This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870– 1878

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of
Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jastp

Ionospheric research and space weather services

Ljiljana R. Cander
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, OX11 0QX, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: This paper concentrates on those major areas where our current physical understanding
Accepted 17 May 2008 and recent advances can lead to positive predictions of the expected effects of
Available online 29 May 2008 ionospheric activity on the near-Earth space environment and on technological systems
Keywords: which operate within this environment. It briefly describes some of the key links
Ionosphere between solar activity and the various physical processes, which govern ionospheric
Space weather plasma structure that has been under scientific examination over past several decades
Storms but has lately received significant importance in relation to the space weather services.
Prediction and forecasting Specific examples during extremely intense solar event show how ionospheric
monitoring techniques that have contributed immense data sets and related empirical
and theoretical formulations have been incorporated in different ionospheric specifica-
tion and prediction models for real-time operational applications. Finally, the general
question of what might be expected as a result of current activities within different
European cooperative projects is addressed.
& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction within different frameworks (Cander, 2003; Zolesi and

The Earth’s ionosphere is a highly dynamic plasma
medium that continues to command much interest in
both purely scientific and applications communities. It
exhibits the long-term (ionospheric climatology) and the
short-term (ionospheric weather) variability at all lati-
tudes and longitudes. Scientific research has the goal to
explore the characteristics, causes, and consequences of
ionospheric structures and dynamics during quiet and
disturbed conditions and diverse irregularities by focusing
on the extremes of space weather. Proper understanding
of Earth’s ionosphere is of fundamental practical impor-
tance because it is an essential part of telecommunication
and navigation systems that use the ionosphere to operate
or would operate much better in its absence. In Europe,
the need for increased reliability of technological systems
whose performance depends on the state of the iono-
sphere has significantly increased in the last few years and
it is strongly related to a broader European collaboration
E-mail address: l.cander@rl.ac.uk
Cander, 2004; Belehaki et al., 2006).
Studies of Earth’s ionospheric for several decades
attempted to investigate large-scale daytime electrody-
namics, structure of E- and F-region irregularities in
relation to gravity waves, auroral activity, and tropo-
spheric weather systems. Particularly important have
been the studies related to the causes and behaviour of
significant changes in electron densities during geomag-
netic storms which increase and decay over time scales of
a few minutes, and their overall influence on the radio
propagation environment. More recent observations in-
cluding space-based in situ and remote and ground-based
measurements together with modelling and theoretical
results provide new science of both large-scale and small-
scale ionospheric processes. Complementing these new
observations are advances in data assimilation models
and models of the coupled ionosphere–magnetosphere
and of the thermosphere–ionosphere circulation. This
science is now widely engaged in providing space weather
services from several communities including heliospheric,
magnetospheric, ionospheric and atmospheric scientists
as well as space weather experts to the users of the space
environment affecting life and society.

1364-6826/$ - see front matter & 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2008.05.010
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878 1871

In the following section, the ionospheric weather

aspects will be introduced by using a few examples of 16
the ionospheric behaviour during the October 2003 storm. Chilton (358.7 E, 51.6 N) 28,29,30 and 31 October 2003
The following brief overview of the existing and iono- 14
spheric models in development provide some basic
information on the ionospheric research required for 12
space weather services (Sections 3 and 4). It aims to
emphasize the complex and interdependent nature of 10

foF2 (MHz)
investigations that seek a broad international participa-
tion and support. Some examples of the space weather 8
services in Europe will be presented in Section 5.
Questions of what might be expected as a result of 6
current activities within different European cooperative
projects are addressed in Section 6. 4

2
2. Ionospheric weather 12 October 2003
0
It is well known that the Earth’s ionosphere is a plasma 00:00 04:00 08:00 12:00 16:00 20:00
environment whose state at any given time and any time (UT)
specified location results from the interactions of multiple
physical and chemical processes that occur simulta- 16
neously and/or sequentially in different solar-terrestrial Rome (12. 5 E, 41.8 N) 28,29,30 and 31 October 2003
domains. The various radiative, chemical, and transport 14
processes in the ionosphere–thermosphere system to-
gether with the effects of solar, interplanetary, magneto- 12
spheric processes above and mesospheric processes below
generate: (1) background ionosphere (climatology-created 10
foF2 (MHz)

and affected by incident EUV radiation, processes of

ion/electron loss due to neutral constituent chemical
reactions, ionospheric electrodynamics, and ion drag from
thermospheric wind); and (2) disturbed ionosphere
(weather-created and affected by the short-term variable
impact of the Sun’s protons, solar wind particles and/or
geomagnetic field). As a consequence, the ionosphere
demonstrates significant variations on timescales ranging
from 11 years of a solar cycle and longer to a few seconds,
from large-scale ionospheric climate, variability, storms,
auroral region, equatorial regions to local and/or regional
effects such as sporadic E, tilts and gradients, small-scale
ionospheric irregularities.
A general pattern of ionospheric space weather clearly
emerged from F-layer storm behaviour (Prölss, 1995;
Mendillo and Klobuchar, 2006). The density gradients and
associated density irregularities produced during the iono-
spheric storm of 28–31 October 2003 show an interesting
picture of ionospheric dynamics and the connection to the
solar wind and magnetosphere that were influencing the
high-precision navigation by Global Positioning System
(GPS) for commercial air travel for two intervals of more
than 20 h (Garner et al., 2006). Systematic measurements
of the F-layer critical frequency (foF2) at Chilton (358.7E,
51.6N) and Rome (12.5E, 41.8N), derived from the network
of European ionosondes, and the vertical Total Electron
Content (TEC) at Hailsham (0.3E, 50.9N) and Matera (16.7E,
40.6N), derived from arrays of European GPS receiver
network, show that these measurements are essential in
sampling vast movements of ionization across mid-
latitudes (Figs. 1a and b, and 2a and b).
In October 2003, the solar activity changed from low
levels in the first half of the month to high activity in the
8
6
4
2
12 October 2003
0
00:00 04:00 08:00 12:00 16:00 20:00
time (UT)
Fig. 1. (a) Pattern of ionospheric variability in foF2 at Chilton during
October 2003 storm, (b) Pattern of ionospheric variability in foF2 at
Rome during October 2003 storm.
last 10 days. On 28–31 October, geomagnetic observa-
tories worldwide registered extensive geomagnetic dis-
turbances (Cander and Mihajlovic, 2005) that during
daytime on 29 October created a predominantly negative
ionization perturbation at Chilton, but not at Rome. On
30 and 31 October, however, foF2 is significantly reduced
at both Chilton and Rome declining by more than
50% relative to the foF2 values on the geomagnetically
quiet day of 12 October 2003 (Figs. 1a and b). The
ionosonde measurements were then compared to vertical
TEC data from the nearby Heilsham and Matera IGS GPS
sites. From Figs. 2a and b which display the 10 min vertical
TEC values on 28–31 October 2003, it can be easily seen
that the total ionospheric content was highly disturbed.
There is a large-scale positive phase prior to the storm
commencement during daytime hours on 28 October that
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1872 L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878

Fig. 2. (a) Pattern of ionospheric variability in TEC at Hailsham during October 2003 storm, (b) Pattern of ionospheric variability in TEC at Matera during
October 2003 storm.

are not so pronounced in the foF2 variations. It continues
during afternoon and night-time hours on 29 October. As
expected, the negative phase of the ionospheric storm for
the TEC is detected from daytime hours of 30 and
31 October. However, a large TEC enhancement on
the nightside, not seen in foF2 data because of missing
data in the scaling procedure (Piggott and Rawer, 1972),
appeared in the evening sector of 29 and 30 October
at the high mid-latitude site Hailsham, lasting for a few
hours.
These examples suggest that vertical TEC data ob-
tained from a worldwide network of ground-based GPS
 Author's personal copy
L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878
50
28 - 31 October 2003
45
40
35
MUF (3000)F2 (MHz)
30
25
20
15
10
0
28
Fig. 3. Diurnal MUF(3000)F2 values at Chilton during 28–31 October 2003 together with MUF(3000)F2 values for the quiet day of 12 October 2003.
measurements can be an important tool for retrieving
ionospheric features that appear during storm conditions
(Leitinger et al., 2004). While the large variations in TEC
are interpreted as significant enhancement or depletion
characteristic of a storm behaviour, the explanation of the
physical mechanisms that lead to such a complex
behaviour could be found in a number of papers, e.g.,
Kersley et al. (2004); Cander and Mihajlovic (2005); and
Mendillo and Klobuchar (2006). At mid-latitudes, thermo-
spheric winds and electromagnetic fields are believed to
play a dominant role in ionospheric plasma changes seen
here in foF2 and TEC temporal and spatial variations (Figs.
1 and 2). Negative storm phases have been attributed to
changes in the atomic to molecular neutral density ratio.
Positive phases are generally believed to be caused by
uplifting of the F-region by equatorward winds in the
early hours of a storm development. The dayside plasma
content is significantly reduced in the regions adjacent to
the storm-enhanced density structure, which enhances
the electron content. In that context, Tóth et al. (2007)
recently reported particularly interesting sun-to-
thermosphere simulation results of the 28–30 October
2003 storm with the Space Weather Modelling
Framework. The observed structure in the ionospheric/
plasmaspheric ionization during this extreme space
weather event display some common features as well as
distinctly different irregularities making it difficult to
match the rapid foF2 and TEC variations in ionospheric
specification and forecasting models and observational
data as the storm develops. During decades of ionospheric
measurements, studies and modelling, knowledge about
the morphology of the ionospheric response to severe
space weather events has accumulated, and the physical
mechanisms that drive storms have been understood in
significant detail (Prölss, 1995 and the references therein).
These depressions of critical frequencies need to be
anticipated by HF communicators. With the current
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1873
10 min values
12 October
29 30 31
days
capabilities and the immense power of digital signal
processing and flexible equipment, it is possible to design
and operate systems that can react by modifying opera-
tional parameters adaptively in response to changing
propagation conditions. For example, the basic
MUF(3000), which is the highest frequency at which a
radio wave can propagate between given terminals
3000 km apart by ionospheric refraction alone, displayed
in Fig. 3 shows that during the 29–31 October storm
event, ionospheric HF radio propagation was drastically
reduced to values below 15 MHz.
However, periods of severe disturbances will affect
more than the MUFs. Irregularities in the ionosphere
result in signals travelling by more than one path
producing fading and consequently serious difficulties in
communications. Positioning errors make navigation
operations extremely difficult. Accordingly, one of the
greatest challenges in developing accurate and reliable
satellite-based augmentation systems (SBAS) is modelling
of ionospheric effects during storm events of such a
magnitude. Firstly, because ionosphere models can suffer
degraded performance in regions where large spatial
gradients in TEC exist. Secondly, because the observed
feature of storm-enhanced density, associated with large
TEC gradients at mid-latitudes, is a significant source of
error in the SBAS correction models (Skone et al., 2004). It
is therefore reasonable to conclude that such conditions
can be specified successfully by space weather forecasting
techniques based on real-time data availability in con-
junction with mathematical algorithms to extrapolate to
near-future conditions (Wilkinson, 2006).
3. Existing models
A comprehensive knowledge of ionospheric structure
and dynamic demands a space weather forecasting
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1874 L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878
system that can be based either on (i) advanced models
coupled across the space weather environment leading to
detailed knowledge of conditions and good prediction
facilities, or on (ii) specific well-targeted services that
provide products like specification data, post-event
analysis, predictions, nowcasts and forecasts generated
in near real time in response to available observations.
However, it is very well known that major factors limit-
ing our ability to accurately model a wide range of
ionospheric effects from storms to scintillation are:
(1) current ground-based sensing capability; (2) density
and frequency of ionospheric observations; (3) sophistica-
tion and accuracy of available ionospheric models;
and (4) current scientific understanding of the physics
of ionosphere–thermosphere–magnetosphere coupling
mechanisms.
As a result, most existing modelling techniques only
successfully describe long-term ionospheric variations,
such as those directly related to the sunspot cycle.
Empirical models, like the global IRI model, the NeQuick
model, the European region COST PRIME, and COSTPROF
family of models, attempt to extract systematic iono-
spheric variations from past data records (Bilitza, 1992;
Bradley, 1995; Hanbaba, 1999; Zolesi and Cander, 2004
and references therein). However, long-term trends are
less well known and understood (e.g., Lastovicka et al.,
2006). Hence these models describe average conditions of
the non-auroral, non-disturbed ionosphere. Based on
measurements, these empirical models are realistic in
providing electron density profiles in those areas suffi-
ciently covered by observations. Their results are useful in
predicting monthly median values of basic ionospheric
parameters for a given place and time of day. It is
Fig. 4. Long-term prediction map over European area for February 2007 at 1200 UT derived from the SIRM model developed under the DIAS project.
important to note that on the regional scale, it is possible
to effectively predict these values with sufficient accuracy
by using only the sunspot number as required input
parameter. An example is given in Fig. 4 where one of the
regional SIRM family of models generates the long-term
forecast map over Europe for February 2007 (Belehaki
et al., 2006). These climatological models often provide
very accurate ionospheric quiet-day reference conditions
and many space weather forecasts in the past relied on
climatology.
Over the years, different modelling techniques have
been used in a variety of space weather applications.
Physics-based theoretical and/or numerical models
attempt to solve a set of first-principles equations for
the ionospheric plasma, starting from the continuity,
energy, and momentum equations for electrons and ions
(Schunk, 1988; Anderson, 1993). Some of the most
important advanced models are listed in Table 1.
Theoretical ionospheric models have proved their
capabilities in reproducing selected sets of non-auroral
observations. All these models are essentially confined to
modern day supercomputers because of their complexity.
The main problem of using theoretical models for
operational space weather prediction and forecasting is
the large amount of computer time needed. In addition, an
extensive preparation of inputs is needed to obtain
meaningful results (Sojka, 1989). For most operational
ionospheric weather applications, this would be a sig-
nificant limitation. Parametric models simplify the
theoretical models by expressing them in terms of solar-
terrestrial parameters and geographical locations, giving a
realistic representation of the ionospheric spatial and
temporal structure using a limited number of numerical
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878 1875

coefficients. Some of the best-known models available at expansion during the coming years (Tobiska et al., 2002;
present are given in Table 2. Wilkinson, 2006). These are the physics-based data-
It is important to emphasize that parametric models driven models that use data assimilation techniques to
allow realistic ionospheric models to be adjusted in real specify the ionospheric plasma distributions. The terres-
time and to provide an accurate specification of the trial weather community as well as oceanographers have
instantaneous ionosphere and then to be incorporated in used such techniques for decades. Currently, the best-
three-dimensional ray tracing programs for HF propaga- known model of the kind is the Global Assimilation of
tion purposes (Reilly et al., 1991). However, it is clear that Ionospheric Measurements (GAIM)—a physics-based data
parametric models based on theoretical considerations assimilation model of the ionosphere and neutral atmo-
are suitable only for well-specified geophysical problems. sphere (Schunk et al., 2004; Scherliess et al., 2006 and
references therein). It is a four-level system providing
4. Model in development time-dependent electron density Ne distributions by
using: (1) Time-dependent climatology from the phy-
sics-based Ionospheric Forecast Model; (2) Observational
Some of the advanced models now being developed
database to adjust the empirical drivers so that they are
will have a major impact on the space weather services
consistent with measurements, then run Ionosphere–
Plasmasphere Model with the adjusted drivers for simula-
Table 1
Some of the best-known physics-based theoretical and/or numerical
tion; (3) Kalman filters that combine the simulation
models results with the available real-time data; and (4) GAIM
forecast mode that provides specifications and forecasts
Institution Name Authors for 3D Ne distribution from 90 to 25,000 km on a global,
regional, and local grid (25 km  25 km) depending
Utah State Time Dependent Schunk et al. (1986)
University Ionospheric Model (TDIM) A detailed review of on the operational demands and available data sets. In
observation model addition, GAIM will provide when finished the global
comparisons is given distributions for the ionospheric drivers (neutral winds,
by Sojka (1989)
electric fields, and particle precipitation), and quantitative
University Coupled Fuller-Rowell et al.
College London Thermosphere–Ionosphere (1987) and Quegan estimates for the accuracy of the reconstructed iono-
and Sheffield Model (CTIM) et al. (1982) spheric densities.
University In order to be effective, space weather specification
National Center Thermosphere–Ionosphere Roble et al. (1988) and forecast models must add value to operational
for Atmospheric Global Circulation Model More advanced
Research—NCAR (TIGCM) version is TIMEGCM
missions. Therefore, the most obvious challenges in the
(M for mesosphere, E assimilation are related to the large and disparate data
for electrodynamics) sets to assimilate, the model drivers (like electric fields
University of Field Line Interhemispheric Torre et al. (1990), and wind), the integrated quantities (e.g., TEC and
Alabama Plasma Model (FLIP) Richards et al.
(1994a, b). It is used
radiance), the multiple sensors, and the sub-model that
by Richards and must be included. For any forecasting procedure involved,
Wilkinson (1998) in a the greatest importance is related to the accurate physics-
comparison of based model, the accurate empirical model that is used,
measurements and
and the accurate forecast of drivers. Although models are
modelling during the
November 1993 already available in this area, further development is
ionospheric storm essential (Basu and Pallamraju, 2006).
Phillips Global Theoretical Anderson (1973), An excellent source for a number of available atmo-
Laboratory Ionospheric Model (GTIM) Moffett (1979) and
spheric, ionospheric, plasmaspheric, and other solar-
Decker et al. (1994)
terrestrial models is at http://modelweb.gsfc.nasa.gov.

Table 2
Some of the best-known parametric models

Name Description Authors

SLIM Low-latitude model, based on theoretically obtained grid values for electron Anderson et al. (1987)
density profiles normalized to the F2 peak and then represented by
modified Chapman function
FAIM Low- and mid-latitude model, which uses the formalism of the Chiu model Anderson et al. (1989)
with coefficients fitted to the SLIM model profiles
ICED Global with improved performance in the high latitude, controlled by the Tascione et al. (1988)
sunspot number (SSN) and geomagnetic Q index and conceived to allow for
real-time updates of the input parameters from a number of sensors
PIM Global, generated as an amalgam of a number of other models by using Daniell et al. (1993a, b)
either the foF2 CCIR coefficients for normalization of the electron density
profiles or coefficients produced by the TDIM
IRI—International The URSI/COSPAR standard for the ionosphere Bilitza (2003) Wilkinson (2004) for
Reference Ionosphere ionospheric variability study
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1876 L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878
5. Space weather services
In an effort to minimize or circumvent the detrimental
ionospheric effects in specific applications, a number of
space weather services have been developed and made
publicly available. They provide ionospheric specifications
and forecasts on a spatial grid that can be regional or local.
As an introduction to the currently available facilities and
data sources a few examples are listed here. The short-
term ionospheric forecasting tool at RAL, UK and the
supporting network of contributing ionosonde stations
provides maps of forecasts up to 24 h ahead of the critical
frequency foF2, maximum usable frequency for 3000 km
range MUF(3000)F2, and TEC for the European area at
each UT hour. It was available as an on-line interactive
24/7 service at http://ionosphere.rcru.rl.ac.uk/ (Cander
et al., 2004). IPS Radio and Space Services, Australia
makes hourly area predictions using some real-time data.
In addition, there are T Index maps available that indicate
differences between long-term predicted and real-time HF
propagation conditions available at http://www.ips.
gov.au/. In the USA there are two systems that regularly
provide real-time data: SPIDR site in Boulder at http://
spidr.ngdc.noaa.gov/spidr/, and DIDBase at the University
of Massachusetts Lowell http://ulcar.uml.edu/DIDBase/
that holds all digisonde prompt ionospheric sounding
data collected all over the world, including Europe
(Reinisch et al., 2004; Galkin et al., 2006). Some of the
DISS network data from the US Air Force are available at
http://ulcar.uml.edu/DIDBase/.
Even from these very limited examples, it is obvious
that some of the basic data needed to support ionospheric
research and associated space weather services are:
(I) bottomside electron density profiles from ionosondes;
(ii) in situ and remote electron density measurements
from satellites; (iii) vertical TEC measurements between
ground-based receivers and the GNSS satellites;
(iv) scintillation data from scintillation receivers; and
(v) radio occultation data from satellite constellations.
The ionospheric community has a long tradition of
providing global observations of Earth’s ionosphere
through the use of ground- as well as space-based remote
sensing. In addition to providing global data sets for
scientific research, this community has pioneered in
facilitating the use of these data by operational agencies,
and in incorporating them through their inclusion in data
assimilation systems to improve environmental forecast-
ing. In particular, these space weather services, where
models are tools, generated end-user applications in:
(1) climatology (statistical/empirical); (2) specification
(nowcasting), and (3) forecasting up to 24 h ahead, using
real or near-time data. Some examples of European
experiences in these areas are given in Table 3.
In this context it is appropriate to mention the
European Digital Upper Atmosphere Server (DIAS) which
is a comprehensive, regional, and timely ionospheric
specification and forecasting service based on real-time
information and historical data collections observed by
operating ionospheric stations in Europe and appropriate
ionospheric models (Belehaki et al., 2006). It provides
among many other ionospheric added value products like
Table 3
Some of the best-known European space weather services
Name Full Name Detailed description available at
website
SWENET ESA Space Weather http://esa-spaceweather.net/
European Network swenet/index.html
SWIPPA Space Weather http://www.kn.nz.dlr.de/swippa/
Impact on Precise index.htm
Positioning See also Jakowski et al. (2005)
Applications of
GNSS
DIAS European Digital http://www.iono.noa.gr/DIAS/
Upper Atmosphere See also Belehaki et al. (2005)
Server
the ionospheric activity indices for foF2 and M(30000)F2
to monitor ionospheric propagation conditions over
Europe in real time for customer’s warning purposes
(Bremer et al., 2006). When prominent large-scale
disturbances occurred in the European area during the
severe space weather event in October 2003, variations of
the ionospheric activity indexes foF2AI (%) and
M(3000)F2AI (%) at Chilton during the 28–31 October
2003 were used to describe the temporal and spatial
storm evolution process. Fig. 5 shows a complex iono-
spheric F-region storm morphology that was dominated
by overall negative disturbances during the main phase of
the storm and the usefulness of these indexes in their
identification.
6. Discussion and conclusions
As modern society increasingly relies on technological
systems in space, the contribution of space weather
research to society is becoming more important. The
following activities and system are particularly affected by
space weather: satellite operations, manned space flights,
radiation in space and aviation, navigation systems, high-
frequency communications, short-wave broadcasting,
surveillance radars, electrical control systems, electricity
power grid distribution, long pipeline corrosion, and
insurance. Thus space weather conditions affect public
safety, information services, defence, industrial processes,
and transport. The programme elements of any space
weather services include: fundamental research, model-
ling, observations, technology transition, operational
specification and forecasting, and education. All these
elements are vital and the programme can succeed only if
all the different elements work together.
While studies continue to search for the actual physical
mechanisms that explain the spatial and temporal
morphologies over various space weather events and to
test forecasting algorithms for practical ionospheric
applications, it is valuable to have at least a well-defined
pattern of a storm, and a technique to forecast it in the
near future. The short-term forecasting (a few hours in
advance) of operational parameters for ionospheric and
trans-ionospheric radio communications is required to
improve the quality and reliability of radio communica-
tion services, including frequency-adaptive applications at
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878
80
28 - 31 October 2003 Chilton
60
40
foF2AI (%), M (3000) F2
20
0
28
-20
-40
-60
-80
Fig. 5. Examples of ionospheric alert indexes for foF2AI and M9(3000)F2AI at Chilton ionospheric station displaying 10 min data.
MF and HF, and trans-ionospheric radiodetermination. A
contribution in that direction is the 4-year COST296
Action on ‘‘Mitigation of Ionospheric Effects on Radio
Systems’’ that started in February 2005 (www.cost296.
rl.ac.uk). The impact of this Action’s results on ionospheric
space weather research and application in telecommuni-
cation and navigation is expected to be significant (Cander
and Zolesi, 2008).
Finally, it is suggested that the progress of the iono-
spheric research and space weather services should be
built on: (1) improvements in understanding the physical
processes of geospace in numerical models across the full
range of its domain starting from micro-scale to helio-
scale; (2) increase in the availability of data with greater
precision from both ground-based and new satellite
observations; (3) ability to combine the two using most
advantageous data assimilation techniques; and (4)
operational use of models and their validation.
Acknowledgements
The investigation is carried out in the framework of
COST296 Action. The author would like to express
appreciation to the International GPS Service for Geody-
namics (IGS) for providing data regularly as well as to
Dr. L. Ciraolo for using his ‘‘TECmake’’ software for TEC
evaluation.
References
Anderson, D.N., 1973. A theoretical study of the ionospheric F region
equatorial anomaly, I, Theory, Planet. Space Science 21, 409.
Anderson, D.N., 1993. Global Ionospheric modelling 1993. In: Matsumo-
to, H. (Ed.), Modern Radio Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford,
p. 159.
Anderson, D.N., Mendillo, M., Herniter, B., 1987. A semi-empirical low
latitude ionospheric model. Radio Science 22, 292.
Anderson, D.N., Forbes, J.M., Codrescu, M., 1989. A fully analytical, low-
and middle-latitude ionospheric model. Journal of Geophysical
Research 94, 1520.
1877
29 30 31
days
Basu, S., Pallamraju, D., 2006. Science rationale for CAWSES (Climate and
Weather of the Sun–Earth System): SCOSTEP’s interdisciplinary
program for 2004-2008. Advances in Space Research 38, 1781.
Belehaki, A., Cander, Lj.R., Zolesi, B., Bremer, J., Juren, C., Stanislawska, I.,
Dialetis, D., Hatzopoulos, M., 2005. DIAS project: the establishment
of a European digital upper atmosphere server. Journal of Atmo-
spheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. 67 (12), 1092.
Belehaki, A., Cander, Lj.R., Zolesi, B., Bremer, J., Juren, C., Stanislawska, I.,
Dialetis, D., Hatzopoulos, M., 2006. Monitoring and forecasting the
ionosphere over Europe: the DIAS project. Space Weather 4, S12002.
Bilitza, D., 1992. Solar-terrestrial models and application software. Planet
Space Science 40, 541.
Bilitza, D., 2003. International reference ionosphere 2000: examples of
improvements and new features. Advances in Space Research 31 (3),
757.
Bradley, P.A., 1995. PRIME (Prediction Regional Ionospheric Modelling
over Europe). COST Action 238 Final Report, Commission of the
European Communities, Brussels.
Bremer, J., Cander, Lj.R., Mielich, J., Stamper, R., 2006. Derivation and test
of ionospheric activity indices from real-time ionosonde observa-
tions in the European region. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-
Terrestrial Physics 68 (18), 2075.
Cander, Lj.R., 2003. Toward forecasting and mapping ionospheric space
weather under the COST actions. Advances in Space Research 31 (4),
957.
Cander, Lj.R., Mihajlovic, S.J., 2005. Ionospheric spatial and temporal
variations during the 29–31 October 2003 storm. Journal of Atmo-
spheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 67 (12), 1118.
Cander, Lj.R., Zolesi, B., 2008. Science rational for MIERS/IRI. Advances in
Space Research, in press.
Cander, Lj.R., Hickford, J., Tsagouri, I., Belehaki, A., 2004. Real-time
dynamic system for monitoring ionospheric propagation conditions
over Europe. Electronics Letters 40 (4), 224.
Daniell, R.E., Whartenby, W.G., Brown, L.D., 1993a. Parameterised real
time ionospheric specification model. PRISM version 1.2. Algorithm
description, Computational Physics, Inc., 385 Elliot St, Newton, MA,
USA.
Daniell, R.E., Whartenby, W.G., Brown, L.D., 1993b. Parameterised real
time ionospheric specification model, PRISM version 1.2. Validation
Report, Computational Physics, Inc., 385 Elliot St, Newton, MA, USA.
Decker, D.T., Valladares, C.E., Sheehan, R., Basu, S., Anderson, D.N., Heelis,
R.A., 1994. Modeling daytime F layer patches over Sonderstrom.
Radio Science 29, 249.
Fuller-Rowell, T.J., Rees, D., Quegan, S., Moffett, R.J., Bailey, G.J., 1987.
Interaction between neutral thermosphere composition and the
polar ionosphere using a coupled ionosphere–thermosphere model.
Journal of Geophysical Research 92, 7744.
Galkin, I.A., Khmyrov, G., Kozlov, A., Reinisch, B.W., Huang, X., Kitrosser,
D.F., 2006. Ionosonde networking, databasing, and web serving.
Radio Science 41 (5), RS5S33.
 Author's personal copy
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1878 L.R. Cander / Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 70 (2008) 1870–1878
Garner, T.W., Bust, G.S., Gaussiran II, T.L., Straus, P.R., 2006. Variations in
the midlatitude and equatorial ionosphere during the October 2003
magnetic storm. Radio Science 41, RS6S08.
Hanbaba, R., 1999. Improved quality of service in ionospheric tele-
communication systems planning and operation. COST Action 251
Final Report, Space Research Centre, Warsaw.
Jakowski, N., Stankov, S.M., Klaehn, D., 2005. Operational space weather
service for GNSS precise positioning. Annales Geophysicae 23 (9),
3071.
Kersley, L., Malan, D., Pryse, S.E., Cander, Lj.R., Bamford, .A., Belehaki, A.,
Leitinger, R., Radicella, S.M., Mitchel, C.N., Spencer, P.S.J., 2004. Total
electron content—a key parameter in propagation: measurement
and use in ionospheric imaging. Annals of Geophysics 47 (2/3,
Suppl.), 1067.
Lastovicka, J., Akmaev, R.A., Beig, G., Bremer, J., Emmert, J.T., 2006. Global
change in the upper atmosphere. Science 314 (5803), 1253.
Leitinger, R., Ciraolo, L., Kersley, L., Kouris, S.S., Spalla, P., 2004. Relations
between electron content and peak density: regular and extreme
behaviour. Annals of Geophysics 47 (2/3, Suppl.), 1093.
Mendillo, M., Klobuchar, J.A., 2006. Total electron content: synthesis of
past storm studies and needed future work. Radio Science 41,
RS5S02.
Moffett, R.J., 1979. The equatorial anomaly in the electron distribution of
the terrestrial F region. Fundamental of Cosmic Physics 4, 313.
Piggott, W.R., Rawer, K., 1972. URSI handbook of ionogram interpretation
and reduction. World Data Center A for Solar-Terrestrial Physics,
Report UAG-23, Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North
Carolina, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
Prölss, G.W., 1995. Ionospheric F region storms. In: Volland, H. (Ed.),
Handbook of Atmospheric Electrodynamics. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, pp. 195–248.
Quegan, S., Bailey, G.J., Moffett, R.J., Heelis, R.A., Fuller-Rowell, T.J., Rees,
D., Spiro, R.W., 1982. A theoretical study of the distribution of
ionization in the high-latitude ionosphere and the plasmasphere:
first results on the mid-latitude trough and the light-ion trough.
Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics 44, 619.
Reilly, M.H., Rhoads, F.J., Goodman, J.M., 1991. Updated climatological
model predictions of ionospheric and HF propagation parameters.
Radio Science 26, 1017.
Reinisch, B.W., Galkin, I.A., Khmyrov, G., Kozlov, A., Kitrosser, D.F., 2004.
Automated collection and dissemination of ionospheric data from
the digisonde network. Advances in Radio Science 2, 241.
Richards, P.G., Wilkinson, P.J., 1998. The ionosphere and thermosphere at
southern midlatitudes during the November 1993 ionospheric
storm: a comparison of measurement and modelling. Journal of
Geophysical Research 103 (A3), 9373.
Richards, P.G., Torr, D.G., Reinisch, B.W., Gamache, R.R., Wilkinson, P.J.,
1994a. F2 peak electron density at Millstone Hill and Hobart:
comparison of theory and measurement at solar maximum. Journal
of Geophysical Research 99, 15,005.
Richards, P.G., Torr, D.G., Buonsanto, M.J., Sipler, D.P., 1994b. Ionospheric
effects of the March 1990 magnetic storm: comparison of theory and
measurement. Journal of Geophysical Research 99, 23,359.
Roble, R.G., Ridley, E.C., Richmond, A.D., Dickinson, R.E., 1988. A coupled
thermosphere/ionosphere general circulation model. Geophysical
Research Letters 15, 1325.
Scherliess, L., Schunk, R.W., Sojka, J.J., Thompson, D.C., Zhu, L., 2006. Utah
State University Assimilation of Ionospheric Measurements Gauss–
Markov Kalman filter model of the ionosphere: model description
and validation. Journal of Geophysical Research 111, A11315.
Schunk, R.W., 1988. A mathematical model of the middle and high
latitude ionosphere. Pure and Applied Geophysics 127, 255.
Schunk, R.W., Sojka, J.J., Bowline, M.D., 1986. Theoretical study of the
electron temperature in the high-latitude ionosphere for solar
maximum and winter conditions. Journal of Geophysical Research
91, 12041.
Schunk, R.W., Scherliess, L., Sojka, J.J., Thompson, D.C., Anderson, D.N.,
Codrescu, M., Minter, C., Fuller-Rowell, T.J., Heelis, R.A., Hairston, M.,
Howe, B.M., 2004. Global Assimilation of Ionospheric Measurements
(GAIM). Radio Science 39, RS1S02.
Skone, S., Yousuf, R., Coster, A., 2004. Performance evaluation of the wide
area augmentation system for ionospheric storm events. Journal of
Global Positioning Systems 3 (1–2), 251.
Sojka, J.J., 1989. Global scale, physical models of the F region ionosphere.
Reviews of Geophysics 27, 371.
Tascione, T.F., Kroehl, H.W., Creiger, R., Freeman Jr., J.W., Wolf, R.A., Spiro,
R.W., Hilmer, R.V., Shade, J.W., Hausman, B.A., 1988. New ionospheric
and magnetospheric specification models. Radio Science 23, 211.
Tobiska, K.W., Cameron, G., Davenport, G., Goodman, J., Hand, G.,
Papitashvili, V., Pi, X., 2002. Improved polar HF propagation using
nowcast and forecast space weather parameters. In: 10th Interna-
tional Ionospheric Effects Symposium, May 7–9, USA, 2002, p. 364.
Torr, M.R., Torr, D.G., Richards, P.G., Yung, S.P., 1990. Mid- and low-
latitude model of thermospheric emissions, 1, O+ (2 P) 7320 A and N2
(2P) 3371 A. Journal of Geophysical Research 95, 21,147.
Tóth, G., De Zeeuw, D.L., Gombosi, T.I., Manchester, W.B., Ridley, A.J.,
Sokolov, I.V., Roussev, I.I., 2007. Sun-to-thermosphere simulation of
the 28–30 October 2003 storm with the Space Weather Modeling
Framework. Space Weather 5, S06003.
Wilkinson, P.J., 2004. Ionospheric variability and the international
reference ionosphere. Advances in Space Research 34 (9), 1853.
Wilkinson, P.J., 2006. The future of the ionosphere. In: IET Conference
on Ionospheric Radio Systems and Techniques, 18–21 July 2006,
London, UK.
Zolesi, B., Cander, Lj.R., 2004. COST271 Action ‘‘Effects of the upper
atmosphere on terrestrial and Earth-space communications’’. Final
Report, Annals of Geophysics, 47(2/3, Suppl.), 2004.