Paper detail

Evaluation of Ionospheric Densities Using Coincident OII 83.4 nm Airglow and the Millstone Hill Radar

We test the utility of the OII 83.4 nm emission feature as a measure of ionospheric parameters. Observed with the Remote Atmospheric and Ionospheric Detection System (RAIDS) Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph on the International Space Station (ISS), limb profiles of 83.4 nm emissions are compared to predicted dayglow emission profiles from a theoretical model incorporating ground-based electron density profiles measured by the Millstone Hill radar and parameterized by a best-fit Chapman-α function. Observations and models are compared for periods of conjunction between Millstone Hill and the RAIDS fields-of-view. These RAIDS observations show distinct differences in topside morphology between two days, 15 January and 10 March 2010, closely matching the forward model morphology and demonstrating that 83.4 nm emission is sensitive to changes in the ionospheric density profile from the 340 km altitude of the ISS during solar minimum. We find no significant difference between 83.4 nm emission profiles modeled assuming a constant scale height Chapman-α best-fit to the ISR measurements and those assuming varying scale height.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.