1989
DOI: 10.5636/jgg.41.597
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ion drift measured by MU radar and its comparison with geomagnetic field variation.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The observations were principally performed for 2 or 3 days in each month. The method by which the electric field is derived from the drift measurement was described by Saryo et al [1989]. The amplitude of the electric field was estimated as the difference between maximum and minimum values of the electric field from 0600 to 1800 LT for the days when continuous drift data were available.…”
Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The observations were principally performed for 2 or 3 days in each month. The method by which the electric field is derived from the drift measurement was described by Saryo et al [1989]. The amplitude of the electric field was estimated as the difference between maximum and minimum values of the electric field from 0600 to 1800 LT for the days when continuous drift data were available.…”
Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Mazaudier [1982] and Mazaudier and Blanc [1982] used the incoherent scatter drift data at Saint Santin and compared the estimated ionospheric currents with the geomagnetic variations. Saryo et al [1989] examined the drift data at Shigaraki and estimated the ionospheric currents by the electric field and compared the geomagnetic field variations. However, these are basically case studies, and thus statistical relationship between the drift observation and geomagnetic Sq field or ionospheric Sq currents is not clear yet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It may become necessary to invoke them to explain important longitudinal variations in electric field behavior, such as has been noted by EVANS (1978), OLIVER et al (1988) and SARYO et al (1989). Other wind components, not tidal in nature, may also be important in helping to explain the considerable day-to-day variability observed in dynamo effects.…”
Section: Modeling the Regular Global Ionospheric Dynamomentioning
confidence: 99%