What is it about?
The limited longitudinal extent of equatorial counter electrojet (CEJ) has been inferred by several workers based on the analysis of ground data. However, the scale length of CEJ characteristics at 2 h or less has not been estimated so far.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
From examination of 323 CEJ events at VEN (Vencode) and 239 at CBY (Campbell Bay) over a period of 346 days, the observations are as follows: (i) the occurrence of CEJ is not simultaneous at VEN and CBY for about 40% of events; (ii) the amplitude and occurrence frequency of CEJ events is greater at VEN than at CBY during both Kp<2 and Kp ≥ 2; and (iii) the influence of westward currents on the EEJ peak was evidenced by early or late peak occurrences comprising about 175 days at VEN and 89 days at CBY. It is established here that considerable variability of CEJ signatures is observed between the two longitudes at 15° separation, revealing the impact of local electrodynamics. These local processes therefore significantly influence the characteristics of EEJ.
Perspectives
The present study provides first observations regarding the occurrence characteristics of CEJ demonstrating variability from day-to-day, as well as over a short longitudinal separation of 15° in the Indian region, which has not been studied in detail so far and confirms that the ionospheric electrodynamics and associated atmospheric-ionospheric effects could vary considerably between the sites separated at 15° longitude both during quiet and disturbed periods. These observational results provide additional evidence about ionospheric irregularities at shorter scale lengths of ~1000 km that have an important imprint in CEJ variability, which modifies the characteristics of EEJ between the two equatorial sites.
Dr Nelapatla Phani Chandrasekhar
NATIONAL GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Variability of equatorial counter electrojet signatures in the Indian region, Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, February 2017, American Geophysical Union (AGU),
DOI: 10.1002/2016ja022904.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
