The updates from NOAA’s SWPC are now available, and there are big jumps all around in February 2014.
Sunspot number reaches the highest ever for SC24:

10.7cm radio flux reaches the highest ever for SC24:

Ap magnetic index, while up, has not surpassed previously higher values in SC24

In other news, Davis Archibald offers this update:
==============================================================
Solar Update March 2014
David Archibald
Figure 1: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 2014
With Solar Cycle 24 maximum in March 2013 (see the heliospheric current sheet tilt angle in Figure 5 below) and a one year lag between solar activity and neutron count, we have probably seen the minimum neutron count for this cycle. The minimum count is well above the minimum value for Solar Cycle 20.
Figure 2: Oulu Neutron Count for Solar Cycles 20 to 24 aligned on month of minimum
In terms of neutron count, Solar Cycle 24 isn’t much weaker than the previous four cycles at a similar stage of development.
Figure 3: Solar Wind Flow Pressure 1971 – 2014
What is really interesting is what has happened to the solar wind flow pressure. Despite a high sunspot number and F10.7 flux for this cycle, in January 2014 the solar wind flow pressure fell to a new low of 1.2 nPa for the instrumental record. With another 10 years of solar cycle fall time ahead of us, this suggests that the neutron count is going to be impressive by the end of the decade.
Figure 4: Ap Index 1932 – 2014
Similarly, despite high sunspot numbers and F10.7 flux values, the Ap Index appears to be in a new regime with current values around the previous apparent floor level of activity for the instrumental record.
Figure 5: Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle
Based on the heliospheric tilt angle, Solar Cycle 24 maximum was in Carrington rotation 2134, which is March 2013. With the Solar cycle 23/24 minimum in December 2008, Solar Cycle 24 rise time was 4 years and three months.
Figure 6: Monthly F10.7 Flux 1948 – 2014
The F10.7 flux is having a new peak of activity.
Figure 7: Interplanetary Magnetic Field 1966 – 2014
As with the solar wind flow pressure and Ap Index, the interplanetary magnetic field appears to be in a new regime in Solar Cycle 24 in which peak activity is at about the level of the previous floor of activity.
Figure 8: Solar Cycle 24 relative to the Dalton Minimum
Solar Cycle 24 had been tracking Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum, quite closely in terms of monthly sunspot number. It is now somewhat stronger at the same stage of the cycle.
Figure 9: Solar Cycles 1749 – 2040
Livingstone and Penn’s forecast of a Solar Cycle 25 maximum amplitude of 7 is still the only prediction of the size of that cycle from the solar physics community. We are still a few years out before solar poloidal field strength can be used to estimate the size of the next cycle.
Figure 10: Predicted Solar Cycle 24 peak sunspot number
Of 54 predictions of Solar Cycle 24 peak amplitude, the six at the bottom of the range could be considered to be in the ball park of the achieved result. This suggests that the solar physics community’s understanding of the Sun, and thus climate, has the potential to evolve further. From: Pesnell, W.D., Predictions of Solar Cycle 24, Solar Phys., 252, 209-220, 2008
lsvalgaard says:
March 8, 2014 at 2:28 pm
Carla says:
March 8, 2014 at 12:13 pm
———————————–
Thank you Dr. S.
Fig. 4 page 9 of “Long Term Evolution of Solar Sector Structure”
http://www.leif.org/research/Long-term%20Evolution%20of%20Solar%20Sector%20Structure.pdf
Is showing pretty much what I was wondering. What is the overall drift I’m seeing there?
Anyone modeled that wrt to how that might appear moving across the solar surface in time..?
Carla says:
March 8, 2014 at 5:06 pm
Anyone modeled that wrt to how that might appear moving across the solar surface in time..?
We can see the drift of the pattern at the surface. It is not understood why it lives so long [decades or centuries]
lsvalgaard says:
March 8, 2014 at 2:28 pm
“Part of the reason is that we are not done with SC24 yet. So far we have only seen three peaks, more to come.”
Leif, that’s fine call a spike a peak.
I believe this part of your argument is sound.
Poptech says:
March 9, 2014 at 6:42 pm
“If SSN is taken to be a proxy of some kind of power output variation that may act as a “forcing” on climate. Then one would not expect it to correlate directly to temperature”
I believe this part of your argument is sound.
so you would regard all reports that there is a direct correlation as spurious and invalid?
Greg Goodman says:
March 4, 2014 at 10:18 am
“If SSN is taken to be a proxy of some kind of power output variation that may act as a “forcing” on climate. Then one would not expect it to correlate directly to temperature”
Poptech says:
March 9, 2014 at 6:42 pm
“I believe this part of your argument is sound.”
lsvalgaard says: March 9, 2014 at 10:31 pm
“so you would regard all reports that there is a direct correlation as spurious and invalid?”
If the question is, if the sunspot proxy as a whole is an indicator of when the suns magnetic poles positive(+) and negative(-) are directly facing us? then yes, it does effect weather and there is direct effects which are very dangerous, the weather can effect regional temperature trends. Which are currently interpreted as anthropological driven climate.
The difference between the suns magnetic poles rotating while facing towards us and when they are rotating at right angles to the elliptic plane, produces a 100% increase in energy output. Peak intensity also has a slight variable known as TSI (Total Solar Irradiation).
The Sun drives it!
Sparks says:
March 10, 2014 at 3:06 pm
The difference between the sun’s magnetic poles rotating while facing towards us and when they are rotating at right angles to the elliptic plane, produces a 100% increase in energy output.
No, that is just nonsense [as written – you may obscurely mean something else].
lsvalgaard says:
March 10, 2014 at 3:44 pm
So.. it’s not what you call nonsense then, just written differently from how you would put it. I don’t have a problem with making “one liners” and giving a link to some lengthy research! where would fun in that be? 🙂
You do know I’m correct tho, maybe a bit obscure, I’ll give you that one!