Is it worth the extra half hour drive for the darkness

[bomberbaz]

I recently went for a drive up into the Yorkshire dales searching for a new deep sky observing spot.  I drove past my usual observing place which is 25 km from my house, up past my current deep sky observing spot which is 35km away (50 minutes drive) and recced a new spot which is 55 km away and circa 1.15 hours drive.

Some may have seen my recent report regarding the murk to the south of my usual observing spot, anything low in the sky is blotted out by the sky glow gloop. My last visit to my deep sky spot also showed some sky glow to the south but it wasn't anything like as bad as the usual place but to the light adjusted eye, still quite noticeable. 

So this was the reason for searching out darker skies and my natural thought was to travel deeper into the dales and hence further from the sky glow LP.

As the crow flies my distances are my regular spot is about 20 km from the LP hot spot, 45 km distance for my current deep sky spot and the new spot is 60 km in. SQM reading are 21.1 - 21.7 & 21.76 respectively. However these are zenith readings and so are somewhat irrelevant as cutting through the southern sky glow gloop is my goal.  

Just wondered what opinion is on the extra distance versus improved darkness. Is 15 km of crow fly distance really going to make that much difference!

[jetstream]

21.1 is nice 21.7 is super good- but if it were me I'd pick the spot that has better transparency if possible. On a very transparent night I would head for the 21.7...

[ollypenrice]

I think a lot depends on how much of the glow is from very local, immediate sources. If it is, then the more distant spot will be a benefit. If it isn't, I don't think it will have a huge effect at low elevations. But there really is only one way to be sure...

Olly

[scarp15]

5 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

Just wondered what opinion is on the extra distance versus improved darkness. Is 15 km of crow fly distance really going to make that much difference!

It might and yes it would be worth it, particularly as you have invested in a SQM-L device, to make a comparison with else where. Of course the weather forecast could imply one thing and the reality for very good transparency at the spot, could well be something else. It is still in my opinion worth the extra 15 min though, even if just to fulfill a curiosity and who knows, could even become a regular (well as regular as dark sky trips go). 

[AlexK]

It's all surely depends on your particular geography. So it's kinda redundant asking the general public advice :))))

In California an extra 30 min of driving for me means 60km away from the megapolis light dome. I'm freeway-driving for ~4 hours on average for that and often for about an hour after that to traverse some rural road to the above marine layer hills with a good horizon, preferably with the South over mountain ridges or the Ocean. That as well reducing the road traffic to nearly zero (I'm usually parking for the night on some scenic overlook).

[bomberbaz]

4 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

I think a lot depends on how much of the glow is from very local, immediate sources. If it is, then the more distant spot will be a benefit. If it isn't, I don't think it will have a huge effect at low elevations. But there really is only one way to be sure...

Olly

The light is from urbanisation so the extra distance may not be worthwhile however as you point out there is only one way to find out and you are spot on with it Olly, go there and see for myself. 

I was considering going tonight but the weather is awful and I don't fancy the drive in poor conditions.

It may end up waiting until autumn before I go unless the weather picks up but I will do it.