Search

We use a set of ground-based instruments (Global Positioning System receivers, ionosondes, magnetometers) along with data of multiple satellite missions (Swarm, C/NOFS, DMSP, GUVI) to analyze the equatorial and low-latitude electrodynamic and ionospheric disturbances caused by the geomagnetic storm of 22-23 June 2015, which is the second largest storm in the current solar cycle. Our results show that at the beginning of the storm, the equatorial electrojet (EEJ) and the equatorial zonal electric fields were largely impacted by the prompt penetration electric fields (PPEF). The PPEF were first directed eastward and caused significant ionospheric uplift and positive ionospheric storm on the dayside, and downward drift on the nightside. Furthermore, about 45 min after the storm commencement, the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) Bz component turned northward, leading to the EEJ changing sign to westward, and to overall decrease of the vertical total electron content (VTEC) and electron density on the dayside. At the end of the main phase of the storm, and with the second long-term IMF Bz southward turn, we observed several oscillations of the EEJ, which led us to conclude that at this stage of the storm, the disturbance dynamo effect was already in effect, competing with the PPEF and reducing it. Our analysis showed no significant upward or downward plasma motion during this period of time; however, the electron density and the VTEC drastically increased on the dayside (over the Asian region). We show that this second positive storm was largely influenced by the disturbed thermospheric conditions.

Observations have revealed large Poynting flux and soft electron precipitation around the cusp region, which have strong impacts on the polar ionosphere/thermosphere. Simulations also confirmed that Poynting flux and soft electron precipitation significantly change the neutral density and dynamics around the dayside polar cap boundary regions. However, no detailed study has been conducted to show if they should coincide with each other or not. Our analysis of Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) satellite data reveals a complex correlation between them. Poynting flux and soft particle precipitation are coincident in some cases (match cases), but a clear displacement between them can also be identified in others (nonmatch cases). In the 29 cusp crossings from F13 we investigated, the ratio between nonmatch and match cases is close to 1:4. In nonmatch cases, the displacement between the Poynting flux enhancement and soft particle precipitation enhancement can be as large as 1° in geomagnetic latitude., Key Points Correlation of Poynting flux and particle precipitationRelative location of two energy inputs in the dayside polar cap boundaryInfluence from the IMF conditions