Methodology

Every number on this site is computed from primary data or quoted from a named source. Where neither is possible, the site shows a dash and says so. This page explains each column.

Totality durations & timings — computed

Durations, contact times (C2/C3), maximum-eclipse times and sun altitudes are computed by us from NASA GSFC's published Besselian elements for the 2 August 2027 eclipse (VSOP87/ELP2000-85 ephemerides, ΔT = 71.7 s), using the standard fundamental-plane reduction from the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac: for each city's coordinates we iterate to the instant of maximum eclipse and take the totality duration as 2·√(L₂² − m²)/n, where m is the observer's distance from the shadow axis, L₂ the umbral radius in the observer's plane and n the relative shadow speed. The 12 August 2026 timings on the 2026 page use the same code with that eclipse's elements (ΔT = 71.4 s).

City coordinates are city-centre points; totality duration changes across a city by a few seconds, and by more near the path edges. Position toward the centreline gains time — the location pages say in which direction.

Validation against independent sources

Before any computed figure shipped, the code was checked against every independently published value we could source. Agreement is within ±4 s everywhere, which is the expected spread from coordinate choice alone:

Two corrections came out of this pass. Cádiz was previously quoted as 2m 47s from a path summary; both our computation (2m 54s) and timeanddate.com (2m 56s) put it higher, so the quoted figure was replaced. And Aden and Berbera, listed on early path lists, turn out to sit outside the umbra entirely — both cities see a deep partial, not totality. Their pages say so now.

August cloud — quoted

Cloud figures are Jay Anderson's satellite-derived August climatology at eclipsophile.com, the reference source for eclipse meteorology. We quote his numbers with their caveats and add nothing. Climatology is odds, not forecast: it tells you where the odds are stacked, and the location pages say where local effects (strait stratus, the levante, Saharan dust) modify them.

Trip effort — scored, 1 to 5

Duration and cloud alone silently rank Egypt first for everyone. They ignore the part of the trip that actually filters people out: paperwork, flights, ground logistics and infrastructure. The effort score makes that dimension comparable:

• Four factors, each rated 1 (easy) to 5 (hard): visa paperwork for EU/US/UK passport holders; flight access and typical routing; ground logistics from arrival to a viewing position; local infrastructure (rooms, roads, services).
• Overall score = arithmetic mean of the four, rounded half-up.
• Advisory floor: a country under advise-against-all-travel guidance (Libya, Yemen, Somalia incl. Somaliland) scores 5 regardless of arithmetic — logistics are moot where governments say do not go.

The four factor ratings and their one-line reasons are printed on every location page — the score is an opinion, so its working is shown. It is deliberately passport-specific: from Nairobi or Mumbai the visa column reads differently, and the score would too.

The honesty rules

• No invented figures. A wrong duration sends someone to the wrong country; a missing one sends them to the sources.
• Computed is labelled computed. Quoted is labelled with its source. The two are never mixed in one cell.
• High-risk ≠ hidden. Libya, Yemen and Somalia stay on the list because the path (or a near miss) involves them — with plain statements that they are not ordinary travel options.
• Partial phases are never safe to view unfiltered. Every page that mentions partial phases links eye safety.

Sources in one line: NASA GSFC eclipse predictions & Besselian elements · Jay Anderson, eclipsophile.com · timeanddate.com local circumstances (validation) · published path summaries (validation). Corrections: hello@eclipsewhere.com.