Search for: All records

Abstract Interplanetary (IP) shocks are perturbations observed in the solar wind. IP shocks correlate well with solar activity, being more numerous during times of high sunspot numbers. Earth‐bound IP shocks cause many space weather effects that are promptly observed in geospace and on the ground. Such effects can pose considerable threats to human assets in space and on the ground, including satellites in the upper atmosphere and power infrastructure. Thus, it is of great interest to the space weather community to (a) keep an accurate catalog of shocks observed near Earth, and (b) be able to forecast shock occurrence as a function of the solar cycle (SC). In this work, we use a supervised machine learning regression model to predict the number of shocks expected in SC25 using three previously published sunspot predictions for the same cycle. We predict shock counts to be around 275 ± 10, which is ∼47% higher than the shock occurrence in SC24 (187 ± 8), but still smaller than the shock occurrence in SC23 (343 ± 12). With the perspective of having more IP shocks on the horizon for SC25, we briefly discuss many opportunities in space weather research for the remainder years of SC25. The next decade or so will bring unprecedented opportunities for research and forecasting effects in the solar wind, magnetosphere, ionosphere, and on the ground. As a result, we predict SC25 will offer excellent opportunities for shock occurrences and data availability for conducting space weather research and forecasting. 

Abstract On 21–22 June 2015, three consecutive interplanetary shocks slammed into the Earth's magnetosphere. Immediately after the third shock at 18:36 UT on 22 June, marked by an exceptional sudden storm commencement with an amplitude of ΔSYM‐H = ∼106 nT, a major geomagnetic storm commenced. In the present study, a multi‐instrument approach comprising observations, data analysis, and modeling is used to examine the global ionospheric response. Results show that enhanced storm time processes produced major total electron content (TEC) variations at different latitudes, longitudes, and phases of the storm. A closer inspection of the TEC observations reveals strong longitudinal and hemispherical asymmetry. In addition, multiple equatorward and poleward propagating traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) were detected in the TEC data. Equatorward propagating TIDs are consistent with vertical neutral winds simulated from Thermosphere‐Ionosphere‐Electrodynamics General Circulation Model; however, poleward TIDs were not reproduced in the model. We find that a combination of driving processes including enhanced high‐latitude injection, prompt penetration electric fields, disturbance dynamo effect, neutral winds, and composition changes were acting at different stages of the storm.