群卫星与EISCAT雷达测量f区离子速度的比较

IF 2.9 2区 地球科学 Q2 ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
M. L. Mekuriaw, A. T. Aikio, L. Cai, H. Vanhamäki, I. I. Virtanen, S. Buchert, N. Ivchenko, W. Miloch, Y. Jin, D. Knudsen, J. K. Burchill
{"title":"群卫星与EISCAT雷达测量f区离子速度的比较","authors":"M. L. Mekuriaw,&nbsp;A. T. Aikio,&nbsp;L. Cai,&nbsp;H. Vanhamäki,&nbsp;I. I. Virtanen,&nbsp;S. Buchert,&nbsp;N. Ivchenko,&nbsp;W. Miloch,&nbsp;Y. Jin,&nbsp;D. Knudsen,&nbsp;J. K. Burchill","doi":"10.1029/2025JA034422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ionospheric ion flow velocities measured by the Swarm satellites are compared with the ion velocities estimated from the European Incoherent Scatter (EISCAT) radar measurements in Tromsø and on Svalbard. A comparison is carried out between the cross-track horizontal ion velocity component given by the Swarm Electric Field Instrument and the corresponding component by the EISCAT radars. This paper describes the comparison procedure between the two very different measurement methods and discusses the challenges in the comparison. Several events are found with eastward or westward ion flow channels that exceed 1,000 m/s. The example events shown occur between the Region 1 and 2 current sheets in the afternoon and post-midnight sectors, and one event in the vicinity of the dayside cusp. However, since the flow channels are relatively narrow and short-lived, it is difficult to capture the ion flow channel by ground-based radar measurements. A Linear fit for the selected conjunction events shows that on average, the Swarm ion velocities are larger than EISCAT ion velocities by a factor of <span></span><math>\n <semantics>\n <mrow>\n <mn>1.34</mn>\n <mo>±</mo>\n <mn>0.07</mn>\n </mrow>\n <annotation> $1.34\\pm 0.07$</annotation>\n </semantics></math>. The main reason for the smaller ion velocity estimates by EISCAT compared to Swarm is likely the coarser spatial and temporal resolution of the radar experiment, which prevents measurement of the narrow ionospheric flow channels. Ion composition at Swarm altitudes may also play a minor role by affecting the standard Swarm analysis velocity values.</p>","PeriodicalId":15894,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics","volume":"130 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2025JA034422","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of F-Region Ion Velocities Measured by Swarm Satellites and EISCAT Radars\",\"authors\":\"M. L. Mekuriaw,&nbsp;A. T. Aikio,&nbsp;L. Cai,&nbsp;H. Vanhamäki,&nbsp;I. I. Virtanen,&nbsp;S. Buchert,&nbsp;N. Ivchenko,&nbsp;W. Miloch,&nbsp;Y. Jin,&nbsp;D. Knudsen,&nbsp;J. K. Burchill\",\"doi\":\"10.1029/2025JA034422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Ionospheric ion flow velocities measured by the Swarm satellites are compared with the ion velocities estimated from the European Incoherent Scatter (EISCAT) radar measurements in Tromsø and on Svalbard. A comparison is carried out between the cross-track horizontal ion velocity component given by the Swarm Electric Field Instrument and the corresponding component by the EISCAT radars. This paper describes the comparison procedure between the two very different measurement methods and discusses the challenges in the comparison. Several events are found with eastward or westward ion flow channels that exceed 1,000 m/s. The example events shown occur between the Region 1 and 2 current sheets in the afternoon and post-midnight sectors, and one event in the vicinity of the dayside cusp. However, since the flow channels are relatively narrow and short-lived, it is difficult to capture the ion flow channel by ground-based radar measurements. A Linear fit for the selected conjunction events shows that on average, the Swarm ion velocities are larger than EISCAT ion velocities by a factor of <span></span><math>\\n <semantics>\\n <mrow>\\n <mn>1.34</mn>\\n <mo>±</mo>\\n <mn>0.07</mn>\\n </mrow>\\n <annotation> $1.34\\\\pm 0.07$</annotation>\\n </semantics></math>. The main reason for the smaller ion velocity estimates by EISCAT compared to Swarm is likely the coarser spatial and temporal resolution of the radar experiment, which prevents measurement of the narrow ionospheric flow channels. Ion composition at Swarm altitudes may also play a minor role by affecting the standard Swarm analysis velocity values.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics\",\"volume\":\"130 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2025JA034422\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025JA034422\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025JA034422","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

将Swarm卫星测得的电离层离子流速度与欧洲非相干散射(EISCAT)雷达在特罗姆瑟和斯瓦尔巴群岛测得的离子速度进行了比较。对群电场仪测得的横向离子速度分量与EISCAT雷达测得的横向离子速度分量进行了比较。本文描述了两种截然不同的测量方法之间的比较过程,并讨论了比较中的挑战。在一些事件中发现东向或西向的离子流通道超过1000米/秒。所示的示例事件发生在下午和午夜后扇区的1区和2区电流表之间,还有一个事件发生在白天尖峰附近。然而,由于离子流通道相对狭窄且寿命较短,地面雷达测量很难捕捉到离子流通道。对所选结合事件的线性拟合表明,群离子的平均速度比EISCAT的速度大1.34±0.07$ 1.34\pm 0.07$。与Swarm相比,EISCAT估算的离子速度较小的主要原因可能是雷达实验的空间和时间分辨率较粗,这阻碍了对狭窄电离层流动通道的测量。离子组成在蜂群高度也可能通过影响标准蜂群分析速度值发挥次要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of F-Region Ion Velocities Measured by Swarm Satellites and EISCAT Radars

Comparison of F-Region Ion Velocities Measured by Swarm Satellites and EISCAT Radars

Ionospheric ion flow velocities measured by the Swarm satellites are compared with the ion velocities estimated from the European Incoherent Scatter (EISCAT) radar measurements in Tromsø and on Svalbard. A comparison is carried out between the cross-track horizontal ion velocity component given by the Swarm Electric Field Instrument and the corresponding component by the EISCAT radars. This paper describes the comparison procedure between the two very different measurement methods and discusses the challenges in the comparison. Several events are found with eastward or westward ion flow channels that exceed 1,000 m/s. The example events shown occur between the Region 1 and 2 current sheets in the afternoon and post-midnight sectors, and one event in the vicinity of the dayside cusp. However, since the flow channels are relatively narrow and short-lived, it is difficult to capture the ion flow channel by ground-based radar measurements. A Linear fit for the selected conjunction events shows that on average, the Swarm ion velocities are larger than EISCAT ion velocities by a factor of 1.34 ± 0.07 $1.34\pm 0.07$ . The main reason for the smaller ion velocity estimates by EISCAT compared to Swarm is likely the coarser spatial and temporal resolution of the radar experiment, which prevents measurement of the narrow ionospheric flow channels. Ion composition at Swarm altitudes may also play a minor role by affecting the standard Swarm analysis velocity values.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics
Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics Earth and Planetary Sciences-Geophysics
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
35.70%
发文量
570
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信