We combined, and analyzed in detail, the H alpha and magnetograph data from
Big Bear Solar Observatory (BBSO), full-disk magnetograms from the Michels
on Doppler Imager (MDI) on board Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO),
coronagraph data from the Large Angle Spectrometric Coronagraph (LASCO) of
SOHO, Fe XII 195 Angstrom data from the Extreme ultraviolet Imaging Telesc
ope (EIT) of SOHO, and Yohkoh soft X-ray telescope (SXT) data of the M6.8 f
lare of 1998 April 29 in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (N
OAA) region 8375 and the M8.4 flare of 1998 November 5 in NOAA region 8384.
These two flares have remarkable similarities:
1. Partial halo coronal mass ejections (CMEs) were observed for both events
. For the 1998 April 29 event, even though the flare occurred in the southe
ast of the disk center, the ejected material moved predominantly across the
equator, and the central part of the CME occurred in the northeast limb. T
he direction in which the cusp points in the postflare SXT images determine
s the dominant direction of the CMEs.
2. Coronal dimming was clearly observed in EIT Fe XII 195 Angstrom for both
but was not observed in Yohkoh SXT for either event. Dimming started 2 hr
before the onset of the flares, indicating large-scale coronal restructurin
g before both flares. 3. No global or local photospheric magnetic held chan
ge was detected from either event; in particular, no magnetic field change
was found in the dimming areas.
4. Both events lasted several hours and, thus, could be classified as long
duration events (LDEs).
However, they are different in the following important aspects. For the 199
8 April 29 event, the flare and the CME are associated with an erupting fil
ament in which the two initial ribbons were well connected and then gradual
ly separated. SXT preflare images show the classical S-shape sheared config
uration (sigmoid structure). For the 1998 November 5 event, two initial rib
bons were well separated, and the SXT preflare image shows the interaction
of at least two loops. In addition, no filament eruption was observed. We c
onclude that even though these two events resulted in similar coronal conse
quences, they are due to two distinct physical processes: eruption of shear
ed loops and interaction of two loops.