Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Breaking : X-flare just released. (earth directed)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I've always said that the midnight to dawn sector is the best one for aurbo-guess what? USAF indices are back up to 80/6z which means that observers around the great Lakes westward to northern WA should be outside if their skies are clear. Substorming is occurring and ssome stations are getting local K values of 7 so there could be some action now. The Btotal has gone up significantly and the Bz is strongly negative. Aurora being reported in WI and MN right now.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed it due to cloud cover here, although if I'm going to be honest, I would've missed it due to sleeping otherwise (had to work until 2:30 a.m. Friday Night) so the cloud cover may have been for the best. Definitely did not think things would ramp up that much overnight. I've seen some nice pictures from MN/WI on Facebook. Interested to see if anyone in SW Michigan stayed up late and got anything good, because they probably cleared out while it was still dark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rule number one about aurora watching: If you're in a big city either take time to drive to a dark location north of the city or forget about it. Very few aurorae can be seen from the light polluted skies of a city like NYC or Philly.

Rule Number two: Aurorae frequently appear best during the midnight to dawn hours so either plan on spending all night watching or plan on missing most of the displays.

Rule number three: Gemag events like regular storms have smaller scale structures such as substorms therefore it's important to check the data frequently. USAF hourly magnetometer summaries and the real time Bt/Bz data on Spaceweather.com are excellent choices.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auroral activity was seen generally north of a line from CA to AR. Auroral flashes (a rare form of the aurora often seen in lower latitudes) were seen in NJ.

Steve

During and just after the height of the previous cycle I saw aurora in NC and on Long Island in NY (following a record X flare in 2003). My first aurora experience was in Alaska in march of 2000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gakona magnetometer in the HAARP network has recorded maximum flucuations of up to 1000 nT while the Riometer has indicated absorption >5 dB at 30 MHz. The latest USAF report has 3 hr ap/Kp indices of 179/8- so for high latitudes this is a very strong storm. Globally, we're probably at G2 or at best G3. HF propagation on Polar and auroral paths will be very poor to useless due to extreme noise, fading and absorption with fair to poor conditions in the mid latitudes. Hams on the 6 meter band should be getting some very good long haul results due to auroral backscatter. GPS will be encountering positioning and timing errors due to anomalous transionospheric propagation of signals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm kind of crushed. Went out to view the aurora last night and relying on an "experts" opinion in my group we gave up too early only to wake up this morning and find out that we could have indeed viewed it here last night. I know it's pretty darn rare to see them here in west central Illinois but I fear I've missed my chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen any recent updates, but perhaps somebody here has, when is the current cycle predicted to peak? and at what level compared to other recent solar cycles? (I am familiar with both the numerical and category ranges). From memory, I believe that a few years ago, the predictions were for a weak to moderate peak in 2013-14. Is this still on track or will this cycle reach a higher peak than say 1905 or 1883-84 peaks which were less strong than most in the past three centuries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much easier to view in the Fall and Winter for those in the suburbs. The air is generally cleaner thus a tad more clear. This dampens the light pollution.

For reasons not totally understood but very likely involving Earth-Sun Geometry, aurorae occur more frequently during the September-October and March-April periods as opposed to the rest of the year.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For reasons not totally understood but very likely involving Earth-Sun Geometry, aurorae occur more frequently during the September-October and March-April periods as opposed to the rest of the year.

Steve

Fascinating is understatement when it comes to geomagnetic storms! So much is still unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've compiled some great aurora pics from around the net and respond to aslkahuna's criticism (and others who made the same point in comments) of my assertions about NASA and NOAA and conflicting, unclear space weather forecasts:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/solar-storm-sparks-beautiful-aurora-photos-video/2012/07/16/gJQAcT7YoW_blog.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NOAA / SWPC did well. Here's their 7-day model performance plot:

wingkp_15m_7d.gif

http://www.swpc.noaa.../seven_day.html

I won't weigh in on the "debate" on the value of a combined public-consumption NOAA / NASA forecast other than to say it's not a debate in the scientific, academic or asset management community, only with enthusiasts. That should give you an idea of the value of the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've compiled some great aurora pics from around the net and respond to aslkahuna's criticism (and others who made the same point in comments) of my assertions about NASA and NOAA and conflicting, unclear space weather forecasts:

http://www.washingto...T7YoW_blog.html

Part of the problem arises because the past collaboration between the USAF Spaceweather forecasters (of which I was one at one time) and what was then SEC (now SWPC) doesn't seem to take place with NASA. The Daily Report and Summary was a Joint effort between USAF and SEC and we would coordinate it to make sure we both were talking from the same page. NASA appears to like to go it on its own from what I can see which is unfortunate because a. They have a lot of good people in the field working there and b. it can cause confusion (and with the media derision when things don't go right). NASA tends to be more flamboyant than SWPC in their language but what I don't like to see or hear is some snarky comment from a talking mouth at Fux News, CNN, or NBC or whatever saying things they have no clue about especially when a big gemag hits Europe or elsewhere but misses us due to timing leading to comments like "it never happens like they said". This recent event was a very interesting one and I plan a post mortem on it. Appears that models had the evolution well but missed the high latitude intensity which is actually understandable.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To elaborate a bit further on the disconnect between NASA and SWPC. I believe that it may be a matter of whose turf should Spaceweather be. What is now SWPC started in 1956 as part of the Boulder World Data Center (WDC) under the auspices of the national Bureau of Standards (now NIST) in part to participate in the Solar activity studies to be conducted during the International Geophysical Year (IGY) and the subsequent IGC both of which ran from 1957 through 1959. They continued to operate afterwards and became one of the global Spaceweather forecasting centers. USAF as it began operations in Space recognized the need for their own capability to support uniquely (and largely classified) military space systems. They originally set up in CO close to then SEC and developed a joint user arrangement. USAF moved its operations to AFGWC at Offutt to be closer to the large mainframe capabilites so that they could develop and use models for certain events. The Air Force under Air Weather Service also put into operation an optical and radio observing network and a magnetometer network all three of which share data with SWPC. Additionally, after early science satellites made certain observations about the Sun NOAA, which took over SEC back around cycle 20 decided that GOES would have X-Ray, magnetic field and proton observing capabilities which was our sole source of data through Cycle 22. NASA through their development of ACE, SDO, STEREO and agreement with the Europeans with SOHO are recent newcomers to the field of Spaceweather forecasting though they have been in the field of data collection and research since the OSO days in the late '60s early 70's (plus Skylab). In terms of experience SWPC is ahead Joe Kunches for example is in his third cycle at SWPC (it was a copy of a short paper he did on effects of gemags on GPS that I provided to the GPS project officer at FHU that both persuaded him to ask for our Spaceweather suppot and allowed him to explain an initial complete test failure in 1989). To be sure it would be great if everyone was on the same page Spaceweather wise, but with NASA essentially fighting for its existence, they can't be blamed for getting their name in the news all of the time-I only wish that they would temper the florid language at times.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To elaborate a bit further on the disconnect between NASA and SWPC. I believe that it may be a matter of whose turf should Spaceweather be. What is now SWPC started in 1956 as part of the Boulder World Data Center (WDC) under the auspices of the national Bureau of Standards (now NIST) in part to participate in the Solar activity studies to be conducted during the International Geophysical Year (IGY) and the subsequent IGC both of which ran from 1957 through 1959. They continued to operate afterwards and became one of the global Spaceweather forecasting centers. USAF as it began operations in Space recognized the need for their own capability to support uniquely (and largely classified) military space systems. They originally set up in CO close to then SEC and developed a joint user arrangement. USAF moved its operations to AFGWC at Offutt to be closer to the large mainframe capabilites so that they could develop and use models for certain events. The Air Force under Air Weather Service also put into operation an optical and radio observing network and a magnetometer network all three of which share data with SWPC. Additionally, after early science satellites made certain observations about the Sun NOAA, which took over SEC back around cycle 20 decided that GOES would have X-Ray, magnetic field and proton observing capabilities which was our sole source of data through Cycle 22. NASA through their development of ACE, SDO, STEREO and agreement with the Europeans with SOHO are recent newcomers to the field of Spaceweather forecasting though they have been in the field of data collection and research since the OSO days in the late '60s early 70's (plus Skylab). In terms of experience SWPC is ahead Joe Kunches for example is in his third cycle at SWPC (it was a copy of a short paper he did on effects of gemags on GPS that I provided to the GPS project officer at FHU that both persuaded him to ask for our Spaceweather suppot and allowed him to explain an initial complete test failure in 1989). To be sure it would be great if everyone was on the same page Spaceweather wise, but with NASA essentially fighting for its existence, they can't be blamed for getting their name in the news all of the time-I only wish that they would temper the florid language at times.

Steve

Steve - Really interesting perspectives. Thanks for sharing...you really know your stuff and I've learned quite a bit reading your posts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...