<p>Your best viewing opportunity will be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis" rel="noreferrer">99942 Apophis</a> which will pass Earth on April 13, 2029, where it will pass about 19,600 miles from Earth; look out for that. According to Wikipedia:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>On that date, it will become as bright as magnitude 3.1 (visible to the naked eye from rural as well as darker suburban areas, visible with binoculars from most locations)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Other ones include:</p>
<p>(137108) 1999 AN<sub>10</sub>, passing Earth at a distance of 240,000 miles on August 7, 2027, peaking at apparent magnitude 7.3, visible with binoculars, but questionably visible in urban areas.</p>
<p>(153814) 2001 WN<sub>5</sub>, approaching at 155,000 miles on June 26, 2028, at magnitude 6.7.</p>
<p>I hope this helps.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T02:50:09.050Z
Oh this is great! Only eight more years to the "apophic event" :-)
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T12:40:09.673Z
@uhoh Done. Would you like more asteroids or is this enough?
WarpPrime
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T13:27:26.173Z
Interesting! At that range and if we assume a speed of ~40km/sec, this thing will traverse 60° of sky in about 20 mins. So it would cross the Moon's diameter in about 10 seconds. That's quite fast for an astronomical object and should be perceptible to the naked eye.
Oscar Bravo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T15:07:17.670Z
Another good candidate soon with binoculars would be (7482) 1994 PC1, a 1km object passing by at 5.2 lunar distances with on 2022 Jan 18. This website keeps a running log of bright asteroids for the upcoming year: http://astro.vanbuitenen.nl/brightneos
Xerxes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T18:27:27.697Z
@Xerxes thanks! Since you can cite a useful source that future readers will find very useful why not write that up as a second answer? Comments are considered temporary and these could all be cleaned up at some point. *Thanks!*
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T18:28:38.357Z
@OscarBravo wow! That is going to be really stunning, perhaps the first time something like that has ever been witnessed in recorded history!
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T08:52:31.757Z
@uhoh Perhaps... Unless you think the myth of Phaeton's Ride (in which a teenage god "borrows" the Chariot of the Sun and goes for a joy-ride) might be based on a close encounter with a comet http://defendgaia.org/bobk/phaeth.html.
Oscar Bravo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T20:45:54.937Z
Thanks for the edit! It's up to you, I'm guessing you've chosen the brightest ones, but if there is something that is visible in 8x42 binoculars in say the next two years with a dark sky, that would be great to know!
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T02:33:28.933Z
2021-03-23T12:39:48.040Z
2021-03-23T12:39:48.040Z
WarpPrime
<p>I would like to see a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_object" rel="noreferrer">near earth object</a> proper with my eyes or binoculars someday.</p>
<p>Has this been possible recently? Are there any upcoming potential opportunities to do so in say the next 20 or 50 years? I have a shot at the first one, the second one is for the benefit of others :-)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T16:13:31.610Z
Your question sound very much like a task for [WolframAlpha](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=near+earth+object+2021). They seem to have a database with NEO, but I fail to guess the syntax which one comes next.
B--rian
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T18:36:21.120Z
@B--rian disagree, WA is great but it is imperfect and not necessarily maintained well, and it is a black box, not transparent. There's no way to understand for sure where it gets its data and how frequently it updates. cf. [Why doesn't Wolfram Alpha show low gravitational acceleration for the Hudson Bay?](https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/q/16787/6031) It's much better to go to primary sources than to put WA between you and the good stuff.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T18:50:44.303Z
I am indeed a fan of primary databases as well. Nevertheless, I like WA's approach of curating data, and it is a good oracle, at least. Anyhow, I contacted them, I am curious what they will answer. :-)
B--rian
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-23T18:52:29.210Z
@B--rian Okay, if you feel like it you can pass along my problem with the Hudson bay as well.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T01:28:11.237Z
Can you define both "see" and "near-Earth object" more clearly? Most nights, you can look up and see several satellites in near-Earth orbit but how clearly you might see them and whether man-made satellites count are different Questions.
Robbie Goodwin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T01:43:33.293Z
@RobbieGoodwin I have already linked to Wikipedia's article [Near-Earth object](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_object). It's an accepted, standard astronomical term. If you click on the near-earth-object tag below the question you can learn more from the tag's usage guidance and from the other questions that have the tag. The term does not apply to objects in stable Earth orbit (satellites, natural or artificial). NEO's will be in heliocentric orbit, bound or unbound. I will not define "see... with my eyes or binoculars..." further.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T14:00:06.573Z
@uhoh Thanks… that's edifying.
Robbie Goodwin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-24T14:26:32.997Z
@RobbieGoodwin Ed(ification) is my middle name! :-)
uhoh
<amateur-observing><asteroids><near-earth-object>
Opportunities to see a near earth object via unaided eyes or binoculars?
uhoh
# Opportunities to see a near earth object via unaided eyes or binoculars?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-03-23)

I would like to see a [near earth object](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_object) proper with my eyes or binoculars someday.

Has this been possible recently? Are there any upcoming potential opportunities to do so in say the next 20 or 50 years? I have a shot at the first one, the second one is for the benefit of others :-)

**Tags:** amateur-observing, asteroids, near-earth-object
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Your question sound very much like a task for [WolframAlpha](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=near+earth+object+2021). They seem to have a database with NEO, but I fail to guess the syntax which one comes next.  
> **username_0**: @B--rian disagree, WA is great but it is imperfect and not necessarily maintained well, and it is a black box, not transparent. There's no way to understand for sure where it gets its data and how frequently it updates. cf. [Why doesn't Wolfram Alpha show low gravitational acceleration for the Hudson Bay?](https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/q/16787/6031) It's much better to go to primary sources than to put WA between you and the good stuff.  
> **username_1**: I am indeed a fan of primary databases as well. Nevertheless, I like WA's approach of curating data, and it is a good oracle, at least. Anyhow, I contacted them, I am curious what they will answer. :-)  
> **username_0**: @B--rian Okay, if you feel like it you can pass along my problem with the Hudson bay as well.  
> **username_2**: Can you define both "see" and "near-Earth object" more clearly? Most nights, you can look up and see several satellites in near-Earth orbit but how clearly you might see them and whether man-made satellites count are different Questions.  
> **username_0**: @RobbieGoodwin I have already linked to Wikipedia's article [Near-Earth object](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_object). It's an accepted, standard astronomical term. If you click on the near-earth-object tag below the question you can learn more from the tag's usage guidance and from the other questions that have the tag. The term does not apply to objects in stable Earth orbit (satellites, natural or artificial). NEO's will be in heliocentric orbit, bound or unbound. I will not define "see... with my eyes or binoculars..." further.  
> **username_2**: @uhoh Thanks… that's edifying.  
> **username_0**: @RobbieGoodwin Ed(ification) is my middle name! :-)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2021-03-23. Score: 17 | Accepted answer

Your best viewing opportunity will be [99942 Apophis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis) which will pass Earth on April 13, 2029, where it will pass about 19,600 miles from Earth; look out for that. According to Wikipedia:

> On that date, it will become as bright as magnitude 3.1 (visible to the naked eye from rural as well as darker suburban areas, visible with binoculars from most locations)

Other ones include:

(137108) 1999 AN10, passing Earth at a distance of 240,000 miles on August 7, 2027, peaking at apparent magnitude 7.3, visible with binoculars, but questionably visible in urban areas.

(153814) 2001 WN5, approaching at 155,000 miles on June 26, 2028, at magnitude 6.7.

I hope this helps.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Oh this is great! Only eight more years to the "apophic event" :-)  
> **username_3**: @uhoh Done. Would you like more asteroids or is this enough?  
> **username_4**: Interesting! At that range and if we assume a speed of ~40km/sec, this thing will traverse 60° of sky in about 20 mins. So it would cross the Moon's diameter in about 10 seconds. That's quite fast for an astronomical object and should be perceptible to the naked eye.  
> **username_5**: Another good candidate soon with binoculars would be (7482) 1994 PC1, a 1km object passing by at 5.2 lunar distances with on 2022 Jan 18. This website keeps a running log of bright asteroids for the upcoming year: http://astro.vanbuitenen.nl/brightneos  
> **username_0**: @Xerxes thanks! Since you can cite a useful source that future readers will find very useful why not write that up as a second answer? Comments are considered temporary and these could all be cleaned up at some point. *Thanks!*  
> **username_0**: @OscarBravo wow! That is going to be really stunning, perhaps the first time something like that has ever been witnessed in recorded history!  
> **username_4**: @uhoh Perhaps... Unless you think the myth of Phaeton's Ride (in which a teenage god "borrows" the Chariot of the Sun and goes for a joy-ride) might be based on a close encounter with a comet http://defendgaia.org/bobk/phaeth.html.  
> **username_0**: Thanks for the edit! It's up to you, I'm guessing you've chosen the brightest ones, but if there is something that is visible in 8x42 binoculars in say the next two years with a dark sky, that would be great to know!  

---

