Search for: All records

Abstract We analyze daytime quiet‐time MSTIDs between 2013 and 2015 at the geomagnetic equatorial and low latitude regions of the Chilean and Argentinian Andes using keograms of detrended total electron content (dTEC). The MSTIDs had a higher occurrence rate at geomagnetic equatorial latitudes in the June solstice (winter) and spring (SON). The propagation directions changed with the season: summer (DJF) [southeast, south, southwest, and west], winter (JJA) [north and northeast], and equinoxes [north, northeast, south, southwest, and west]. In addition, the MSTIDs at low latitudes observed between 8:00 and 12:00 UT occur more often during the December solstice and propagate northwestward and northeastward. After 12:00 UT, they are mostly observed in the equinoxes and June solstice. Their predominant propagation directions depend on the season: summer (all directions with a preference for northeastward), autumn (MAM) [north and northeast], winter (north and northeast), and spring (north, northeast, and southwest). The MSTID propagation direction at different latitudes was explained by the location of the possible sources. Besides, we calculated MSTIDs parameters at geomagnetic low latitudes over the Andes Mountains and compared them with those estimated at the geomagnetic equatorial latitudes. We found that the former is smaller on average than the latter. Also, our observations validate recent model results obtained during geomagnetically quiet‐time as well as daytime MSTIDs during winter over the south of South America. These results suggest that secondary or high‐order gravity waves (GWs) from orographic forcing are the most likely source of these MSTIDs. 

Abstract Although many substorm‐related observations have been made, we still have limited insight into propagation of the plasma and field perturbations in Pi2 frequencies (∼7–25 mHz) in association with substorm aurora, particularly from the auroral source region in the inner magnetosphere to the ground. In this study, we present conjugate observations of a substorm brightening aurora using an all‐sky camera and an inner‐magnetospheric satellite Arase atL ∼ 5. A camera at Gakona (62.39°N, 214.78°E), Alaska, observed a substorm auroral brightening on 28 December 2018, and the footprint of the satellite was located just equatorward of the aurora. Around the timing of the auroral brightening, the satellite observed a series of quasi‐periodic variations in the electric and magnetic fields and in the energy flux of electrons and ions. We demonstrate that the diamagnetic variations of thermal pressure and medium‐energy ion energy flux in the inner magnetosphere show approximately one‐to‐one correspondence with the oscillations in luminosity of the substorm brightening aurora and high‐latitudinal Pi2 pulsations on the ground. We also found their anti‐correlation with low‐energy electrons. Cavity‐type Pi2 pulsations were observed at mid‐ and low‐latitudinal stations. Based on these observations, we suggest that a wave phenomenon in the substorm auroral source region, like ballooning type instability, play an important role in the development of substorm and related auroral brightening and high‐latitude Pi2, and that the variation of the auroral luminosity was directly driven by keV electrons which were modulated by Alfven waves in the inner magnetosphere. 

Abstract A specialized ground‐based system has been developed for simultaneous observations of pulsating aurora (PsA) and related magnetospheric phenomena with the Arase satellite. The instrument suite is composed of (a) six 100 Hz sampling high‐speed all‐sky imagers (ASIs), (b) two 10 Hz sampling monochromatic ASIs observing 427.8 and 844.6 nm auroral emissions, (c) a 20 Hz sampling fluxgate magnetometer. The 100 Hz ASIs were deployed in four stations in Scandinavia and two stations in Alaska, which have been used for capturing the main pulsations and quasi 3 Hz internal modulations of PsA at the same time. The 10 Hz sampling monochromatic ASIs have been operative in Tromsø, Norway with the 20 Hz sampling magnetometer. Combination of these multiple instruments with the European Incoherent SCATter (EISCAT) radar enables us to detect the low‐altitude ionization due to energetic electron precipitation during PsA and further to reveal the ionospheric electrodynamics behind PsA. Since the launch of the Arase satellite, the data from these instruments have been examined in comparison with the wave and particle data from the satellite in the magnetosphere. In the future, the system can be utilized not only for studies of PsA but also for other classes of aurora in close collaboration with the planned EISCAT_3D project. 

This paper presents observations of electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves from multiple data sources during the four Geospace Environment Modeling challenge events in 2013 selected by the Geospace Environment Modeling Quantitative Assessment of Radiation Belt Modeling focus group: 17 and 18 March (stormtime enhancement), 31 May to 2 June (stormtime dropout), 19 and 20 September (nonstorm enhancement), and 23–25 September (nonstorm dropout). Observations include EMIC wave data from the Van Allen Probes, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite, and Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms spacecraft in the near-equatorial magnetosphere and from several arrays of ground-based search coil magnetometers worldwide, as well as localized ring current proton precipitation data from low-altitude Polar Operational Environmental Satellite spacecraft. Each of these data sets provides only limited spatial coverage, but their combination shows consistent occurrence patterns and reveals some events that would not be identified as significant using near-equatorial spacecraft alone. Relativistic and ultrarelativistic electron flux observations, phase space density data, and pitch angle distributions based on data from the Relativistic Electron-Proton Telescope and Magnetic Electron Ion Spectrometer instruments on the Van Allen Probes during these events show two cases during which EMIC waves are likely to have played an important role in causing major flux dropouts of ultrarelativistic electrons, particularly near L* ~4.0. In three other cases, identifiable smaller and more short-lived dropouts appeared, and in five other cases, these waves evidently had little or no effect.