Variability of the quasi-2-day wave observed in the MLT region during the PSMOS campaign of June–August 1999

Pancheva, D.; Mitchell, N. J.; Manson, A. H.; Meek, C. E.; Jacobi, Ch.; Portnyagin, Yu. I.; Merzlyakov, E. G.; Hocking, W. K.; MacDougall, J. W.; Singer, W.; Igarashi, K.; Clark, Ronald; Riggin, D. M.; Franke, Steven; Kürschner, D.; Fahrutdinova, A.; Степанов, А. М.; Kashcheyev, B. L.; Oleynikov, A.N.; Müller, Heinz

doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2004.01.008

Cited by 55 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second is that the 2-day wave arises from a baroclinic instability of the summer mesospheric jet (Plumb, 1983). This latter mechanism was further developed by Pfister (1985) in a two-dimensional stability analysis. Theoretical and observational studies have supported both the normal-mode and instability interpretations, suggesting that the excitation mechanism of the 2-day wave may actually be a combination of the two.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The first is that the 2-day wave is a manifestation of the (3,0) Rossby-gravity normal mode (Salby, 1981). The second is that the 2-day wave arises from a baroclinic instability of the summer mesospheric jet (Plumb, 1983). This latter mechanism was further developed by Pfister (1985) in a two-dimensional stability analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The wave has since been extensively studied by ground-based radar. In particular, meteor and MF radars have been used to investigate the vertical structure and climatology of the wave at middle and low latitudes (e.g., Salby and Roper, 1980;Craig et al, 1983;Plumb et al, 1987;Tsuda et al, 1988;Harris and Vincent, 1993;Palo and Avery, 1996;Jacobi et al, 1997;Thayaparan et al, 1997;Jacobi et al, 1998;Gurubaran et al, 2001;Manson et al, 2004;Pancheva et al, 2004;. Satellite observations have been used to investigate the global-scale structure of the wave (e.g., Rodgers and Prata, 1981;Wu et al, 1993;Ward et al, 1996;Lieberman, 1999;Limpasuvan and Wu, 2003;Sandford et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The two-day wave in the Antarctic and Arctic mesosphere and lower thermosphere

Tunbridge

Mitchell

2009

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The two-day wave in the Antarctic and Arctic mesosphere and lower thermosphere

Tunbridge

Mitchell

2009

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These radar measurements have widely been used to detect mean winds and tides (Manson, 1992;Manson et al, 1989Manson et al, , 2002, and to get insight into the seasonal, interannual, and long-term behaviour of the MLT circulation including long-term trends . In addition, MR and MF radar wind measurements have been combined to analyse properties of planetary waves (Pancheva et al, 2004), and to construct empirical climatologies of MLT wind parameters (Portnyagin and Solovjova, 1998;Portnyagin et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of mesopause region meteor radar winds, medium frequency radar winds and low frequency drifts over Germany

Jacobi

Arras

Kürschner

et al. 2009

Advances in Space Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During 2004 and 2005 measurements of mesospheric/lower thermospheric (80-100 km) winds have been carried out in Germany using three different ground-based systems, namely a meteor radar (36.2 MHz) at the Collm Observatory (51.3°N, 13°E), a MF radar (3.18 MHz) at Juliusruh (54.6°N, 13.4°E) and the LF D1 measurements using a transmitter (177 kHz) at Zehlendorf near Berlin and receivers at Collm with the reflection point at 52.1°N, 13.2°E. This provides the possibility of comparing the results of different radar systems in nearly the same measuring volume. Meteor radar winds are generally stronger than the winds observed by MF and especially by LF radars. This difference is small near 80 km but increases with height. The difference between meteor radar and medium frequency radar winds is larger during winter than during summer, which might indicate an indirect influence of gravity waves on spaced antenna measurements.

show abstract

“…Nonlinear interactions between different kinds of waves, for example between different tidal modes, gravity wave and tides, or gravity waves and planetary waves, may also generate secondary waves with different characteristics from the original variations (e.g. Pancheva et al, 2004;Isler and Fritts, 1996;Forbes and Miyahara, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity studies of the E region neutral response to the postmidnight diffuse aurora

Parish

Lyons

2006

Ann. Geophys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Measurements of the neutral thermosphere within the postmidnight substorm recovery phase diffuse aurora show very large horizontal winds, and strong vertical structure. Rocket, satellite, and ground based observations during the ARIA (Atmospheric Response in Aurora) campaigns, and earlier dawn side rocket observations, indicate neutral winds of up to 200 m/s, and a characteristic jet-like wind maximum around 110 to 120-km altitude, with strong shears above and below. The observed wind magnitudes are found to have a dependence on geomagnetic activity level, but recent modeling studies suggest that tides which propagate up from the troposphere and stratosphere may play an important role in generating the strong vertical variations in the neutral winds. The relative importance of auroral and tidal forcing in producing the measured wind structure is not known, however. Simulations have been performed using a three dimensional (3-D) high resolution limited area thermosphere model to understand the processes which generate the observed neutral structure within the postmidnight diffuse aurora. Parameters measured during the ARIA I observational campaign have been used to provide auroral forcing inputs for the model. Global background winds and tides have been provided by the CTIP (Coupled Thermosphere Ionosphere Plasmasphere) model. The sensitivity of the response of the neutral atmosphere to changes in different parameters has been examined. Variations in the amplitudes and phases of the propagating tides in the background winds are found to have significant effects on the neutral structure in the E region, and the wind structure below around 110 km is found to be mainly produced by tidal forcing. Changes in the electric field and ion density affect the winds above around 120 km, and the importance of auroral forcing is found to depend on background winds. Variations in the orientation of the aurora relative to the background field, which may be Correspondence to: H. F. Parish (helen@atmos.ucla.edu) caused by changes in the interplanetary magnetic field, are also found to modify the wind structure. When both auroral forcing and propagating tides are included, many of the basic characteristics of the wind structure are displayed, although the great strength of the wind shears is not well reproduced. The strength of the shears may be related to a currently unmodeled process, or to different types of waves.

show abstract

Variability of the quasi-2-day wave observed in the MLT region during the PSMOS campaign of June–August 1999

Cited by 55 publications

References 47 publications

The two-day wave in the Antarctic and Arctic mesosphere and lower thermosphere

The two-day wave in the Antarctic and Arctic mesosphere and lower thermosphere

Comparison of mesopause region meteor radar winds, medium frequency radar winds and low frequency drifts over Germany

Sensitivity studies of the E region neutral response to the postmidnight diffuse aurora

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About