3

There is going to be a solar eclipse in 2017 and I thought it would be cool to fly along its path to make it longer than the approximately two and a half minutes you would see on the ground.

Is this a bad idea?

Should I go to fast or slow for the solar eclipse?

I think it would be fun to fly during the solar eclipse, even if I can't keep pace with it.

abelenky
  • 30,696
  • 9
  • 92
  • 143
William
  • 255
  • 1
  • 4
  • 13

2 Answers2

8

The speed at which the shadow of the Moon crosses the Earth varies according to time of day and latitude. However, 1500mph is a good starting point.

The only supersonic commercial aircraft to enter service was Concorde, top speed around 1350mph. And, of course, Concorde is now out of service.

Flying something subsonic along the path of totality will give a longer view, but most airliners top out at around 600mph.

You've really no chance of keeping up with it. You're probably better off finding a spot with a good view and enjoying your 2.5 minutes!

Nasa have a range of materials dedicated to this. If you fancy a little mental gymnastics take a look at https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/challenge-5-%E2%80%93-estimating-speed-lunar-shadow. In particular, download the PDF worksheet and do the maths!

  • 7
    Too bad the SR-71 is retired... – reirab May 03 '17 at 03:36
  • 1
    Are there any regulations of flying under a solar elcipse? – William May 03 '17 at 04:04
  • 3
    @William you could edit that into your question or ask a separate question asking about regulations of flying during an eclipse. – Notts90 May 03 '17 at 06:12
  • 1
    @William See this. – Steve May 03 '17 at 17:12
  • @Steve Thank you! I think I would have found it if had been labeled solar eclipse and not eclipse. I don't want this to be a duplicate so I have edited the question title to be slightly more specific. – William May 03 '17 at 17:49
  • According to this site the slowest section of the 2017 eclipse will be 1462 mph or 1270 kts. SR-71 could achieve 1982kn ground speed. It could keep up. – TomMcW May 03 '17 at 18:14
  • @mins Actually at 85,000 ft the umbra would be slightly larger, thus easier to track – TomMcW May 03 '17 at 18:53
  • 1
    @mins Because the light source (sun) is larger than the object casting the shadow (moon). The shadow is a cone. But you, as an astrophysicist should know this! (see comments on this question – TomMcW May 03 '17 at 19:02
  • @mins but I doubt 85,000 feet would make much of a difference considering the source is 239,000 miles away – TomMcW May 03 '17 at 19:04
  • @mins I sent you a diagram on chat, but it didn't tag u. Feel free to ignore it, though. – TomMcW May 03 '17 at 19:47
3

It is possible. The shadow of the moon goes too fast to keep up with that, but there are other reasons to do it. Firstly, when you fly over the clouds, you can be sure they don't obstruct your view. Second reason is that sometimes solar eclipse, or the best part of it, only appear over an ocean.

Here is an article from last year. Couple of interesting quotes from it:

"Taking to the skies during the sun being eclipsed out of view behind the moon, is not a new concept. In fact in 1887, Dmitri Mendeleev, the Russian inventor, was so keen to see the eclipse without cloud obstruction that he rode in a hot air balloon when it took place."

"In the past private operators have capitalised on the event by offering special eclipse flights."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3475224/Out-world-best-commercial-flights-witnessing-total-solar-eclipse.html

Mika Letonsaari
  • 31
  • 1