In situ observations from STEREO/PLASTIC: a test for L5 space weather monitors

Simunac, K. D. C.; Kistler, L. M.; Galvin, A. B.; Popecki, M. A.; Farrugia, C. J.

doi:10.5194/angeo-27-3805-2009

Cited by 28 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a future space weather mission at L5 or L4 as a second coronagraph viewpoint would reduce CME arrival time errors compared to a single L1 viewpoint. For example, Akioka et al (2005), Simunac et al (2009), Gopalswamy et al (2011), Strugarek, Antoine et al (2015, Vourlidas (2015), Lavraud et al (2016), and Weinzierl et al (2016) all identify the potential benefit of an L5 mission. Lavraud et al (2016) proposes an L5 mission that would measure the coronal magnetic field using a polarization technique, in addition to white-light imaging.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification of real-time WSA−ENLIL+Cone simulations of CME arrival-time at the CCMC from 2010 to 2016

Wold

Mays

Taktakishvili

et al. 2018

J. Space Weather Space Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Wang-Sheeley-Arge (WSA)-ENLIL+Cone model is used extensively in space weather operations world-wide to model CME propagation. As such, it is important to assess its performance. We present validation results of the WSA-ENLIL+Cone model installed at the Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC) and executed in real-time by the CCMC space weather team. CCMC uses the WSA-ENLIL+Cone model to predict CME arrivals at NASA missions throughout the inner heliosphere. In this work we compare model predicted CME arrival-times to in-situ ICME leading edge measurements at STEREO-A, STEREO-B, and Earth (Wind and ACE) for simulations completed between March 2010-December 2016 (over 1,800 CMEs). We report hit, miss, false alarm, and correct rejection statistics for all three locations. For all predicted CME arrivals, the hit rate is 0.5, and the false alarm rate is 0.1. For the 273 events where the CME was predicted to arrive at Earth, STEREO-A, or STEREO-B, and was actually observed (hit event), the mean absolute arrival-time prediction error was 10.4±0.9 hours, with a tendency to early prediction error of -4.0 hours. We show the dependence of the arrival-time error on CME input parameters. We also explore the impact of the multi-spacecraft observations used to initialize the model CME inputs by comparing model verification results before and after the STEREO-B communication loss (since September 2014) and STEREO-A sidelobe operations (August 2014-December 2015. There is an increase of 1.7 hours in the CME arrival time error during single, or limited twoviewpoint periods, compared to the three-spacecraft viewpoint period. This trend would apply to a future space weather mission at L5 or L4 as another coronagraph viewpoint to reduce CME arrival time errors compared to a single L1 viewpoint.

show abstract

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification of real-time WSA−ENLIL+Cone simulations of CME arrival-time at the CCMC from 2010 to 2016

Wold

Mays

Taktakishvili

et al. 2018

J. Space Weather Space Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The coronal hole evolution is important because it leads to the change in CIR properties, so one can adjust the predictions. Recently Simunac et al (2009) used in-situ observations from STEREO B and A separated by $601 to show that it is possible to predict the properties of CIRs at STEREO A based on the observations at STEREO B. This separation is similar to the L5-Earth separation and hence demonstrates the usefulness of the method.…”

Section: Observing Cirs Before They Arrive At Earthmentioning

confidence: 90%

Earth-Affecting Solar Causes Observatory (EASCO): A potential International Living with a Star Mission from Sun–Earth L5

Gopalswamy

Davila

Cyr

et al. 2011

Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis paper describes the scientific rationale for an L5 mission and a partial list of key scientific instruments the mission should carry. The L5 vantage point provides an unprecedented view of the solar disturbances and their solar sources that can greatly advance the science behind space weather. A coronagraph and a heliospheric imager at L5 will be able to view CMEs broadsided, so space speed of the Earth-directed CMEs can be measured accurately and their radial structure discerned. In addition, an inner coronal imager and a magnetograph from L5 can give advance information on active regions and coronal holes that will soon rotate on to the solar disk. Radio remote sensing at low frequencies can provide information on shock-driving CMEs, the most dangerous of all CMEs. Coordinated helioseismic measurements from the Sun-Earth line and L5 provide information on the physical conditions at the base of the convection zone, where solar magnetism originates. Finally, in situ measurements at L5 can provide information on the large-scale solar wind structures (corotating interaction regions (CIRs)) heading towards Earth that potentially result in adverse space weather.

show abstract

“…Bučík et al, 2009a;Rouillard et al, 2008;Jian et al, 2009;Gó mez-Herrero et al, 2009;Dresing et al, 2009;Bučík et al, 2009b;Mason et al, 2009;Simunac et al, 2009;Tappin and Howard, 2009;Leske et al, 2010;Wood et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%