Polar vs Equatorial Coronal Holes

[TAZ]

I'm trying to determine whether Solar winds from equatorial (ECH) or polar coronal holes (PCH) are more likely to cause auroral displays.

I believe that solar wind from PCHs is generally faster than that from ECHs so my assumption is that the faster winds are more likely to cause the aurora.

Does anybody know of any research to prove or disprove my, hopefully, educataed guess? :-)

Many thanks in advance 

Trev

[Guest Engelsman Finland]

Hi with out the right ingredients you can not make a cake

Last night for example. kp4.. High solar wind 650+ no -bz and low density = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cCYOSgWu2w

you can see when the bz changes in the video.

I have seen stronger aurora at kp4 ,550w/s, good -bz and good density.

you need the right ingredients!

(edit: i live in tesjoki finland)

[Marcel de Bont]

Well, as far as your question goes: we really want the equatorial coronal holes. Earth orbits the Sun (more or less) around it's equator so coronal holes at the poles are useless for us. The solar wind from these polar coronal holes miss us. I think you are right that the solar wind might be faster from these polar coronal holes but these streams just never hit us. Even streams from coronal holes that are at higher latitudes sometimes hardly have an effect on us or just graze us.