Ionospheric Response to the Magnetic Storm of 22 June 2015

Mansilla, Gustavo Adolfo

doi:10.1007/s00024-017-1741-5

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The features seen in GIM VTEC maps are validated by observed VTEC from 12 stations spread in both hemispheres as given in Figure 6. This peak appears to move from north to south with diminishing amplitude which could be due to reported AE activity around 8 UT (Mansilla, 2017) followed by TIDs from the Northern Hemisphere. The episodic fluctuations in IEF Ey and E × B drift are mapped well in VTEC as observed from 12 stations in terms of different peaks at different times in both hemispheres.…”

Section: June 2015mentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The first discernible peak is found between 11 and 12 UT over CRO1, LMMF, BOGT, KOUR, and AREQ with varying peak VTEC values, and it remained subdued over most of the stations in the Southern Hemisphere. This peak appears to move from north to south with diminishing amplitude which could be due to reported AE activity around 8 UT (Mansilla, 2017) followed by TIDs from the Northern Hemisphere. It is clear that TIDs launched from the Southern Hemisphere are not observed in VTEC over any station at the same time durations.…”

Section: June 2015mentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interhemispheric Asymmetry in Response of Low‐Latitude Ionosphere to Perturbation Electric Fields in the Main Phase of Geomagnetic Storms

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structures of sudden enhancements/depressions and associated interhemispheric asymmetry in low‐latitude total electron content (TEC) during the main phase (MP) of geomagnetic storms have remained unpredictable majorly due to oscillating equatorial vertical E×B drifts and resultant redistribution of plasma in low latitudes in a given seasonal background. Robust analysis of 7 major and 30 moderate ionospheric storms during the years 2000–2018 is performed with comprehensive literature review encompassing various sources of asymmetry in magnetosphere‐ionosphere coupling. Taking advantage of simultaneous long‐term observations of E×B drift from Jicamarca, H component from magnetometers, and global ionospheric map vertical TEC (VTEC) and TEC observations across the dip equator from the South American sector, simultaneous formation of peaks and valleys in VTEC and associated asymmetry are studied. Additionally, a three‐layer neural network‐based E×B drift model is developed using delta‐H observations that provide drift estimates in the absence of Jicamarca drifts. The main results establish simultaneous high‐magnitude short‐lived (1–2 hr) enhancements and depression in VTEC during the MP in daytime in both hemispheres with varying differences of −30 to 100 TECU with respect to quiet time mean and along with prominent existence of interhemispheric asymmetry in TEC during the MP regardless of seasons. Maximum VTEC in the northern and southern low latitudes is found to occur at different times during storms. Large difference of VTEC is found ranging between 10 and 30 TECU between the near conjugate locations of the hemispheres. Coincident global episodic peaks marked by steep VTEC falls show dominance of episodic eastward and westward penetration electric fields in the low‐latitude daytime ionosphere.

show abstract

Section: June 2015mentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: June 2015mentioning

confidence: 92%

Interhemispheric Asymmetry in Response of Low‐Latitude Ionosphere to Perturbation Electric Fields in the Main Phase of Geomagnetic Storms

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have reported that geomagnetic storms induce ionospheric disturbances, presented by statistical analyses and different case studies [8][9][11][12][13]. For example, Mansilla and Zossi [12] reported VTEC enhancement at equatorial and low latitude regions due to PPEF during the main phase of the storm on north side of the magnetic equator. Moreover, some studies mainly focused on storm-time ionospheric variations on global level and specifically emphasized on different morphological characteristics of the storm in ionosphere.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ionospheric–Thermospheric Responses in South America to the August 2018 Geomagnetic Storm Based on Multiple Observations

Shah

Abbas

Ehsan

et al. 2022

IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Observations Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ionospheric storm time responses during August 2018 are investigated over South American region using multiple observables, for example, Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) derived Vertical Total Electron Content (VTEC) from International GNSS Service (IGS), magnetic field data, geomagnetic indices, Global Ionospheric Maps (GIMs), Thermospheric Mass Density (TMD), and [O/N2] ratio measurement. Strong ionospheric and upper-atmospheric disturbances affected the ionospheric variables with long duration, during the storm recovery phase and following after. First, daytime VTEC (9:00-20:00 UT) presented variations of > 15 TECU during days 25 to 30 of August 2018 in low and middle latitudes of South America, this after sudden storm commencement (SSC). Furthermore, nighttime (21:00-24:00 and 00:00-05:00 UT) VTEC presented low values (58 TECU) in the recovery phase. Second, the ionospheric values during the storm main phase and following after, at low-and mid-latitudes, caused the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) to expand due to Prompt Penetration Electric Field (PPEF). Furthermore, VTEC enhancements are likely to occur few hours after the SSC of 25 August 2018, while enhancements of Thermospheric Mass Density (TMD) and [O/N2] ratio started to appear later on 26 and 27 of August 2018.

show abstract

“…In the upper atmosphere, larger tidal amplitudes are anticipated in the ionospheric parameters under solar maximum condition due to the stronger ionization rate. Besides, the geomagnetic activity is found to be another major driver for the variabilities in the upper atmosphere, which may impose either negative or positive impact on the IT system (Danilov, ; Lei et al, ; Mansilla, ). For example, Pancheva and Mukhtarov () found that both the diurnal and semidiurnal tidal variations of the F2‐layer critical frequency (foF2) may either increase or decrease during a geomagnetic storm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tidal Variations in the Ionosphere and Mesosphere Over Eastern China During 2014

Zhou

et al. 2020

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sources for the variabilities of the ionospheric tidal oscillations are complex and not totally understood yet. In this paper, both the seasonal and short‐term variations of the ionospheric diurnal and semidiurnal oscillations over a meteor radar chain (Wuhan [114.4°E, 30.6°N], Beijing [116.5°E, 39.9°N], and Mohe [121.1°E, 50.1°N]) are investigated with critical frequency of the F2 layer (foF2) observations during 2014. The collocated mesospheric horizontal winds, the daily 10.7‐cm solar flux, and the daily Ap index are also examined to determine the sources of the ionospheric tidal variabilities from the lower atmosphere, solar and geomagnetic activities, respectively. We found that the seasonal variations of the ionospheric tidal oscillations at the three sites are consistent, which are not in‐phase with the seasonal variations of mesospheric tides at the same location. This indicates that mesospheric tides are unlikely the main cause of the seasonal variations of the ionospheric tides. Besides, the ionospheric tidal oscillations show clear periodical signals, which could correspond well with those in the local mesospheric wind or Ap index. Nevertheless, the periodical solar flux oscillation does not induce similar short‐term ionospheric tidal variabilities. We also found that the influence of geomagnetic activities on the ionospheric tidal variabilities is with either enhancement or depression patterns during geomagnetic storms.

show abstract

Ionospheric Response to the Magnetic Storm of 22 June 2015

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Interhemispheric Asymmetry in Response of Low‐Latitude Ionosphere to Perturbation Electric Fields in the Main Phase of Geomagnetic Storms

Interhemispheric Asymmetry in Response of Low‐Latitude Ionosphere to Perturbation Electric Fields in the Main Phase of Geomagnetic Storms

Ionospheric–Thermospheric Responses in South America to the August 2018 Geomagnetic Storm Based on Multiple Observations

Tidal Variations in the Ionosphere and Mesosphere Over Eastern China During 2014

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About