Main Article Content


The time delay of ionospheric response to the geomagnetic storms are varies depending on the geomagnetic storm intensity so they are difficult to estimate. This condition is one of the problems encountered by researchers at Space Science Center-LAPAN in Swifts activity. To determine its response then be made to the model. They are empirical model of the ionosphere response by AraujoPradere et al. (2002) and numerical model by Santoso et al. (2016). The purpose of this study was to test the accuracy of both the models. The case studies done at the geomagnetic storms event on January 20, 2016; April 14, 2006; August 24 and 31, 2005 and September 11, 2005. Dst index and foF2 data from BPAA Sumedang BPAA is processed and analyzed. The result showed that both an empirical model and a numerical models are equally good and proper to use in the estimation of the ionospheric foF2 storm at BPAA Sumedang. But, in general, numerical models have better accuracy and more excellent than empirical models. This is indicated by a deviation ï¤foF2SMD models and observations were less than 30% on a geomagnetic storm events on April 14, 2006 (ï¤foF2SMD = 27.1%), 24 (ï¤foF2SMD = -9.2%) and August 31, 2005 (ï¤foF2SMD = 9.4%). Likewise, the value of deviation models, ΔTpeak ï¤foF2SMD, still less than 30% for geomagnetic storm events on January 20, 2016 (Δtpeak ï¤foF2SMD = -2.7%) and August 24, 2005 (Δtpeak ï¤foF2SMD = 25 7%) so that the model ï¤foF2SMD more proper to use in modeling activities.


foF2 ionospheric response Geomagnetic storm Empirical ionospheric storm model Numerical ionospheric storm model

Article Details