Unit 2 Pestle Analysis
Accordingly, we removed definitions in line 193-194.
5. Line 175. 'As a consequence, later breakups were initiated at higher latitudes...' As a consequence of what? Why should later breakups initiate at higher latitudes?
Reply:
We replaced “As a consequence” by “In other words” in line 184.
6. Line 246-248. 'These flows were simultaneous with a further auroral activation at 0231 UT near 68.7 MLAT.' Were the flows observed around 0226 UT by TH4 and TH5 also simultaneous with the further auroral activation or the first auroral breakup? If they are related to the first auroral breakup, why were the flows observed later than the auroral breakup?
Reply:
We interpret that the flows observed 0226 UT by TH4 and TH5 are associated with the …show more content…
9. Line 331-339. '...Pi2...' The authors did not have a figure of the amplitude of the Pi2 pulsations. Can you comment why Pi2 pulsations were observed only by stations at lower latitude rather than in the auroral oval?
Reply:
We added one more “not shown” in line 358-361 as :
The amplitude (not shown) of these three major Pi2 pulsations were 0.5, 0.3, and 0.2 nT, respectively, in the wave index [Nose et al., 2012] at SJG (W_SJG), while the amplitude (not shown) was lower than 0.07 nT before 0225 UT.
In the previous manuscript we stated in line 331-332 as “Pi2 range (40-150 s) magnetic pulsations were observed at five lowest latitude stations (Figure 12). We did not intended to state that there was no Pi2 in the auroral oval. Since Pi2 observations at high latitudes, including the auroral oval, are often contaminated by local auroral activities, we concentrated on observations in lower latitudes.
In the revised manuscript, we concentrated on the lowest latitude station (SJG) in line 354-355 as:
Pi2 range (40-150 s) magnetic pulsations were observed by a low-latitude (26.9 MLAT) station San Juan (SJG) (Figure 12).
10. Line 413-429. 'Initial Brightening or Breakup as
5. Line 175. 'As a consequence, later breakups were initiated at higher latitudes...' As a consequence of what? Why should later breakups initiate at higher latitudes?
Reply:
We replaced “As a consequence” by “In other words” in line 184.
6. Line 246-248. 'These flows were simultaneous with a further auroral activation at 0231 UT near 68.7 MLAT.' Were the flows observed around 0226 UT by TH4 and TH5 also simultaneous with the further auroral activation or the first auroral breakup? If they are related to the first auroral breakup, why were the flows observed later than the auroral breakup?
Reply:
We interpret that the flows observed 0226 UT by TH4 and TH5 are associated with the …show more content…
9. Line 331-339. '...Pi2...' The authors did not have a figure of the amplitude of the Pi2 pulsations. Can you comment why Pi2 pulsations were observed only by stations at lower latitude rather than in the auroral oval?
Reply:
We added one more “not shown” in line 358-361 as :
The amplitude (not shown) of these three major Pi2 pulsations were 0.5, 0.3, and 0.2 nT, respectively, in the wave index [Nose et al., 2012] at SJG (W_SJG), while the amplitude (not shown) was lower than 0.07 nT before 0225 UT.
In the previous manuscript we stated in line 331-332 as “Pi2 range (40-150 s) magnetic pulsations were observed at five lowest latitude stations (Figure 12). We did not intended to state that there was no Pi2 in the auroral oval. Since Pi2 observations at high latitudes, including the auroral oval, are often contaminated by local auroral activities, we concentrated on observations in lower latitudes.
In the revised manuscript, we concentrated on the lowest latitude station (SJG) in line 354-355 as:
Pi2 range (40-150 s) magnetic pulsations were observed by a low-latitude (26.9 MLAT) station San Juan (SJG) (Figure 12).
10. Line 413-429. 'Initial Brightening or Breakup as