Geomagnetism and Aeronomy

, Volume 58, Issue 6, pp 793–808 | Cite as

Complex Analysis of the Polar Substorm Based on Magnetic, Optical, and Radar Observations near Spitsbergen

  • V. V. SafargaleevEmail author
  • V. N. Mitrofanov
  • A. E. Kozlovsky


A comprehensive analysis of the polar substorm registered by IMAGE network stations close to the poleward boundary of the auroral oval has been carried out with THEMIS, CLUSTER, and GEOTAIL satellites in favorable positions for analysis. The observation interval is characterized by a low level of geomagnetic activity. The polar substorm looked like three negative, bay-like disturbances and developed within an ordinary substorm registered at stations in the middle of the auroral zone half an hour before the polar substorm. Each bay-like disturbance of the polar substorm was accompanied by a poleward drift of aurora and westward electrojet, a Pi2 pulsation group, a surge of magnetic activity over the range of 0.1–10 Hz, and enhancement of electronic precipitations over Spitsbergen. The differences between the first activation and two subsequent ones in the aurora dynamics, ionospheric convection, and electronic precipitations are revealed. The disturbed zone longitudinal sizes and position in the magnetosphere are estimated. Possible causes of the substorm onset and disturbances associated with it are discussed. The results of the study expand the statistics on the polar substorm phenomenon and will enable insight into its nature.



Geomagnetic activity indices Dst and Kp are taken from the Kyoto University database. The authors are grateful to John Hopkins University (JHU/APL) and to the OVATION project for opportunities to explore the auroral oval parameters, to FGM team and ESA Cluster archive for magnetic data from CLUSTER satellites. EISCAT is an international association financed by the research organizations of China (CRIRP), Finland (SA), Japan (NIPR and STEL), Norway (NFR), Sweden (VR), and England (NERC). Data from the IMAGE network magnetometers, keograms from LYR and ABK cameras, and the online procedure of calculation of equivalent ionospheric currents are available on the website of the MIRACLE project. Data from GEOTAIL and THEMIS satellites are taken from the CDAWeb database. The authors are grateful to N. Safargaleeva (Polar Geophysical Institute) for assistance in the data selection process.

VS acknowledges support from the Academy of Finland via grant 316991.


  1. 1.
    Akasofu, S.-I., A study of auroral displays photographed from DMSP-2 satellite and from the Alaska meridian chain of stations, Space Sci. Rev., 1974, vol. 16, nos. 5–6, pp. 617–725. doi 10.1007/BF00182598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    André, D. and Baumjohann, W., Joint two-dimensional observations of ground magnetic and ionospheric electric fields associated with auroral currents. 5. Current system associated with eastward drifting omega bands, J. Geophys., 1982, vol. 50, pp. 194–201.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arnoldy, R.L., Posch, J.L., Engebretson, M.J., Fukunishi, H., and Singer, H.J., Pi1 magnetic pulsations in space and high latitudes on the ground, J. Geophys. Res., 1998, vol. 103, no. A10, pp. 23518–23592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Despirak, I.V., Lyubchich, A.A., and Kleimenova, N.G., Polar and high latitude substorms and solar wind conditions, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2014, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 575–582.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feldstein, Y.L. and Starkov, G.V., Dynamics of auroral belt and geomagnetic disturbances, Planet. Space Sci., 1967, vol. 15, pp. 209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Henderson, M.G., Kepko, L., Spence, H.E., Connors, M., Sigwarth, J.B., Frank, L.A., Singer, H.J., and Yumoto, K., The evolution of north-south aligned auroral forms into auroral torch structures: The generation of omega bands and Ps6 pulsations via flow bursts, in Proc. Sixth Int. Conf. on Substorms, Winglee, R.M., Ed., Seattle, Washington: University of Washington, 2002, pp. 169–174. lanl-repo/lareport/LA-UR-02-3972.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Henderson, M.G., Reeves, G.D., Skoug, R., Thomsen, M.F., Denton, M.H., Mende, S.B., Immel, T.J., Brandt, P.C., and Singer, H.J., Magnetospheric and auroral activity during the 18 April 2002 sawtooth event, J. Geophys. Res., 2006, vol. 111, A01S90. doi 10.1029/2005JA011111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kleimenova, N.G., Antonova, E.E., Kozyreva, O.V., Malysheva, L.M., Kornilova, T.A., and Kornilov, I.A., Wave structure of magnetic substorms at high latitudes, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2012, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 746–754.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lyons, L., A new theory for magnetospheric substorms, J. Geophys. Res., 1995, vol. 100, no. A10, pp. 19069–19081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lyons, L.R., Nagai, T., Blanchard, G.T., Samson, J.S., Yamamoto, T., Mukai, T., Nishida, A., and Kokubun, S., Association between Geotail plasma flows and auroral poleward boundary intensifications observed by CANOPUS photometers, J. Geophys. Res., 1999, vol. 104, no. A3, pp. 4485–4500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Opgenoorth, H., Persson, M., Pulkinen, T., and Pellinen, R., Recovery phase of magnetospheric sub-storms and its association with morning sector aurora, J. Geophys. Res., 1994, vol. 99, no. A3, pp. 4115–4129. doi 10.1029/93JA01502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Petrukovich, A.A., Dynamics and structure of the Earth’s magnetotail as a function of the IMF, Extended Abstract of Doctoral (Phys.–Math.) Dissertation, Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Safargaleev, V., Turunen, T., Lyatsky, W., Manninen, J., and Kozlovsky, A., Imaging and EISCAT radar measurements of an auroral prebreakup event, Ann. Geophys., 1996, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 237–241.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Safargaleev, V., Sergienko, T., Nilsson, H., Kozlovsky, A., Massetti, S., and Osipenko, S., Combined optical, EISCAT and magnetic observations of omega bands/Ps6 pulsations and an auroral torch in the late morning hours: A case study, Ann. Geophys., 2005, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1821–1838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sergeev, V.A., Yakhnin, A.G., Dmitrieva, N.P., Substorms in the polar cap: the effect of high-velocity solar wind fluxes, Geomagn. Aeron., 1979, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1121–1122.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Solovyev, S., Baishev, D., Barkova, E., Engebretson, M., Posh, J., Huges, W., Yumoto, K., and Pilipenko, V.A., Structure of disturbances in the dayside and nightside ionosphere during periods of negative interplanetary magnetic field Bz, J. Geophys. Res., 1999, vol. 104, no. 12, pp. 28019–28039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tagirov, V., Auroral torches: Results of observations, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 1993, vol. 55, no. 14, pp. 1775–1787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wild, J.A., Yeoman, T.K., Eglitis, P., and Opgenoorth, H.J., Multi-instrument observations of the electric and magnetic field structure of omega bands, Ann. Geophys., 2000, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. V. Safargaleev
    • 1
    Email author
  • V. N. Mitrofanov
    • 1
  • A. E. Kozlovsky
    • 2
  1. 1.Polar Geophysical Institute, Russian Academy of SciencesApatityRussia
  2. 2.Sodankylä Geophysical ObservatorySodankyläFinland

Personalised recommendations