On-orbit firings of both liquid and solid rocket motors provide localized disturbances to the plasma in the upper atmosphere. Large amounts of energy are deposited to ionosphere in the form of expanding exhaust vapors which change the composition and flow velocity. Charge exchange between the neutral exhaust molecules and the background ions (mainly O + ) yields energetic ion beams. The rapidly moving pickup ions excite plasma instabilities and yield optical emissions after dissociative recombination with ambient electrons. Line-of-sight techniques for remote measurements rocket burn effects include direct observation of plume optical emissions with ground and satellite cameras, and plume scatter with UHF and higher frequency radars. Long range detection with HF radars is possible if the burns occur in the dense part of the ionosphere. The exhaust vapors initiate plasma turbulence in the ionosphere that can scatter HF radar waves launched from ground transmitters. Solid rocket motors provide particulates that become charged in the ionosphere and may excite dusty plasma instabilities. Hypersonic exhaust flow Manuscript

We have used all‐sky imaging to relate different types of auroral oval disturbances to large‐scale traveling ionospheric disturbances (LSTIDs). We selected eight nights with good all‐sky imaging and Global Positioning System total electron content coverage, including five non–storm time periods with isolated initiations of geomagnetic activity and three storm main phase periods with continuous activity. Periods with LSTIDs generally started and stopped with initiation and cessation of activity. We found evidence that individual LSTIDs often show 1‐1 correspondence with identifiable auroral disturbances, disturbances either being related to a substorm onset or to auroral streamers without a substorm. Since substorm ground magnetic depressions are directly related to the electric fields and electron precipitation of auroral streamers, we hypothesize that streamers may be the primary drivers of individual nightside LSTIDs with or without a substorm. Additionally, we found evidence that (1) LSTIDs detection is more likely near the longitude range of the initiating disturbance than further away, (2) the orientation of LSTID phase fronts depends on location relative to disturbance longitude, and (3) disturbance ionospheric current and magnetic latitude may influence whether a given disturbance leads to a detectable LSTID. Numerous LSTIDs (10 to 12 over 7‐ to 8‐hr periods) were detected during southward interplanetary magnetic field periods of coronal mass ejection storm main phases, the vast majority reflecting streamers in the absence of substorms. Less LSTIDs were seen during the one examined high‐speed‐stream storm. We have also found evidence that omega band disturbances may drive interesting TIDs that are distinct from the LSTIDs driven by the substorm and streamer disturbances.

Our understanding and specification of solar‐terrestrial interactions benefit from taking advantage of comprehensive data‐intensive approaches. These data‐driven methods are taking on new importance in light of the shifting data landscape of the geospace system, which extends from the near Earth space environment, through the magnetosphere and interplanetary space, to the Sun. The space physics community faces both an exciting opportunity and an important imperative to create a new frontier built at the intersection of traditional approaches and state‐of‐the‐art data‐driven sciences and technologies. This brief commentary addresses the current paradigm of geospace science and the emerging need for data science innovation, discusses the meaning of data science in the context of geospace, and highlights community efforts to respond to the changing landscape.

On 28 October 2008, small‐scale rayed artificial airglow was observed at the High frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) heating facility by the HAARP telescopic imager. This airglow occurred during an experiment at twilight from 0255–1600 UT (1855–2000 LT) and with estimated scale sizes of 100 m (at assumed 225 km altitude) constitutes the smallest structure observed in artificial airglow to date. The rays appeared to be oriented along the geomagnetic field lines. During this period, other instruments, SuperDARN, GPS receivers, stimulated electromagnetic emissions receivers, also recorded unusual data sets with the general characteristic of time scales longer than anticipated for features to form. The experiment took place at the commencement of a small geomagnetic disturbance (Kp of 4.3). This unique observation is as yet unexplained. The airglow features start as large scale structures and then become smaller as heating continues in apparent contradiction to current theories on irregularity development. A thermal gradient instability at boundary of the ionospheric footprint of the plasmapause may be responsible for causing the small‐scale structuring. Observations of 427.8 nm N2+ (first negative group) emissions indicate the presence of ionization.