1. Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models.
- Author
-
Walterscheid, R. L., Chen, M. W., Chao, C.‐C., Gegenheimer, S., Cabrera‐Guzman, J., and McVey, J.
- Subjects
MAGNETIC storms ,GENERAL circulation model ,STORMS ,MASS spectrometers ,PREDICTION models ,INCOHERENT scattering ,ACCELEROMETERS ,ARTIFICIAL satellite tracking - Abstract
We examine the accuracy of density prediction by the first principles model Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three empirical models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Research Laboratory Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter Extended 2000 (NRLMSIS), Jacchia 1971, and Jacchia‐Bowman 2008. Comparisons are made for three large storms: the October 2003 storm, the March 2013 storm, and the March 2015 storm. To evaluate the accuracy of these models we use tracking data for nine space objects in low Earth orbit. Additionally, we evaluate the accuracy of the TIEGCM and NRLMSIS with data from high precision accelerometers on the Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and Gravity field and Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellites. The goal is to assess the use of a first principles model as a potential tool for forecasting satellite drag during large magnetic storms. For the storms considered, we found the TIEGCM, JB2008, and NRLMSIS models to be substantially more accurate than the Jacchia 71 model. The accuracies of the TIEGCM and JB2008 models were similar, but overall, the TIEGCM was more accurate. We found smaller differences for TIEGCM versus CHAMP than for NRLMIS for the Halloween Storm, and smaller differences than results published for JB2008 and the assimilative model HASDM. The empirical models are at present more practical for operational purposes, but the TIEGCM, developed as a research model, with a greater focus on operational use offers the potential for improved utility during stressing conditions. Plain Language Summary: We examined the accuracy of density prediction by the physics‐based Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three data‐based models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Research Laboratory Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter Extended 2000 (NRLMSIS), Jacchia 1971 and Jacchia‐Bowman 2008 (JB2008). Comparisons are made for three large magnetic storms. To evaluate the accuracy of these models we use tracking data for nine space objects in low earth orbit. Additionally, we evaluate the accuracy of the TIEGCM and NRLMSIS with data from the Challenging Minisatellite Payload and Gravity field and Circulation Explorer satellites. The goal is to assess the use of a physics‐based model as a potential tool for forecasting satellite drag during large magnetic storms. For the three storms considered, we found the TIEGCM, JB2008, and NLMSIS accuracies to be substantially better than for Jacchia 71. The TIEGCM and JB2008 models were similar, but overall the TIEGCM was slightly more accurate. The empirical models are at present more practical operationally, but the TIEGCM was developed as a research model and with a greater focus on operational use offers the potential for improved utility during stressing conditions. Key Points: The accuracy of Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) density prediction during storms is compared to empirical models using tracking data for objects in low earth orbitTIEGCM accuracy is substantially better than the Jacchia 71 model during three large magnetic stormsThe accuracies of the TIEGCM and JB2008 models are similar, but overall, the TIEGCM was more accurate [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF