A comparison of results derived from scaling VS chirp-ionosonde ionograms with the international reference ionosphere (IRI)

Грозов, В. П.; Kotovich, G. V.

doi:10.1016/s1364-6826(02)00298-5

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adaptation capabilities of IRI [1] and the possibility of its application for calculation of conditions for radiowave propagations over paths by different length (in addition to methods for calculation of propagation characteristics) make this model attractive for calculations as maximum usable frequency (MUF), so angles of arriving and group delays of signals. Ionosphere parameters f 0 E, f 0 F2, hmF2 forecasted by model, agree well with median experimental f 0 E, f 0 F2, hmF2 values and calculated hmF2 values via vertical sounding (VS) data of digisonde and FMCW-ionosounder [2][3] with error which is pleasant for semi-empirical ionosphere model (as IRI).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 75%

<title>Comparative analysis of different methods for reconstruction of electron density profile from vertical sounding data</title>

Kim

Kotovich

2007

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electron density N(h)-profile -is important geophysical characteristic and is the aim of many radiophysical methods of upper atmosphere investigation. The work is devoted to comparative analysis of the four different methods of electron density reconstruction from vertical sounding (vertical-incidence) data. The digisondes make good use of the HuangReinisch method for N(h)-profile reconstruction from measured vertical sounding data. The Guliaeva technique of N(h)-profile reconstruction is also widely distributed in the science environment. But this technique asks for complete heightfrequency characteristic. And calculation of the peak height of the F2-layer in critical frequencies region requires the very small frequency step. The Mikhailov method (reducing this disadvantage in hmF2 calculation) was examined too. Among other things, the N(h)-profile reconstruction can be carried out via capability of the International Reference Ionosphere model to adapt by parameters which can be received from measured height-frequency characteristic. In the work comparison of the mentioned methods of N(h)-profile reconstruction was carried out on the basis of vertical sounding data obtained by DPS-4 Digisonde in Irkutsk in 2006.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 75%

<title>Comparative analysis of different methods for reconstruction of electron density profile from vertical sounding data</title>

Kim

Kotovich

2007

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a reasonable amount of agreement between ionosonde and IRI outputs are observed, it is concluded that there is still room for improvement in EQ region even for a quiet year. Grozov and Kotovich () compared IRI model with Irkutsk (52°N, 104°E) ionosonde on selected dates between 1993 to 1997. For winter and equinox seasons, model and ionosonde medians agree in midlatitude.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) is the international standard ionospheric climatic model. Since the original formation of the international task force in 1970s, the IRI model has been continuously improved by ingesting developments in research in ionosphere. The most current version, namely, IRI‐2016, is offered with International Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR) and International Union of Radio Science (URSI) model choices with “STORM” option for the F2 layer critical plasma frequency (foF2) and BSE‐1979, AMTB‐2013, and SHU‐2015 options for maximum ionization height, hmF2. Since these two parameters are the determining values for the other model outputs, the evaluation of the options offered by IRI‐2016 is critical for various applications. In this study, all foF2 and hmF2 model options offered online at http://irimodel.org are computed for winter and summer solstice and equinox seasons of 2011 and 2015 at the locations of all available ionosondes and for all measurement intervals. The ionosondes are grouped into northern and southern midlatitude, northern and southern high‐latitude and equatorial regions. Individual, regional and global model output foF2 and hmF2 values are compared with those of ionosondes in both root‐mean‐square (RMS) and normalized RMS (NRMS) senses. For foF2, “STORM ON” can be used any time and in any region. Equatorial and high‐latitude regions have larger RMS values due to the sparse ionosondes. In northern midlatitude and high‐latitude regions URSI, in all other regions CCIR is the better option. For hmF2, SHU‐2015 and BSE‐1979 options provide a better fit for all regions, seasons, and years.

show abstract

“…All ionogram data have been manually scaled with the interactive ionogram scaling technology described by Reinisch et al (2004). The peak heights are obtained from the electron density profiles constructed from the ionogram traces using the Reinisch and Huang (1983) method. Because the calculated true heights depend on the accuracy of the virtual heights in the DPS ionograms, we conducted tests comparing the measured virtual heights with observations made with a calibrated chirp-ionosonde and with incoherent scatter radar measurements, all confirming the accuracy of the DPS virtual heights.…”

Section: Digisonde Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The predicted evening foF2 peak, however, is in very good agreement with the observations. Grozov and Kotovich (2003) had tested the IRI-95 model using data from Irkutsk for November 1993 and March 1997. They reported that the average deviation of the foF2 prediction from the observed medians is about 6%.…”

Section: Monthly Median Values Of the Main Ionospheric Parameters Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the main ionospheric characteristics measured by the digisonde at Irkutsk in 2003 with IRI 2001 model data

Oinats

Kotovich

Ratovsky

2006

Advances in Space Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of results derived from scaling VS chirp-ionosonde ionograms with the international reference ionosphere (IRI)

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

<title>Comparative analysis of different methods for reconstruction of electron density profile from vertical sounding data</title>

<title>Comparative analysis of different methods for reconstruction of electron density profile from vertical sounding data</title>

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

Comparison of the main ionospheric characteristics measured by the digisonde at Irkutsk in 2003 with IRI 2001 model data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About