3. The foF2 Dependence on Solar Activity

2005GI000129-fig06
Figure 6
[18]  The examples presented above in Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were drawn for 1980 and 1989. These years were very favorable for manifestation of the effects in question. Vanina and Danilov [2003] showed that the effect of the negative correlation between the daytime and nighttime values of foF2 is better pronounced in years of high solar activity (see Figure 1). Figure 6 confirms this statement.

[19]  Kaliningrad and Moscow stations and the period considered above (1979-1989) are taken. Since we have here multidimensional picture ( r(foF2) depending on solar and geomagnetic activity) we took for the consideration moderate limitation on Ap: Ap < 16. It should be noted that Ap < 16 presents the most frequent conditions in the ionosphere. The value of the solar index (sunspot number W ) is taken not for the entire year, but for the March-May period when the maximum effect of the negative correlation between the daytime and nighttime values of foF2 is observed.

[20]  One can see in Figure 6 that, in spite of the scatter of the individual points, there is a pronounced and statistically significant tendency of a depletion of the modulus of the negative correlation coefficient with an increase in F(10.7).

AGU

Powered by TeXWeb (Win32, v.2.0).