PDA

View Full Version : Survey: have you ever seen aurora below or "around" your aircraft?


jrbt
21st Oct 2003, 03:47
Survey: have you ever seen aurora below or "around" your aircraft?

Guess what - scientists say it can't possibly be there, only much higher up! So please fill out the questionnaire below and tell what you saw.

Survey conducted by John Beattie, New York - layperson with long-time interest in astronomy and science as an amateur - former VFR private pilot with approx. 100 hours of flying - email address: [email protected].


INTRODUCTION

Scientists researching the aurora borealis and australis say it only occurs in the upper atmosphere above 60-100km or higher and, because of the physics involved, cannot possibly occur at or below the cruising altitude of a jet aircraft which is approximately 10km.

But years ago, as a passenger on a commercial airline flight, I saw aurora - or at least, something that looked and behaved very much like it - below the aircraft myself.

Therefore I would like to survey pilots flying in northerly or southerly reaches, as many pilots as possible, to find out how many have also observed this at least once in their careers to date. I'd also like to survey members of the flying public who have observed this as passengers. The aim is to corroborate what I saw and call scientists' attention to the seeming fact that aurora, or some cousin of it, really can occur at and below aircraft altitudes. If the scientists can ultimately verify this to their own satisfaction, I think it could be a minor or major revelation in their field and lead to new areas of research and new progress in understanding, etc..

Evidently it's sufficiently rare that, over the years, none of the scientists themselves have ever happened to see it while flying. They have received many reports of it but maintain that it has to be something else such as aurora beyond the horizon; a mirage or optical illusion; glowing algae or plankton in the sea; and other possibilities. But if enough observers report they have seen it and describe it in detail and all corroborate each other and make themselves available to respond to questions about what they saw, the scientists may start to put real credence in its existence, and then begin efforts to confirm this and ascertain its true nature. My role in this, as a non-scientist myself, is simply leading the horse to water: getting the scientists and pilots/passengers to talk to each other about this which apparently they have never done before. I think the scientists would have been receiving reports of low-altitude aurora sightings all along if more people had realized it was something the scientists believed to be impossible.

At the end of this discussion is a questionnaire which I would ask you to fill out and submit by conventional email to [email protected]. In addition, you may post any comments you wish as part of this thread.

Help us to learn more about this glorious natural phenomenon, the aurora!


DETAILED DISCUSSION

On June 6-7, 1967 at the age of nineteen, flying from New York to London on a moonless overnight flight, I saw what certainly appeared to be aurora borealis, with shimmering curtains all monochrome whitish in color, distinctly below the aircraft. It flickered and rippled and pulsated and moved, between pauses, at gigantic speeds on the order of hundreds of kilometers per second.

It was about 1-2 hours after departure while everyone else slept. I was observing out the window using a blanket to block out the in-cabin lights. My recollection is that there were no clouds above the aircraft although there may have been some clouds below the aircraft, and also, the aircraft was over water because there were no lights at all visible on the surface. I watched for something like 20-30 minutes and ascertained definitely that the aircraft was not banking but was on horizontal cruise the entire time. I made double-triple sure that the seeming-aurora I was observing was not at or beyond the horizon - because it wasn't confined to a more-or-less one-dimensional horizontal band near the wingtip light but instead, spanned a very broad two-dimensional field of view from below the horizon to well below the aircraft, and in fact, *no part* of the display was above the aircraft at any time, and I could dimly see stars which provided steady points of reference as to where the actual sky was, and in fact, could dimly see the horizon itself.

It was the first time I had ever seen aurora or similar and I thought to myself, isn't it supposed to be way up higher than that? Also, I didn't know it moved so fast! In other words, I was not prejudging due to any prior notion about aurora or observation of it - not only its low-altitude occurrence was different from what I would have expected, but also its quick motion.

(Since then I have seen aurora of the expected high-altitude variety two times: from the ground in Iceland in 1986 and from the air on a New York to Moscow flight in 2001.)

An important point

What I saw in 1967 was remarkable not only because the aurora-like display appeared to be situated at low altitudes, but also because this was *not connected to or simultaneously accompanied by* any aurora at the usual high altitudes. I'm far from qualified to speculate on the significance of this, only to emphasize it as an important characteristic of the occurrence - important not only in itself, but also because it seems to rule out any possibility that the low-altitude display was some sort of reflection from above.

"Impossible"

For years I remembered the occasion, but only around the 1980's began to realize that what I had seen was not supposed to be. I mentioned it to some science friends of mine who said it was impossible, and, even though they were not aurora specialists, I strongly agreed with them based on what I know about physics from my boarding school days preceding college: the aurora is a plasma that can only occur in the very attenuated upper atmosphere, like the near-vacuum inside a television. But I felt my observation had been rock solid.

So, I began asking various pilots from time to time, at the end of flights such as over the Atlantic, on any occasion in your flying have you ever seen something appearing to be aurora below your aircraft.

About 30%-40%, I would say, replied yes definitely, they had seen it below, or at least at the same altitude as, the aircraft - "a perception of flying through it"; the other 60%-70% said no, in their years of flying they had never seen that.

It's a very small sample - probably 20-30 pilots I asked - and only verbal, but still gives useful corroboration, I think, helping to reassure everyone that I haven't been going on field trips to New Mexico :) . It's corroboration not only that the aurora or whatever-it-is can occur lower than an aircraft, but also that such is indeed quite rare, since some pilots have seen it but a majority have never seen it. And for that matter, in three and a half decades of looking for it every time I go on a night flight, I've never seen it a second time.

Other reports

Recently I started thinking about this again and decided to pursue the question. Looking for additional preliminary corroboration I did a cursory internet search by typing on Google "aurora below" which yielded three pertinent references, two of which were from the nineteenth century:

(1) http://www.project1947.com/shg/e1.htm

"... Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Report of a Remarkable Appearance of the Aurora Below a Cloud, 1845, NS V38 (1845). ..."

(2) http://47.1911encyclopedia.org/A/AU/AURUNCI.htm
[online original has scanner errors most of which I have been able to fix]

"20. Height. ... Much the most consistent results were those obtained [in 1882-1883] at Godthaab [Greenland] by Paulsen.... The calculated heights - all referring to the lowest border of the aurora - varied from 0.6 to 67.8km..., with the average being about 20km.... In 1885 Messrs Garde and Eherlin made similar observations...near Cape Farewell in Greenland.... Their results were very similar to Paulsen’s..., the calculated heights varying in fairly regular fashion from 1.6 to 12.9km.... If the Godthaab observations can be trusted, auroral discharges must often occur within a few miles of the earth’s surface in Arctic regions. In confirmation of this view reference may be made to a number of instances where observers - e.g. General [?]bine, Sir John Franklin, Prof. Sehim Lemström, Dr David Walker [?] Fort Kennedy in 1858-1859), Captain Parry (Fort Bowen, 1825) and others - have seen aurora below the clouds or between themselves and mountains. One or two instances of this kind have even been described in Scotland. Prof. Cleveland Abbe...has given a full historical account of the subject to which reference may be made for further details. ..."

(3) http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF2/266.html

From a column of the Alaska Science Forum dated November 22, 1978: "... Do not be misled by the sight of aurora below the wing. This aurora is probably 60 miles...above the earth's surface, but far distant from the aircraft--as Columbus proved in 1492, the world is round. Earth curvature allows one flying at 30,000 feet to see auroras more than a 1000 miles away. ..."

Concerning this last reference, evidently the writer received (inarticulate?) lay reports about below-aircraft auroras-or-relatives-thereof but did not see them himself, and felt that he *had* to dismiss them as the purported horizonal illusion. But I think they really *were* below the aircraft wing, just like the display I am convinced I saw in 1967.

(continued - see next post)

jrbt
21st Oct 2003, 03:56
(continued from previous post - since too large for one post)

Current scientific viewpoint

An aurora scientist with whom I exchanged emails recently confirmed the consensus in his field that aurora at or below jet aircraft altitude is unlikely or impossible:

"The [charged particles, such as electrons or ions, penetrating earth's atmosphere from outer space] that could reach that altitude would have to be very energetic. And even though we do get bombarded by ions within the energy range that let them penetrate even to the ground, the number fluxes of these high energy particles are so low that they cannot cause enough brightness to be visible. The potential optical emissions from these extreme high energy particles would also not look like aurora because the magnetic field of the earth is much too weak to constrain the motion of these particles as it does for auroral electron precipitation."

However, he did also mention another observation he knew of, along with a proposed explanation:

"There are many reports from people in the Alaska mountains who had the impression of aurora at the same altitude as the surrounding mountain tops. I think this is a similar effect as that of the 'big moon': when the moon is near the horizon it appears about twice as big compared to a moon high up in the sky. This has nothing to do with diffraction in the atmosphere, and is nothing else but an illusion caused by our way of comparing the size of objects on the horizon with that of the moon."

I respectfully disagree with the scientist and believe that the Alaskans really did see aurora, or something which looked quite like it, as low as the mountain tops.

Concerning the nineteenth-century observers who said they saw aurora "below the clouds or between themselves and mountains", the scientist wrote:

"There are several possible explanations, and only one (and an unlikely one at that) is an airglow phenomenon at low altitude that looks like aurora. The Arctic (and Antarctic) are very prone to strong inversion layers, and atmospheric reflection and thus "fata morgana" type illusions [mirages produced by reflections of light from strong, low level temperature inversions in the atmosphere - see for example http://jackstephensimages.com/Merchant/photographicgallery/fatamorgana/fatamorganapage.html ] are very common. It is conceivable that observers can get the impression of seeing aurora "below" a mountain top. The mind can play all kinds of tricks on an observer when distance perception is impossible. For example: all reports of aurora below clouds that I have heard had scattered clouds, I never heard of a report of aurora below a solid cloud cover. If I didn't know better, I could convince myself that the moon is in front of scattered (or thin) clouds (sometimes, when the conditions are just right). So I don't find these reports conclusive as to confirm low altitude airglow emissions.

"Collecting reports of low altitude airglow observations may nevertheless help in finding an explanation for these observations. Maybe they occur more often in specific locations or weather conditions (clear - cloudy, summer - winter, over ocean - over land, etc.). I would consider it a "high risk" investigation, though. High risk meaning that you might spend a lot of time and effort and not reach any conclusion."

Jet Blast weighs in

Lastly, by searching for "aurora" here on PPRuNe I found a remarkable post by gaunty dated 15th November 2001 09:16 on Misc. Forums, Jet Blast via http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11964&highlight=aurora :

"Coming back from Melbourne to Perth late one night in 1990 at FL430 [43,000 feet] in our Citation coasted via Norseman [a town] with Perth about 290 track miles on the nose you can expect, on those crystal clear nights, you can see the loom of Perth soon after. Out my window on the left wingtip I saw what looked like the loom I was expecting over the nose. Bit of crosschecking takes place to confirm we're heading in the right direction.

"The white 'loom' then slowly turned into the most magnificent green with the red bars of a magnificent Aurora Australis seemingly all around us. I swear we were actually in it.

"Had eldest daughter on board and got her to turn off the cabin lights and wake the rest for the sight of their lives. The radio lit up with the RPT [Regular Passenger Transport] traffic around and behind us.

"We only had about 30 minutes before we got busy coming down, but when we landed it was still visible against the city lights. Quite rare made the papers and something I will never forget. Now I want to see the Northern Lights."

Recently I exchanged private-messages with gaunty and he affirmed that his recollection of the event is "still fairly vivid" and from his logbook the actual date was 22 February 1990. He said he had not been aware that the science "did not allow" aurora at that level. He said "I don't recall what the tropopause level was that night but I may be able to dredge that up but it gets pretty low around there at that time of the year. I don't know if the tropopause is significant in Aurora but my instinct tells me it might be." (Tropopause, the boundary between troposphere and stratosphere, is, according to the dictionary, where temperature stops decreasing rapidly with altitude, and above which convection is not active and clouds usually do not form. Altitude of the tropopause can vary according to latitude, season, and weather.)

Airborne parallax effect

One more thought I have is that reports by airborne observers may have more inherent credibility than those by ground-based observers because airborne observers see low-altitude aurora in three-dimensional moving perspective, making it harder for most types of potential illusions to fool them.

Nomenclature

If ultimately confirmed to exist, the phenomenon may require a name based on whatever its true nature is determined to be. Maybe it will turn out to be not the same thing as aurora despite its similar appearance - in that case I would propose calling it "AURora-like display at Extreme Low Altitude", or, "aurela".


QUESTIONNAIRE - DIRECTIONS

Please electronically copy and paste the following questionnaire onto your own computer, fill it out, and submit by conventional email to [email protected]. I'll share your report with some aurora scientists with whom I have been corresponding. It's preferable that you include your actual name which will make it easier for the scientists to use your response, with your permission, in research and scientific papers if they would like to. Therefore do not include your PPRuNe username, so as to preserve your PPRuNe anonymity. Unless you tell us otherwise, we will presume it's okay for the scientists to contact you if they have questions about your submission, and in so doing they will identify themselves as well of course. If you wish to know their identity before making your submission, email me. In addition to your submission to [email protected] you may post any comments you wish as part of this thread under your regular PPRuNe username.

Depending on what we learn from this survey we might do one or more follow-up surveys later.


§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§



LOW-ALTITUDE-AURORA QUESTIONNAIRE

from post on www.pprune.org , Flight Deck Forums: Questions



1. a. Your name ___________________________ .

Do not include your PPRuNe username, so as to preserve your PPRuNe anonymity.

b. Location ___________________________ .

City - or just country, if you prefer - where you live.



2. Is it okay for scientists to use this submission in research and scientific papers?

Yes _____ . No _____ .



3. You are now currently, or in case furloughed, retired, etc., have been in the past,

a. an airliner pilot _____

b. a commercial pilot on smaller aircraft _____

c. a private pilot _____

d. cabin crew _____ .

You may check more than one of the above. If none of the above, then you are reporting an observation you made as

e. a passenger _____ .



4. In your career as a pilot thus far and/or in your travels as a passenger, how many hours of night flying would you estimate you have done above, say, 45°N or below 45°S?

_________

Of course, if you *have* seen aurora-like display below or "around" the aircraft you were flying in, we want to hear about it even if it was at the equator!



5. How many times would you estimate you have seen "normal" aurora borealis or australis as an observer from the ground or ocean surface, or from any aircraft on which you were a pilot or a passenger, wherein it appeared in the usual, expected manner, i.e. entirely at a far higher altitude than the aircraft, or at an altitude you could not discern because it was far away?

_______



6. a. How many times have you seen aurora-like display below, i.e. not simultaneously "around", the aircraft in which you were flying? "Below the aircraft" should not include anything at or beyond the horizon, only something that appeared definitely nearer than the horizon.

Write an exact number or approximate; if never, write 0 of course.

_______

b. Please comment on whether you also saw it above the aircraft - i.e. below and above occurring at the same time but discontinuous.

________________________________________________

________________________________________________



7. How many times have you seen aurora-like display "around" the aircraft in which you were flying, such as, giving the perception that you were flying through it, where at least part of the display appeared definitely lower than the aircraft and definitely nearer than the horizon?

_______



8. Describe the aurora-like display(s) you have seen below or "around" the aircraft in as much detail as you would like, with separate accounts for each instance if possible: general appearance and behavior, color(s), duration, evident altitude of the phenomenon, altitude of the aircraft at the time, geographic location, exact date if recalled, how many other people saw it including cabin crew, media coverage, possible illusions it might have been - or, are you convinced it could not have been an illusion and why; etc..

Please be sure to mention, to the best of your recollection, whether you were over water or land, whether you were over or under partial or complete cloud cover, and whether moonlight was a factor.

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________




§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

zerozero
21st Oct 2003, 05:22
...but I've spent the last eight years flying north of 59 degrees and I've never observed the aurora below my aircraft.

I have certainly seen it on the horizon but as you mention this only speaks to the distance of the event.

As for mountains emitting light, I have read accounts of the local (Alaska) mountains producing a single flash immediately prior to an earthquake. There are, in fact, photographs and some pretty credible testimony to back up this allegation.

But back to the aurora, I have to agree with the scientists that it's quite impossible. If it were possible I'm afraid we would all have cancer by now.

Those lights are caused by gases in the very thin upper-atmosphere being charged by ions from the sun. The gases in the lower atmosphere (below the tropospause) are not ever charged because the radiation is mostly filtered out by the time it reaches altitudes used by aircraft.

From what I've read about the aurora the How's and Why's are pretty well addressed. Right now the scientists seem to be working on answering the When's.

Aurora forecasting is getting better and better and the local newspapers have started publishing it along with the weather forecast.

Anchorage Daily Newspaper (http://www.adn.com)

Good luck.

DCDriver
22nd Oct 2003, 21:23
I spent a few years flying the so-called "Polar Route" between Europe & Japan via Anchorage. I never saw the aurora below the a/c, but it appeared quite different from that experienced at, say, 50N because we were close to the magnetic Npole.
What you may have seen as a passenger, jrbt, could have been St Elmo's Fire. This can get rather spectacular, with star wars-type "light swords" projecting outward from pitot heads, wing fences, antennas, etc. Usually coloured purple or blue.

Celtic Frog
23rd Oct 2003, 03:35
I've spent most of the last Twenty something years flying in and out of Scotland and lost count of the number of times I've seen the aurora, both from the aircraft and from the ground.
Like seeing sunrise / sunset from altitude, any light from beyond the horizon may look like it's below the aircraft or mountaintop height, especially if there is any reflection from seawater beneath, but I have problems believing that it can ever be seen at altitudes similar to flying aircraft.
One thing I've noticed is that it seems to affect radio navigation. Instead of flying in a straight line from VOR to VOR over a distance of say 100 miles or so, I've not been the only pilot to be noticed by ATC to be flying a curved track despite the VOR readings being centred....the track curving to the north in every case. Also spent some time sifting through ASR reports of various electrical problems in aircraft ..much more commonly during periods of repeated strong aurora....including the occasional burnt out circuit.

jrbt
24th Oct 2003, 00:42
Thanks for replies thus far from zerozero, DCDriver, and Celtic Frog.

No doubt about it - based on current understanding of the phenomenon, aurora *should* absolutely never appear at or below jet aircraft altitude.

But that's what I saw in 1967. And there are persistent reports of it since the nineteenth century, as described in my post. And *some* pilots I've spoken to informally over the years have also seen it, stating so emphatically, although the majority have not. I'm expecting that some of the ones who have seen it will find this topic within the next few days or weeks or months and let us hear from them. I know they're out there.

I can't try to offer an explanation for the low-altitude aurora, only to get corroboration, from as many pilots as possible, that it does occur, until it crosses some threshold of credibility.

That it goes so contrary to our understanding is precisely what makes it all the more intriguing, in my opinion, because I think it will tell us something important and fundamental if we can pin it down in some way.

I'll be asking everyone who reads this to be on the lookout for *future* sightings especially - if observers on two or more different aircraft report the same occurrence and verify each other's accounts and undergo cross-examination via email by the scientists, that should be very convincing.

St. Elmo's Fire sounds remarkable and I'd love to see it but from what I understand, it always emanates or projects from structures of the observer's aircraft, ship, or whatever, and never appears freestanding over wide areas forming shimmering curtains, etc.. So I have to say definitely that's not what I saw in 1967.

Intruder
25th Oct 2003, 03:13
I've seen it once, apparently surrounding the airplane. It looked like we were going to Pearl Harbor a la "The Final Countdown"!

jrbt
30th Oct 2003, 04:09
Thanks Intruder for your report and everyone should be on the lookout today and over the next few days since we're having the big solar storm which could produce lots of auroras...but will any of them be low-altitude ones?

Fokkerwokker
30th Oct 2003, 06:10
About 10 days ago 500 miles southeast of Anchorage at about 0500-ish local time I think. Spectacular display during which we appeared to be 'bathed' in flickering light for a few minutes. Quite amazing.

Regds

FW

maxalt
31st Oct 2003, 21:57
DCDriver, I've seen the 'light sword' effect too. On a B737 200 during descent over the Irish sea years ago. Two huge 'beams' of light began to grow out of the windscreen wiper bolts. At its peak I would guess they were about 50 feet long and projected in front of the a/c like headlamps. It was night and we were in cloud...the effect lit up the whole cockpit!

This is the only time I ever saw that particular effect and I've often wondered if it was a 'one off'.

The 732 used to be a demon for Elmos fire though, but most of it was just the commonly seen sparking effect crawling across the windscreen.

Never saw the aurora borealis below though, sorry.

Scottie
31st Oct 2003, 23:00
Celtic Frog,

One explanation as to why you may track in a curved line towards a VOR in the northern latitudes when there's an aurora about is that VHF radio signals can be reflected off the auroral curtain.

The signals exhibit doppler shift and have a harsh tone to them. Possibly the VOR receiver in you aircraft receives a distorted signal which fools it. The DME won't be affected as it is a UHF frequency which isn't readily affected by the aurora. But VHF signals (VOR) certainly are. Just one possible explanation!! :}

As a radio ham I've just spent the last 2 afternoons/evenings listening to far away VHF stations bouncing their signals off the curtain in order to make long distance contacts. Best signal I heard came from Lithuania (I'm in EDI)! Not bad for a "line of sight" frequency!

I must get out more :cool: :uhoh:

Some interesting web sites:

http://www.spaceweather.com

and

http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/srs.html

The storm that has just passed was categorised as an S3 storm see latter link. Dosage received could have been the equivalent of up to one chest x-ray. That's why I'm happy with shorthaul :ok:

Speedbird48
1st Nov 2003, 18:08
On one memorable occaision while going from Calgary to London well North of the track system we observed the Aurora to be South of us!! It was very unnerving as we had seen it frequently but always to the North. There was much checking of heading and compasses! Why, I have no clue but maybe someone on this thread may enlighten me?
While living in Goose Bay back in the early '90's my wife and I went out in to the wild darkness beyond the Goose VOR on a dirt track to observe a very bright Aurora. Out there in the very still darkness away from any noise or light pollution we were able to actually hear the Aurora. As the Greenish/Blue curtain shimmered above us we could hear a hissing sound that came and went with the waving of the curtain. Truly amazing.
While on the same subject I had never seen the Aurora to be any color other than Greenish/ Blue until last Wednesday night when it was a very distinct Red? Anyone know the reason for that?

Speedbird48

Scottie
2nd Nov 2003, 00:24
Speedbird48,

Was speaking to a mate in Shetland a couple of days ago and the aurora was well to the South of them. So it must spread southwards away from the poles :ok:

zerozero
2nd Nov 2003, 06:22
I'm hardly a scientist but I've read a little and observed a little.

The Northern Lights can appear in the south--if you're quite north.

And the color is determined by which gas in the atmosphere is being charged.

Nitrogen being the most abundant gas means that most of the Lights will emit a green hue.

Oxygen being relatively sparse means the color red is seen less often.

I've heard other people say that they've heard the Lights but I've never experienced that.

In Alaska, and probably other native cultures, the elders say they can make the Lights dance by whistling or singing to them.

jrbt
4th Nov 2003, 13:43
Thanks Fokkerwokker for your report Oct-29 about low-altitude aurora you had seen about ten days earlier.

----

I'm going back and re-editing no. 6a and no. 7 in the questionnaire in my original post, to clarify that when those questions refer to aurora-like displays "below the aircraft", they mean only displays appearing definitely nearer than the horizon - since from high altitude, displays at or beyond the horizon appear "below the aircraft" too. Likely this is well understood but my original wordings should have been specific about it.

I will email those who have already submitted the questionnaire to confirm whether these changes are retroactively okay with them.

Also I'm now asking not only pilots but also passengers to submit the questionnaire, if they have seen low-altitude aurora.

Evo
5th Nov 2003, 03:49
zerozero


And the color is determined by which gas in the atmosphere is being charged.

Nitrogen being the most abundant gas means that most of the Lights will emit a green hue.

Oxygen being relatively sparse means the color red is seen less often.


Unnecessary pedantry, but green is Oxygen at 5577 angstroms. Red is a rarer oxygen transition at 6300 angstroms. There's another oxygen transition in the near infra-red, and the main Nitrogen line is in the blue at 4278 angstroms.

zerozero
6th Nov 2003, 06:30
I learned something today.

jrbt
15th Dec 2004, 04:30
Since it's now been over a year may I post this message to reactivate the aurora survey thread.

I'm editing the original post to give my regular email address [email protected] for responses instead of [email protected] and [email protected].

Last year I did not get hundreds of formal responses to the survey or even dozens, but I did get two solid ones, which I am showing below minus the names of the pilots responding. These in addition to the cited 15 November 2001 PPRuNe post by gaunty on Jet Blast and the posts on this thread by Intruder and Fokkerwokker, and also a comment on the St. Elmo's Fire thread by Faire d'income reproduced near the end of this post, offer in my view some credible corroboration that the phenomenon is real although exceedingly rare.

Naturally my aim in reviving this is to receive additional reports, perhaps of sightings during 2004, so if you've seen low-altitude aurora please let me hear from you.


----


RESPONSE #1 TO SURVEY: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AURORA BELOW OR "AROUND" YOUR AIRCRAFT?
[name]
Seattle, Washington, USA
[email address]
airliner pilot and private pilot
date of response: 24 Oct 2003
estimated night flying experience above 45°N or below 45°S: 500 hrs
estimated number of times seen "normal" aurora: over 50
number of times seen aurora below the aircraft: 0
number of times seen aurora "around" the aircraft: 1

Description:

The occasion was about 5 years ago, so many of the details are quite fuzzy right now. However, as closely as I can remember:

We were westbound over the North Atlantic, with little or no cloud cover. I cannot remember whether there was a moon. I cannot remember the exact route, but it probably took us near Iceland that night. The total Aurora display lasted about 2 hours, if I recall. I was the F/O [First Officer, i.e. co-pilot] on a 747-400 freighter; the Captain was the only other one aboard.

The Aurora began as a relatively "normal", though spectacular, display above the northern horizon. We could distinguish pink, blue, and yellow colors in the "curtains" building in the northern sky. After some time (30 minutes?) the Aurora appeared to expand southward and above us, such that we appeared to be heading under it. I don't recall the exact shapes/configurations of the effects at that time, but they were distinctly different from any cloud formations. We could discern wavelike movement in the lights, and several colors were apparent.

After a while (15-30 minutes more?) the Aurora seemed to wrap around the airplane, though at some distance. I remember remarking that it looked like we were approaching the 'time vortex' in the movie "The Final Countdown" (F-14 Tomcats go back to Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941). I was in the right seat (north side), and it appeared to me that the lights were more intense above and to the north, though still significant below and on the left side.

We saw this effect for maybe another 30-45 minutes, at varying levels of spectacle and intensity, before it retreated back to the northern sky.

I haven't seen anything like it since.



Followed by email from John Beattie to [Respondent #1] 30 Oct 2003:

Thanks for taking the time to submit the aurora survey questionnaire...
I'm going to go back and re-edit...the questionnaire to clarify that when those questions refer to aurora-like displays "below the aircraft", they mean only displays appearing definitely nearer than the horizon....
Do I presume correctly that your answers...would remain the same...? You write that the aurora appeared to wrap around the airplane "at some distance", but this distance was still definitely nearer than the horizon, am I correct?



Reply by [Respondent #1] 31 Oct 2003:

Yes, my answers would remain the same.

I only had that one experience, and I cannot recall any phase of it where the aurora was ONLY [apparently] below the airplane and/or horizon.

When it appeared to surround the airplane, the apparent distance was a few miles. As it developed, I recall remarking to the Captain that it looked like we might eventually fly "through" it, hence the reference to the "Final Countdown" effect. The "leading edge" of the effect appeared to be abeam or just forward of the airplane.



----



RESPONSE #2 TO AURORA SURVEY: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AURORA BELOW OR "AROUND" YOUR AIRCRAFT?
[name]
Amsterdam
[email address]
airliner pilot
date of response: 29 Oct 2003
estimated night flying experience above 45°N or below 45°S: 2000 hrs
estimated number of times seen "normal" aurora: more than 40 times
number of times seen aurora below the aircraft: 0
number of times seen aurora "around" the aircraft: 1

Description:

Once on a night flight from Amsterdam to the US I saw aurora in 2 bands at almost the same altitude which appeared to approach the a/c [aircraft] and was moving at a fast rate towards us. Was only on 1 side (north side) and we had the illusion that we were about to fly through it. It remained at the same distance from the a/c at one point. The colour was green with a beautifull blue mixed through it. It was in pitch darkness between just south of Greenland and Canada over water. Aurora was very fluent and active.

Later a band appeared on the left (south side) of the a/c with the same colours. So we were enclosed by it on both sides.

Duration was very long and actually went only away after we left the area towards Canada. It remained in the same area with the same intensity. Altitude must have been around 33000 feet. Was about a year ago. Exact date unknown.

Everybody saw it, no mind tricks. Have never seen it like this again and also the colours were very different than normal aurora. Much brighter and much more colours. Especially blue. Horizon was only visible straight ahead and could not have been seen on the left or right due to the aurora.



----



On the PPRuNe thread "St. Elmo's Fire and other atmospheric phenomenon":

Faire d'income
posted 4th November 2003 00:55

...

JRBT I think I have seen what you are talking about. A couple of times at very northerly latitudes I have witnessed what appeared to be the Aurora all around the aircraft including below. Don't know if it was just an illusion or what but stunning all the same.



----



Finally: a friend in California pointed out some great photos of auroras seen from an airplane on Shigemi Numazawa's website at:

http://www.jplnet.com/03eclipse

all the way at the bottom of the page, labeled "Northern lights from a plane".

These are terrific pictures but showing *not* what I saw in 1967. They're excellent examples of auroras that evidently are way beyond the horizon, so far beyond that they appear below the aircraft wing because of the curvature of the earth, even though they're actually 100km high or higher, much higher than the aircraft altitude.