Coronal mass ejections observed by heliospheric imagers at 0.2 and 1 au: the events on April 1 and 2, 2019

TL;DR

This study analyzes two CMEs observed by heliospheric imagers at different distances from the Sun, revealing their kinematics, deflections, and discrepancies between observations from two spacecraft, advancing understanding of CME propagation.

Contribution

First simultaneous analysis of CMEs from two viewpoints at different solar distances, incorporating analytical modeling to assess kinematics and deflections.

Findings

Both CMEs are slow and propagate eastward of the Sun-Earth line.

The second CME accelerates between 0.1 and 0.2 au and deflects westward.

Discrepancies in distance, latitude, and longitude are due to feature tracking and observational differences.

Abstract

Context. We study two coronal mass ejections (CMEs) observed between April 1-2, 2019 by both the inner Wide-Field Imager for Parker Solar Probe (WISPR-I) and the inner heliospheric imager (HI-1) on board STEREO-A. This is the first study of CME observations from two viewpoints in similar directions but at considerably different solar distances. Aims. Our objective is to understand how the PSP observations affect the CME kinematics, especially due to its proximity to the Sun. Methods. We estimate the CME positions, speeds, accelerations, propagation directions and longitudinal deflections using imaging observations from two spacecraft, and a set of analytical expressions that consider the CME as a point structure and take into account the rapid change in spacecraft position. Results. We find that both CMEs are slow ($< 400\ km\ s^{-1}$), propagating eastward of the Sun-Earth line. The second CME seems to accelerate between $\sim 0.1$ to $\sim 0.2\ au$ and deflect westward with an angular speed consistent with the solar rotation speed. We find some discrepancies in the CME solar distance (up to $0.05\ au$, particularly for CME \#1), latitude (up to $\sim10^{\circ}$) and longitude (up to $24^{\circ}$) when comparing results from different fit cases (different observations or set of free parameters). Conclusions. Discrepancies in longitude are likely due to the feature tracked visually rather than instrumental biases or fit assumptions. For similar reasons, the CME \#1 solar distance, as derived from WISPR-I observations, is larger than the HI-1 result, regardless of the fit parameters considered. Error estimates for CME kinematics do not show any clear trend associated to the observing instrument. The source region location and the lack of any clear in situ counterparts (both at near-Earth and at PSP) support our estimate of the propagation direction for both events.