You need to sign in or sign up before continuing. dismiss

Artem Smirnov

and 10 more

Suman Chakraborty

and 7 more

We present, for the first time, a plasmaspheric hiss event observed by the Van Allen probes in response to two successive interplanetary shocks occurring within an interval of ~2 hours on December 19, 2015. The first shock arrived at 16:16 UT and caused disappearance of hiss for ~30 minutes. Significant Landau damping by suprathermal electrons followed by their gradual removal by magnetospheric compression opposed the generation of hiss causing the disappearance. Calculation of electron phase space density and linear wave growth rates showed that the shock did not change the growth rate of whistler mode waves within the core frequency range of plasmaspheric hiss (0.1 - 0.5 kHz) during this interval making conditions unfavorable for the generation of the waves. The recovery began at ~16:45 UT which is attributed to an enhancement in local plasma instability initiated by the first shock-induced substorm and additional possible contribution from chorus waves. This time, the wave growth rate peaked within the core frequency range (~350 Hz). The second shock arrived at 18:02 UT and generated patchy hiss persisting up to ~19:00 UT. It is shown that an enhanced growth rate and additional contribution from shock-induced poloidal Pc5 mode (periodicity ∼240 sec) ULF waves resulted in the excitation of hiss waves during this period. The hiss wave amplitudes were found to be additionally modulated by background plasma density and fluctuating plasmapause location. The investigation highlights the important roles of interplanetary shocks, substorms, ULF waves and background plasma density in the variability of plasmaspheric hiss.

Laura E. Simms

and 2 more

Although lagged correlations have suggested influences of solar wind velocity (V) and number density (N), IMF Bz, ULF wave power, and substorms (as measured by AE) on MeV electron flux at geosynchronous orbit over an impressive number of hours and days, a satellite’s diurnal cycle can inflate correlations, associations between drivers may produce spurious effects, and correlations between all previous time steps may create an appearance of additive influence over many hours. Autoregressive-moving average transfer function (ARMAX) multiple regressions incorporating previous hours simultaneously can eliminate cycles and assess the impact of parameters, at each hour, while others are controlled. ARMAX influences are an order of magnitude lower than correlations. Most influence occurs within a few hours, not the many hours suggested by correlation. Over all hours, V and N show an initial negative impact, with longer term positive influences over the 9 (V) or 27 (N) h. Bz is initially a positive influence, longer term (6 h) negative effect. ULF waves impact flux in the first (positive) and second (negative) hour before the flux measurement, with further negative influences in the 12- 24 h before. AE (representing electron injection by substorms) shows only a short term (1 h) positive influence. However, when only recovery and after-recovery storm periods are considered (using stepwise regression), there are positive influences of ULF waves and V, negative influences of N and Bz, while AE shows no influence.

Geoffrey Reeves

and 6 more

We present a methodology to define strong, moderate, and intense space weather events based on probability distributions. We have illustrated this methodology using a long-duration, uniform data set of 1.8-3.5 MeV electron fluxes from multiple LANL geosynchronous satellite instruments but a strength of this methodology is that it can be applied uniformly to heterogeneous data sets. It allows quantitative comparison of data sets with different energies, units, orbits, etc. The methodology identifies a range of times, “events”, using variable flux thresholds to determine average event occurrence in arbitrary 11-year intervals (“cycles”). We define strong, moderate, and intense events as those that occur 100, 10, and 1 time per cycle and identify the flux thresholds that produce those occurrence frequencies. The methodology does not depend on any ancillary data set (e.g. solar wind or geomagnetic conditions). We show event probabilities using GOES > 2 MeV fluxes and compare them against event probabilities using LANL 1.8-3.5 MeV fluxes. We present some examples of how the methodology picks out strong, moderate, and intense events and how those events are distributed in time: 1989 through 2018, which includes the declining phases of solar cycles 22, 23, and 24. We also provide an illustrative comparison of moderate and strong events identified in the geosynchronous data with Van Allen Probes observations across all L-shells. We also provide a catalog of start and stop times of strong, moderate, and intense events that can be used for future studies.

Jerry Manweiler

and 9 more

Understanding the dynamical behavior of plasma and energetic particles in Earth’s inner magnetosphere requires carefully designed and calibrated instrumentation. The Van Allen Probes Mission included two instruments capable of measuring the proton distribution function in-situ. The Energetic Particle Composition and Thermal Plasma Suite (ECT) – Helium Oxygen, Proton, and Electron (HOPE) spectrometer (Spence et al., 2013; Funsten et al., 2013) used a top-hat detector designed to measure protons from the SC potential through 50 KeV in logarithmic energy steps. The Radiation Belt Storm Probes Ion Composition Detector (RBSPICE) instrument (Mitchell, 2013) used a time of flight and SSD detector design to measure protons from approximately 7 KeV through 650 KeV in logarithmic energy steps. Using the overlap of energy channels between the two instruments, the two instrument teams have worked diligently during the final Phase F of the mission to calibrate the observations so that a continuous distribution function can be resolved on nearly a spin-by-spin basis. During the life of these two instruments calibration changes have been required both on-board the spacecraft as well as within the final production datasets. Manweiler (2018) provided an early report on the intercalibration factors between HOPE and RBSPICE with a nominal factor of two difference between the proton data sets in the energy range between 7 and 50 KeV. With the final production of each of these data sets occurring in Fall 2021, both teams have been worked together to provide for an understanding of the required intercalibration factors to be used so that a full distribution function is available on a spin-by-spin basis. In this poster we report on the final efforts to provide this calibrated set of data products between the two instruments. Details of the intercalibration calculations are presented as well as year by year L by MLT maps of the factors required to match both datasets. Finally, we report on a supplementary data set that is to be made available which contains the spin-by-spin factors required to match the ECT/HOPE and RBSPICE/TOFxPH proton datasets. Funsten, H.O., et al. Space Sci Rev 179, 2013 Manweiler, J. W., et al., 2018 GEM Summer Workshop. Mitchell, D.G., et al., Space Sci. Rev., 179, 2013 Spence, H.E., et al. Space Sci Rev 179, 2013