Journal cover Journal topic
Annales Geophysicae An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 1.585 IF 1.585
  • IF 5-year value: 1.698 IF 5-year
    1.698
  • CiteScore value: 1.62 CiteScore
    1.62
  • SNIP value: 0.820 SNIP 0.820
  • IPP value: 1.52 IPP 1.52
  • SJR value: 0.781 SJR 0.781
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 83 Scimago H
    index 83
  • h5-index value: 24 h5-index 24
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-2019-110
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-2019-110
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Submitted as: regular paper 19 Aug 2019

Submitted as: regular paper | 19 Aug 2019

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Annales Geophysicae (ANGEO).

Auroral ionospheric E region parameters obtained from satellite-based far ultraviolet and ground-based ionosonde observations: Effects of proton precipitation

Harold K. Knight Harold K. Knight
  • Computational Physics, Inc., Springfield, VA, 22151, USA

Abstract. Coincident auroral far ultraviolet (FUV) and ground-based ionosonde observations are compared for the purpose of determining whether auroral FUV remote sensing algorithms that assume pure electron precipitation are biased in the presence of proton precipitation. Auroral particle transport and optical emission models, such as the Boltzmann 3-Constituent (B3C) model, predict that maximum E region electron density (NmE) values derived from auroral Lyman-Birge-Hopfield (LBH) emission assuming electron precipitation will be biased high by up to ~ 20 % for pure proton aurora, while comparisons between LBH radiances and radiances derived from in situ particle flux observations (i.e., Knight et al., 2008, 2012) indicate that the bias associated with proton aurora should be much larger. Surprisingly, in the comparisons with ionosonde observations described here, no bias associated with proton aurora is found in FUV-derived auroral NmE, which means that auroral FUV remote sensing methods for NmE are more accurate in the presence of proton precipitation than was suggested in the aforementioned earlier works. Possible explanations for the discrepancy with the earlier results are discussed.

Harold K. Knight
Interactive discussion
Status: open (until 16 Dec 2019)
Status: open (until 16 Dec 2019)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Harold K. Knight
Harold K. Knight
Viewed  
Total article views: 158 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
121 32 5 158 4 2
  • HTML: 121
  • PDF: 32
  • XML: 5
  • Total: 158
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 2
Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Aug 2019)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 19 Aug 2019)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 125 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 125 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Cited  
Saved  
No saved metrics found.
Discussed  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 15 Nov 2019
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
Comparisons were made of ground-based ionosonde (a type of radar) observations of the ionosphere and satellite-based observations of auroral far-ultraviolet emissions to determine whether a remote sensing algorithm for determining auroral ionospheric electron densities from far-ultraviolet emissions was biased by the presence of proton precipitation, and it was found that there was no such bias.
Comparisons were made of ground-based ionosonde (a type of radar) observations of the ionosphere...
Citation