assessing the contribution of heliospheric imaging in improving space weather prediction n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 7

Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 64 Views
  • Uploaded on

Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction. SHINE Session 6 Simon Plunkett and Doug Biesecker Thursday Morning and Afternoon. Goals of Session.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction' - bayard


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
assessing the contribution of heliospheric imaging in improving space weather prediction

Assessing the Contribution of Heliospheric Imaging in Improving Space Weather Prediction

SHINE Session 6

Simon Plunkett and Doug Biesecker

Thursday Morning and Afternoon

goals of session
Goals of Session
  • (I)CME’s have now been observed from a variety of viewpoints both along and away from the Sun-Earth line, allowing us to directly trace the propagation all the way from near the Sun to the Earth.
  • It has become common to predict, using various methods, the propagation direction, speed, size and time of arrival of the CMEs at Earth.
  • What improvements in forecasting CME’s at Earth have been made that we can find community consensus on?
    • Focused around 6 questions (with an implicit 7th question), and another set of NOAA derived questions.
what are the questions i
What are the questions I?
  • What are the improvements in predicting the CME arrival time and speed using SECCHI and SMEI? - How can we assess the degree of improvement?
  • What is the optimum CME shape for input to operational models such as ENLIL? Cone, fluxrope model, something else?
  • What is the best distance range for a successful Time-of-Arrival prediction? When the CME reaches the edge of the coronagraph field of view (~15Rs), or the inner heliosphere (say 60 Rs)?
    • What constitutes a successful prediction?
what are the questions ii
What are the questions II?
  • How does the ambient environment affect the predictions (e.g., through drag, solar wind interactions, multiple interacting CMEs)?
    • Are there conditions existing models do not or cannot account for?
  • For operational purposes, is imaging from a platform away from the Sun-Earth line (e.g., from L5) sufficient or do we still need imagers along the Sun-Earth line?
  • Is an empirical approach, based on elongation-time measurements, sufficient for operational prediction or do we still need to deploy MHD modeling?
  • What if we didn’t have any space based assets? How well would we do?
additional questions specific from noaa swpc
Additional QuestionsSpecific from NOAA/SWPC
  • How well can we do if we consider resources like radio observations, including the MWA, muon detectors?
  • How would you iterate between data and models?
  • How important is a magnetograph at L5? Elsewhere?
  • Should we have a SHINE challenge on a set of events, similar to the GEM challenge?
    • The STEREO Space Weather E-mail list is doing this informally.
known contributions
Known Contributions
  • Curt de Koning – geometric triangulation and polarimetric localization
  • Ying Liu – geometric triangulation
  • Craig DeForest – high resolution HI imagery
  • Tim Howard – comparison of Feb 2011 CME predictions, TH model applied to >40 events
  • Brian Wood – addresses Question #3
  • Vic Pizzo or Biesecker – issues with initiating MHD models (cf. June 21, 2011 CME)
  • Others?
this is not agu
This is not AGU
  • This is SHINE. You may not give an AGU talk or really any talk.
  • Make your point.
  • Use 1-3 slides to do it.
  • Make your point, again.
  • Discuss it.
  • Be sure to tell us which question you wish to address. Please, let’s try to deal with each question in order.