Editors: C. T. Russell, David J. Southwood, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C. 1982 X_CONTENTS Preface vii X I. IMS Satellites T. T. von Rosenvinge, Data from ISEE3 for the IMS Period 1 Joseph H. King, Availability of IMP7 and IMP8 Data for the IMS Period 10 Keith W. Ogilvie, Data from ISEE1 for the IMS Period 21 Vittorio Formisano, The International Sun Earth Explorer Mission ISEE I and2 27 R. Lundin, B. Hultqvist, N. Pissarenko and A. Zackarov, Particle Data fromPROGNOZ-7 (The PROMICS-1 Experiment) 37 K. Knott, The Availability of GEOS Data for IMS Research 43 Theodore A. Fritz and Carlene Arthur Neeley, Geostationary Satellites ATS6and SMS/GOES: Description, Position, and Data Availability During the IMS 53 J.F. Fennell, Description of P78-2 (SCATHA) Satellite and Experiments 65 D. H. Baker, P. R. Higbie, R. D. Belian, E. W. Hones, Jr., and R. W.Klebesadel, The Los Alamos Synchronous Orbit Data Set 82 C. A. Cattell, S3-3 Satellite Instrumentation and Data 91 H. W. Kroehl, Space Environment Monitoring by Low-Altitude OperationalSatellites 99 N. W. Spencer, The AE Mission During the IMS 106 R. A. Langel, MAGSAT Data Availability 109 M. J. Teague, D. M. Sawyer, and J. L Vette, The Satellite Situation Center 112 II. Ground Based Observations Risto Pellinen, IMS Ground Observations on Optical Aurora and IonosphericAbsorption Made in Northern Europe, with Examples of Data Handling 117 Risto Pellinen, Wolfgang Baumjohann, and Erling Nielsen, Examples ofMulti-Instrumental Studies on Auroral Phenomena 124 Wolfgang Baumjohann, Magnetometer Networks in Northern Europe 134 W.F. Stuart, The Array of Magnetometers Operated in N.W. Europe 141 P. Tanskanen, J. Bjordal, L. P. Block, K. Bronstad, A. Egeland, T. Holtet, I.Iversen, I. Kangas, G. Kremser, M. M. Madsen, T. Moe, J. Niskanen, W. Riedler, H.(0*0*0*Slamanig, J. Stadsnes, K. H. Saeger, E. Thrane, and S. Ullaland, SBARMO-79: AMulti-Balloon Campaign in the Auroral Zone 153 Gordon Rostoker, High Latitude North American Networks Operative Duringthe IMS 159 R. L. McPherron, Midlatitude Magnetometer Chains During the IMS 170 T. J. Rosenberg, Research at United States Antarctic Stations During the IMS 182 Takesi Nagata and Takeo Hirasawa, IMS Results in Antarctica 188 Michael J. Rycroft, Antarctic Observations Available for IMS CorrelativeAnalyses 196 E. Friis-Christensen, Geophysical Observations in Greenland During the IMS 211 Erling Nielsen, The STARE System and Some of its Applications 213 Richard R. Vondrak, Chatanika Radar Measurements During the IMS 225 M. J. Baron, Worldwide Incoherent Scatter Radar Measurements 230 XyIII. IMS Workshops J. I. Vette, D. M. Sawyer, M. J. Teague, and D. J. Hei, Jr. The Origin andEvolution of the Coordinated Data Analysis Workshop Process 235 Gordon Rostoker, Status of IMS Workshops-CDAW 1: December 1977Events 242 R. H. Manka, T. A. Fritz, R. G. Johnson, R. A. Wolf, M. J. Teague, and J.I. Vette, Status of IMS Workshops - CDAW 2: July 1977 Events 246 K. Knott, The July 29, 1977 Magnetic Storm: Observations Near theMagnetopause at the Sudden Storm Commencement 256 D. N. Baker, T. A. Fritz and B. Wilken, The July 29, 1977 Magnetic Storm: Observations Modeling of Energetic Particles at Synchronous Orbit 259 Keith W. Ogilvie, ISEE Work on Collisionless Shocks: CDAW3: The Meetingand the Results 264 Gotz Paschmann, ISEE-Magnetopause Observations: Workshop Results 272 K Knott and R. Pellinen, Summary of European IMS Workshops 285 Appendix 291 Subject Index 293 X"PREFACE The International Magnetospheric Study, or IMS, was an international programunder the auspices of SCOSTEP in which a coordinated effort was made tounderstand magnetospheric processes. The active phase of the IMS, duringwhich data were gathered, ran from 1976 to 1979 with the different datagathering efforts coming on line at various times during this period. Althoughthere were many national programs devoted to the IMS the coordination(0*0*0*between countries was principally at the level of the participating scientistsrather than at the level of the bureaucracy. This aspect of the IMS had itsadvantages and its disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is that there is nocoordinated system for reporting of the IMS results, either with regard to thedata gathering effort, the workshops devoted to these data or the scientificresults of the IMS. It is in an attempt to introduce some order in this chaoswe have compiled the papers in this book. We hope that the book serves boththe active researcher involved heavil As should be apparent to most, and will be after reading about workshops inchapter three of this book, most papers are set down because of the existenceof deadlines. We, of course, learned this in school, as all assignments havedeadlines, but we sometimes forget about this in later life. The papers in thisvolume were also produced by deadlines. The first deadline was created byholding a symposium which we called the IMS Assessment Symposium and forwhich the authors were expected to produce manuscripts. The aims of thesymposium were threefold, to identify what data were obtained during the IMSfor coordinated studies, to assess the status of the various workshops whichhave been convened to facilitate such coordinated studies and to examine thestatus of the problems the IMS was designed to solve. One day of theconference was devoted to each of these areas. This book covers the first twoareas. The third area is covered by a special issue of Reviews of Geophysicsand Space Physics. In order to exploit fully the data gathered during the IMS and to promoteinteraction between those who have the data and those who might wish to usethe data, one must know what data are available and who has it. The firstchapter of the book covers the "what, when and how" of the major IMSsatellite programs. It also documents whom to contact to get the data. Thesecond chapter covers similar informatlon on the major IMS ground-basedrocket and balloon programs. We have not attempted to include allground-based programs, rather only those with a large data base which have amoderately large possibility of being useful in coordinated studies. Thoseattempting to learn every possible detail about the IMS effort would be wise toread through the IMS Newsletters edited by J. H. Allen and published by theWorld Data Center A for STP. The third chapter covers the subject of workshops. Under the IMS workshopumbrella a large variety of workshops have been attempted. Some of theseprobably should not have been called workshops. They merely reported on thescientific results of the IMS. The Japanese workshops were of this kind. Other workshops approached the conventional concept of a workshop centeredaround an event or problem and consisting of both presentations and exchange(0*0*0*of ideas and data on an informal basis. A new type of workshop evolvedduring the IMS as a result of the efforts of Gordon Rostoker and Jim Vette toget the IMS data analysis phase off the ground. This was the CoordinatedData Analysis Workshop or CDAW which grew to be a computer-basedevent-oriented multi-data set analysis workshop. Machine readable data weresent to Jim Vette at the NSSDC and stored on disks. Later those who had sentin data assembled at the NSSDC and examined these data on common timescales and worked together on the analysis. But, it is best to In school there were always some kids who failed to get their assignment in ontime. Of course they all had excuses and some of them were very goodexcuses. The discerning reader will also note some absences in this book. Some absences may be due to the ignorance of the organizers. However, wehad many people advising us about our ignorance before the IMSAS was held. In this regard we owe a special thank you to Bob Carovillano and the US IMSPanel on whose turf this conference was held. We would like to comment though on some notable absentees. First, Tom Potemra chose not to discussTriad data availability because he felt there was sufficient reference to the dataset in the literature already. The Japanese and the Soviets also flew spacecraftduring the IMS. T. Obayashi did attend the meeting and discussed the resultsof Kyokko and Jikiken. However, he did not submit a manuscript to thisvolume, because the Japanese STP observations during IMS had already beencompiled in volume 5 of Solar Terrestrial Environmental Research in Japan(June 1, 1981) available from the editor, A. Nishida. The Soviets had adifferent problem. The meeting was scheduled only six months after the initialannouncement, which was too short a period for the Soviets to respond. Weowe a special thanks to R. Lundin and B. Hultqvist who filled us in on at leastsome of the Prognoz 7 results. It was difficult to slice up the ground-based pie in an logical order. In someareas national efforts could be reviewed, in others the international effort forone technique was discussed. In the end analysis our decisions were arbitraryalthough hopefully not capricious. The glaring holes in this effort are in the Soviet sector in which there is a lotof ground and the French sector. The French representative could not attendnor could he provide a finished manuscript. The Japanese ground programwas reviewed by T. Nagata and T. Hirasawa (Antartica) and by T. Obayashi(Japan proper) but we received a manuscript only from the former twoauthors. Those interested in the Japanese program are referred to the abovementioned volume. Those who have read through the above material can guess about thecompleteness of our workshop coverage. We cover the CDAW workshops(0*0*0*and the European workshops. The Japanese held workshops but they weremore like symposia than workshops and our invitations evoked no response,neither a talk nor a manuscript. We feel certain the Soviets have held IMSworkshops and suspect that they are probably different in some respects fromthose described in Chapter Three. However, we will not benefit from theSoviet experience in this book. If you are planning to hold a workshop westrongly advise you to read Chapter Three even if it is incomplete. During the meeting a set of possible technical problems became evident whichwere addressed in the traditional manner by issuing a set of recommendations. These in general concern the treatment of IMS data sets especially theiravailability. These recommendations are included as an appendix. We would be remiss if we did not acknowledge the assistance we had in thiseffort. The real heroes are the authors who responded to our initial invitationwith a presentation at the IMSAS and the completed manuscripts you will findherein. The conference ltself was a success principally through the efforts ofJim Vette and his staff with the advice and counsel of David Stern who hostedthe meeting at the NSSDC. They did a splendid job. The daily sessionsincluded not only the speakers but also a review panel. The review panelswere there to represent the scientific community at large who were in generalunable to attend. (Total attendance at the meeting was about 70 people). Itwas somewhat more difficult to entice people to join in the review panel eventhough it was an easier task. (There is probably a moral here). However,those who did attend were very active and useful. Since the only recognitionthey will get in this book despite their shaping of much of it through theirquestions and comments is here, we C.T. Russell Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California Los Angeles, California, USA D.J. Southwood Imperial College London, U.K.