1999
DOI: 10.1109/23.819110
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A low altitude trapped proton model for solar minimum conditions based on SAMPEX/PET data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
46
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 90 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides, the value of the trapped proton flux at L∼1.2 (Leonov et al, 2005) is varied with equator pitch-angle more than an order of magnitude near the loss cone. It could be seen from the SAMPEX PSB97 (Heynderickx et al, 1999) model data fluxes at L=1.2 for the equator pitch angle values 64 • and 66 • , which are also shown in Fig. 10b.…”
Section: Measurements Of Geomagnetically Trapped Hydrogen and Helium mentioning
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Besides, the value of the trapped proton flux at L∼1.2 (Leonov et al, 2005) is varied with equator pitch-angle more than an order of magnitude near the loss cone. It could be seen from the SAMPEX PSB97 (Heynderickx et al, 1999) model data fluxes at L=1.2 for the equator pitch angle values 64 • and 66 • , which are also shown in Fig. 10b.…”
Section: Measurements Of Geomagnetically Trapped Hydrogen and Helium mentioning
confidence: 76%
“…The inputs for most of these simulations were the MSISE atmospheric model and the AP8 proton flux model. On the other hand, the recent missions SAM-PEX (Heynderickx et al, 1999), TIROS (Xapsos et al, 2002) and Oersted seemed to indicate that the flux of energetic protons is underestimated by AP8 by up to an order of magnitude. For altitudes below 1000 km, fluxes are significantly higher and energy spectra are significantly harder than those predicted by the AP8 model (Xapsos et al, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, collecting data simultaneously at various locations has led to new multispacecraft data synthesis [Friedel et al, 2000]. As a result, new specification models are becoming available (POLE [see Boscher et al, 2003], TPM [see Huston, 2002], Sampex PET [see Heynderickx et al, 1999]) but their spatial coverage is limited and their energy coverage is poor.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A standard description of such an environment is provided by the AP8 empirical model [2], based on data from satellite experiments in the 1960s and early 1970s. Recently, significant improvements [3,4,5,6] have been made thanks to the data from new spacecrafts [7,8,9,10,11]. Nevertheless, the modeling of the trapped environment is still incomplete, with largest uncertainties affecting the high energy fluxes in the inner zone and the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), where the inner belt makes its closest approach to the Earth 1 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%