H? coronagraph observations of a flare spray, March 1, 1969

Large Scale Solar Magnetic Fields and Their Consequences

“…A final moving Type IV (Riddle, 1970) was accompanied by the expulsion of a spray prominence (McCabe and Fisher, 1970). Both the prominence and the burst appear to have been conducted out along the magnetic field (see Smerd and Dulk, 1970, Figure 14).…”

Energy and Mass Injected by Flares and Eruptive Prominences

“…Measurements of ascending velocities often refer to the upper and leading edge of a prominences where also the velocity tends to be highest" (McCabe, 1971;Engvold and Rustad, 1974). Various parts and fragments of a prominence may move differently (Waldmeier, 1958;McCabe and Fisher, 1970;Sakurai, 1976). Curved trajectories of ejected matter are evidence of strong influence by magnetic fields.…”

“…The mass supplied to the corona by one eruptive prominence may be estimated as the pre-eruption mass minus the downfailing part. The Ha coronagraph observations of a flare spray of March 1, 1969(McCabe andFisher, 1970) shows clearly that some fragments move outwards whereas the trajectories for others turn back towards the solar surface. Schmahl and Hildner (1977) inferred a column density of ground-state hydrogen in the pre-eruptive state of the Dec. 19, 1973, prominence, based on an estimate on LyC opacity at 625A.…”

Determination of 3D Trajectories of Knots in Solar Prominences Using MSDP Data

“…Analysis of time-series of images provide parameters of the motion of the observed structure (its translation, velocity and acceleration) only in a plane of the sky (e.g. Rothschild, Pecker and Roberts, 1955;McCabe and Fisher, 1970;Rompolt, 1975;Kim, 1990;Aurass et al, 1991;Vrsnak et al, 1993;Uddin, Gaur and Pande, 1994;Tandberg-Hanssen, 1995;Rudawy and Madjarska, 1998) while 3D trajectories of the plasma (namely separated knots of material) could be evaluated only under certain strong and arbitrary assumptions. To do this Billing and Pecker assumed that the acceleration of the prominence knots is always normal relative to their velocity vector (Billings and Pecker, 1954), Paluš assumed spiral motions of the knots on conical surfaces (Paluš, 1972), Makhmudov and coauthors assumed constant acceleration of the falling knots (Makhmudov, Nikolsky and Zhugzda , 1980), and Ballester and Kleczek introduced their own method based on an extended geometrical analysis of the data (Ballester and Kleczek, 1983).…”