and 15x70 binoculars
70mm and 100mm achromatic refractors
4.5", 7", and 12.5" Dobs
|
Holst
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 1318
Loc: Portland, OR
|
|
Thanks Tony. I thought *maybe* my city was somewhat better being Portland as opposed to Detroit, plus my neighborhood is full of trees, but I too doubt it makes much of a difference.
-------------------- Marya
10" f/5, 1250 FL Hardin Optical dob named "Clifford the Big Red Dob"; *6.0mm Orion Expanse; 7mm Pentax XW; 9.0mm Orion Expanse; 9.0mm Optical plossl; 14mm Meade 4000 UWA, *26mm 1.25" Meade super plossl; 32mm 2" GSO; 2x 2" Powermate; *Swift "Sea Wolf" 10x50 binoculars
(*gifts from very kind and generous CN members! :-)
|
Joe Cipriano
Entropy Personified
   
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 3818
Loc: Uh... anyone have a GPS?
|
|
Quote:
...The long answer is that the only way to find out for sure is to measure it yourself. You are then faced with the dilemma of how to express that measurement in terms that will be meaningful to other people.
In my opinion, the best method to date is to use the Sky Quality Meter (Google for it). But this has to be used with great care, as it can be fooled by nearby streetlights or obstructions.
Using VMag is a pretty universal method of expressing your LP. Here's a UMi VMag map you can use to figure your local naked-eye limiting magnitude; here's another for M45. Compare those numbers to the Bortle Scale NELM listings, and you'll have numbers everyone here will understand. Ain't perfect, as high thin haze, smog, dust, etc can all affect NELM - and those things have nothing to do with LP - but it gives you some idea. Keep a log, with an average, best, and worst. Over time, you'll have a good idea.
My area...
NELM between 3 and 4.3, average 3.5
Bortle class 9 (high 9, low 9, average 9... )
SQL 16.6 (low) to 17.68 (best ever, IIRC). Average 17.1
BTW - that 16.6 SQL was on a moonless night...
I have not bothered taking readings with the Moon up; there shouldn't be any questions as to why.
Now you know...
PS - A SQM can be a nice tool to have - or be very depressing...
Edit: On further thought, use the Bortle scale. NELM is dependent on your visual accuity; your NELM 6 may be my NELM 5. Just a thought...
-------------------- In the Land of Eternal Light Pollution & Great Pizza (Chicago)
SN-6, ED80, WO 66SD
Meade 208xt, SBIG ST-4
D70 (modified)
CGE (way modified)
A Wife who understands (unmodified)
Some other stuff...
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
Douglas Adams
Edited by Joe Cipriano (03/18/08 07:56 PM)
|
Joe Cipriano
Entropy Personified
   
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 3818
Loc: Uh... anyone have a GPS?
|
|
Some more info...
Here's the S&T article by John Bortle (inventor of the Bortle Scale). Gives his philosophy on how to determine your local sky conditions and LP.
HTH
-------------------- In the Land of Eternal Light Pollution & Great Pizza (Chicago)
SN-6, ED80, WO 66SD
Meade 208xt, SBIG ST-4
D70 (modified)
CGE (way modified)
A Wife who understands (unmodified)
Some other stuff...
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
Douglas Adams
|
panhard
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 01/20/08
Posts: 2082
Loc: 43.88 n 79.17 w
|
|
Quote:
Live on 10+ view acres in northeastern Calf in a county 5300 square miles and 28000 people (plus 10000 locked up in our two prisons).....lots more cows than people. 
Picture shows view to the south which has virtually no visible lights as the land up to the treeline is a 2100 acre ranch that has a conservation easement against any future development. To the east of me is 500 acres of nature preserve that is owned and managed by a land trust (I am the volunteer land manager.) No development is possible there. I get a small flat light dome over the mountains from Reno, which is 85 miles down the road. The town is to the north and blocked by the house. The "problem child" is the prison down the road east about 15 miles; it throws a orange light dome that is fortunately partially blocked by a ridge.
My average SQMs are 21.4; the best I've seen at my home observing site is 21.65. I drive about 150 miles to central Nevada during camping weather to get to SQM 22+ skies.
I deliberately bought this property because of the dark sky advantages offered.
you have an ideal situation
-------------------- 10"Sky watcher dob
8 & 17mm Hyperion eye pieces
12x50 binos
A love for this hobby
"What goes around comes around."
"She who must be obeyed."
Herb c
cloudy nights my # 1 site
43.53°n 79.17°w
|
Nightknight
member
Reged: 10/12/07
Posts: 68
Loc: The great pacific northwet of ...
|
|
Quote:
I'm extremely fortunate to live in a very rural area, with only one neighbor. My night skies average mid 21. SQM.
Carol
Ohwowohwowohwowohwow! Can I come live with you? I haven't even seen the Milky Way since I went up to the San Juan islands a couple Mars oppositions ago. I'm in the "Greater" Seattle area- Light pollution, geez- and Metro Transit keeps the air hazy enough there's lots of scattered light to the west- makes Mercury even harder to catch.
-------------------- You can only talk astronomy with astronomers. Everybody else just yawns.
|
David Knisely
Postmaster
   
Reged: 04/19/04
Posts: 6495
Loc: Beatrice, Nebraska
|
|
Quote:
Some more info...
Here's the S&T article by John Bortle (inventor of the Bortle Scale). Gives his philosophy on how to determine your local sky conditions and LP.
HTH
Well, the Bortle scale is rather inconsistent in the items it uses to measure the "levels", so I would rather go with a Zenith Limiting Magnitude figure coupled with a simple description (or better yet, the SQM readings). I once came up with this scale:
Re: Judging light pollution. It is really tough to give a judgment of the exact level of sky quality. I guess I could divide it into several levels: Severe, Moderate, Mild, Dark Sky, and Pristine.
SEVERE: Severe light pollution might be a situation where (even in the absence of direct lighting), only stars brighter than magnitude 4.0 would be visible to the unaided eye overhead, with considerable skyglow in all parts of the sky. The sky background would be bright (especially nearer the horizon) with perhaps just a slight dimming of the glow overhead. Such conditions maybe found in some areas in some of the central portions of major cities like New York or Los Angeles. MODERATE: Moderate light pollution is rather difficult to quantify, but some limited deep-sky observations are possible in such an environment (double stars, brighter open clusters, brighter planetary nebulae, etc.). I would probably put the moderate light pollution at a limiting magnitude of from 4.0 to 4.9 or so with varying amounts of skyglow in different directions, although no part of the sky would appear very dark. The horizon would still be fairly bright overall, making deep-sky observations lower than about 30 degrees in altitude more difficult.
MILD: A "mild" light pollution level would probably be at the point where a person could see 5.0 to 5.9 or so in some areas of the sky, and where the brighter portions of the Milky Way high above the horizon may be faintly visible at times. Various areas around the horizon would show skyglow, but overhead and perhaps in a few other areas, the sky brightness would appear noticeably darker, although perhaps not exactly fully dark. M31 would be visible to the unaided eye with averted vision when well above the horizon, although it would usually be perceived as just a small faint fuzzy spot. I think that probably all of the Messier Objects would be visible in a good telescope over 4 inches in aperture with mild to moderate light pollution levels, although the detail visible in them might be a bit limited. The number of faint galaxies visible in a 6" or 8" takes a big jump when you get down to the mild light pollution level. Some light pollution filters can help combat the effects of low to moderate light pollution to a degree.
DARK SKY: I would consider a "dark sky" site to be a place where you can see typically see stars 6.0 to 6.8 with averted vision routinely and large parts of the sky appear quite dark, but where there may be a few limited light domes from nearby cities visible. The Milky Way would show up prominently with a sort of granular texture. M31 would appear noticably elongated to the unaided eye, and occasionally, M33 would be glimpsed with the unaided eye as well when well above the horizon. At such sites, detail in faint deep-sky objects becomes a good deal easier to see, and the number of objects visible in the telescope goes up dramatically. My dark sky site routinely gets me to +6.5 naked eye, and occasionally fainter.
PRISTINE: Skies which routinely allow naked-eye sightings of magnitude +6.9 and fainter I would consider "pristine". Usually, these places are located well away from any major cities, and at higher altitudes. Little or no light pollution is visible over the entire sky at such pristine sites, and the Milky Way shows some faint detail which is usually shown only in photographs. For example, the Nebraska Star Party site is deep in the sparsely-populated Sandhills at 3100 feet elevation (the nearest sizable "city", North Platte, Nebr., pop. 24,509, is 100 miles to the south). At that site, I have seen stars as faint as +7.5, and others have gone to 8.0. Similar such feats are possible in many areas, especially in the Rockies, and in the high desert areas of the American southwest. In summary, the following are the approximate unaided-eye visual magnitude limits (Zenith Limiting Magnitude) and overhead light-pollution ratings for my scale of judging light pollution:
SEVERE: only stars brighter than mag. 4.0 are visible with bright skyglow over most of the sky. MODERATE: mag. 4.0 to 4.9 stars visible (variable skyglow depending on direction of observation). MILD: mag. 5.0 to 5.9 stars visible (some notable darker areas visible). DARK SKY: mag. 6.0 to 6.8 stars visible (dark, sometimes with a few light domes along the horizon). PRISTINE: mag. 6.9 and fainter stars *consistently* visible (little or no light pollution in any direction).
If you want to get the most out of Deep-Sky with a telescope, get to as dark a site as you reasonably can (even if there is some light pollution), and then work with what you have. You may be surprised as to how well you do, even from a non-optimal location!
Clear skies to you.
-------------------- David W. Knisely
Hyde Memorial Observatory
http://www.hydeobservatory.info
|
csa/montana
Astro Ambassador
   
Reged: 05/14/05
Posts: 25796
Loc: montana
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm extremely fortunate to live in a very rural area, with only one neighbor. My night skies average mid 21. SQM.
Carol
Ohwowohwowohwowohwow! Can I come live with you? I haven't even seen the Milky Way since I went up to the San Juan islands a couple Mars oppositions ago. I'm in the "Greater" Seattle area- Light pollution, geez- and Metro Transit keeps the air hazy enough there's lots of scattered light to the west- makes Mercury even harder to catch.
Forgot to mention, I have 20 acres, so never any "close" neighbors.
Carol
-------------------- Carol
AstroTech 16" Dob (Thanks ASTRONOMICS!)
AstroTech 66ED / Vixen 80MF/AstroTech Voyager
Masuyama's 7.5, 15, 25W, 35mm,
Tak LE 5mm
7mm Pentax XL, 10mm Pentax XW
14mm Meade 4000 UWA
22mm Pan, 35mm Pan
DreamCatcher Dobservatory, #2
|
RussL
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 03/18/08
Posts: 1163
Loc: Cayce, SC
|
|
I haven't studied the different scales very much yet, but based on the Bortle Scale, I'd say I was about a 5-1/2, sometimes a 6, sometimes a 5, except when the power went off Monday morning around 12:30 a.m. For two hours I saw Bortle 4! It was awesome compared to what I usually see!!!
-------------------- --Russell
"Akita mani yo." Observe everything as you walk. (--Lakota)
Celestron Celestar 8 Standard SCT, f10
Celestron 80mm Wide View ref., f5
Criterion RV-6 Dynascope, Newt., f8, (c. 1962)
Sears Discoverer 60mm ref., f7, (c. 1973)
Celestron Ultima DX 10x50, 6.5 TFOV
Tasco 7x35 wide
Several mediocre eyepieces
|
BryceSkies
member
Reged: 03/06/05
Posts: 24
|
|
How about using Bortle Class to describe light pollution levels? Limiting Magnitude is dependent on atmospheric clarity, as well as technique, observer experience, visual acuity, and patience. Bortle Class is a more suitable qualitative scale.
|
|
0 registered and 0 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Tom L, csa/montana
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 3556
|
|
|
|
|
|
|