A response of the mid-latitude ionosphere to propagation of the atmospheric gravity wave

Eduard L. Afraimovich, A. F. Yakovets, V. V. Vodyannikov, G. I. Cordienko, Ya. F. Ashkaliev, Yu. G. Litvinov, S. B. Akasov

2007

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1117/12.783392
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This study reports observations of the response of the mid-latitude ionospheric F-layer to the passage of the atmospheric gravity wave (AGW) produced by the July 2004 geomagnetic storm, using data from the ground ionosonde located at Alma-Ata (43.25°N, 76.92°E). Ionograms were recorded every 5 min. They were analysed for temporal variations of virtual heights of specific frequencies (the virtual heights of a constant electron density), critical frequencies of the F-layer (fo,xF) and height profiles of the electron density (N(h)-profiles). The temporal behaviour of all F-layer parameters such as the altitude of its peak (hmF), the electron density at the peak (NmF) and the half thickness of the layer (ΔhF) revealed well-defined wave structures throughout the entire night of 24-25 July 2004. A comprehensive understanding of the relationship between phases of various parameters of the F-layer is established. It is shown that the relationship between phases of hmF, NmF and ΔhF variations is determined by the value of the wave front tilt. As a rule, the certain phase of ΔhF precedes that of hmF, and NmF anticorrelates with ΔhF. Last result contrast with previous investigations, which have frequently assumed a negative correlation between NmF and hmF. A small amplitude of NmF variations compared with N(t) at certain altitudes may be largely explained in terms of the height gradient of AGW amplitudes.