GEOMAGNETISM AND AERONOMY, English Translation, VOL. 34, NO.

1, AUGUST 1994 Russian Edition: JANUARY{FEBRUARY 1994

Asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion e ects in the ionosphere F region

V. V. Adushkin, K. I. Gorely, and V. P. Kudriavtzev
Institute of Geosphere Dynamics

Abstract. Ionospheric e

ects of atmospheric nuclear explosions are studied. The e ects are due to the in uence on the upper atmosphere of acoustic gravity waves (AGW) propagating from the region of the explosion. It is shown that there is an asymmetry in the AGW propagation which is determined by the features of the medium along propagation paths: existence of the solar terminator and of the high-latitude ionosphere, which di ers from the midlatitude one by vertical distribution of the neutral gas density and temperature.
A large amount of energy (comparable to the energy introduced into the atmosphere during geomagnetic storms) injected into the medium is typical for atmospheric nuclear explosions Rees, 1975]. Such explosions generate acoustic gravity waves (AGW), which propagate over large distances Shashunkina, 1972] and thus provide planetary transport for the nuclear explosion energy. Because of di erences in physical conditions in various regions of the globe, there is an asymmetry in gravity wave propagation Samuel, 1975], so the spatial distribution of the explosion energy is nonuniform. In particular Katadia 1986] noted that North American ionospheric stations located the same distance from the place of explosion (Novaia Zemlia Island) as European stations had observed no ionospheric e ects of the explosions. The fact that the detection boundary of ionospheric e ects lies at local evening time indicates a possible role in AGW propagation for the solar terminator. To investigate AGW propagation by theoretical methods is a hard task. Results of the above-mentioned (three dimensional) solution depend on the global distribution of physical atmospheric parameters, models of which are far from perfect. The latter do not currently allow the use of numerical methods to get parameters of the ionosphere that has been modi ed by atmospheric nuclear explosions via AGW propagating to several thousand kilometers. In this paper a propagation asymmetry of the AGW generated by atmospheric nuclear explosions in the megaton range is studied by using experimental data from the global network of ionospheric stations (data from routine ionospheric soundings with 15-min intervals at
Copyright 1995 by the American Geophysical Union. 0016{7932/95/3401{0016$18.00/1

17 stations in the northern hemisphere are used) to describe the geophysical situation during the nuclear explosions on Novaia Zemlia Island. The experimental range is situated at a geomagnetic latitude of about 70 in the auroral zone which is strongly in uenced by solar activity. The ionospheric station network surrounds the range by two rings at distances of about 1000 and 3000 km. Below, the data for the outer ring are analyzed. Information about the station geographical coordinates, their distances, and their direct and reverse azimuths from the range are shown in Table 1. Assuming a likely role for the terminator, let us investigate AGW propagation asymmetry for the two most
Table 1.

A list of the ionospheric stations used to study nuclear explosion e ects in the ionosphere. Abbre- Geographical Paths coordinates viation ' b, km Adir Arev At As Gd Ir Ns Rb Re Rd Ru Ya 43.2 37.9 69.3 52.5 61.2 74.7 64.1 47.2 54.6 62.0 76.9 58.3 306.5 104.0 314.6 265.2 338.2 39.7 13.4 129.6 3500 3900 3380 3210 3960 3460 3020 2960 2780 3140 148 176 319 108 306 345 292 204 246 73 348 358 33 333 30 16 38 10 27 324

Station Alma-Ata Ashkhabad Godhavn Irkutsk Narssarssuaq Resolute Bay Reykjavik Rostov-Don Rugen Yakutsk

79

80

adushkin et al.: asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion effects

Ionospheric disturbances in the F 2 region 3000 km from the place of a nuclear explosion: (a) explosion on October 30, 1961, at 0831 UT (the nonsunlit parts of the area at 100 km for the moments of the explosion and 3 h later are hatched).
Figure 1.

powerful explosions, which occured in di erent conditions of northern hemisphere illumination. Figures 1a and 1b show deviations of the F 2 layer critical frequencies ( f0 F 2 %) from the monthly median for the ionospheric stations situated at distances about 3000 km from the place of explosion (abbreviations of the station names used in Figure 1 are shown in Table 1). Data for 4 h (0.5{1.0 h before and 3.0{3.5 h after an explosion) with 15 min intervals for the events of October 30, 1961 (prewinter period equivalent power, 58 Mt of TNT) and August 5, 1962 (summer equivalent power, 30 Mt of TNT), are shown in the Figure 1. The nonsunlit part of the area at 100 km altitude is hatched for the moments of explosion and 3 h after it. Figure 1a shows that at Narssarssuaq and Resolute Bay, Greenland, and in the North American archipelago (nighttime conditions), no e ects in f0 F 2 are detected. In case of polar day, when the high latitude ionosphere is illuminated by the Sun the entire day, the ionospheric

e ect of the nuclear explosions is less pronounced (see Figure 1b for the event on August 5, 1962) owing to observation at some stations of the screening E layers (symbol A) and of radio-wave absorption (symbol B). Nevertheless, Figure 1b shows that the ionospheric effect of the explosion at the Resolute Bay station is detected with the same degree of reliability as, for example, the one at Ashkhabad. The above-mentioned spatial asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion e ects in the F 2 region produced by AGW may be interpreted in the following way. Theoretical models Karpov and Lebe, 1986] show that the AGW vertical pro le depends on vertical distribution of the temperature and the neutral gas density at ionospheric heights. The regions of strong variability of the temperature or of its derivative can became a barrier for a propagating AGW that does not allow the wave to pass through or that signi cantly diminishes its amplitude in the vicinity of the solar terminator. If

adushkin et al.: asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion effects

81

Figure 1.

(b) explosion on August 5, 1962, at 0908 UT. gating above the F 2 peak, whichprevented their being observed by the local ionospheric station. Analysis of the data reveals variations in AGW propagation velocity depending on the azimuth of the propagation path. Figure 2 shows a distribution of the rst \valley" (solid circles) and rst \ridge" (open circles) velocities in f0 F 2 for the paths with di erent orientations for the winter and summer explosions. Azimuths of the direction from Novaia Zemlia Island to the place of observation are shown along the horizontal axis, and velocities for paths having the same lengths (about 3000 km) are shown along the vertical axis. Figure 2 demonstrates that AGW velocities in northward directions are higher than those in southward directions. What makes the northern azimuth sector unique is that the propagation there takes place above the auroral zone and the polar cap, where the neutral atmosphere at ionospheric altitudes is heated. According to Talush 1977], the \bulge" of the high-latitude upper atmosphere is especially well pronounced in the auroral oval because of precipitation of low energy (below 1 KeV) electrons

in the terminator region the wave disturbances are localized above the F 2 peak, ionospheric stations in that region detect no propagating wave-like features. As an indirect con rmation of this e ect we can use data obtained in the study of the ionospheric disturbances produced by ground-based explosion with the power of 288 t of TNT (Massa experiment in the vicinity of AlmaAta). The measurements were carried out by an incoherent scatter radar facility in Kharkov that was situated 3500 km from the place of the explosion Taran et al., 1985]. Temporal variations in the electron concentration vertical pro le were observed and it was shown that temporal variations in the electron concentration below 400 km do not di er from usual Ne variations produced by the terminator pass. At altitudes above 400 km, quasi periodic oscillations of the electron concentration produced by explosion-generated AGW were detected at the very moment of sunrise. Theamplitude of the oscillations was 30%, with a period of 60{70 min. Probably, the distribution of the atmospheric density and temperature was such that the AGW were propa-

82

adushkin et al.: asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion effects

Figure 2.

AGW propagation velocity v versus the azimuth of path A for two explosions: (a) on October 30, 1961 (b) on August 5, 1961. Propagation velocities of the rst minimum (valley) in f0 F 2 are denoted by solid circles, and the ones of the rst peak (ridge) are denoted by open circles.

into the ionosphere. If such a bulge really does exist, its spatial structure might be studied (to improve neutral composition models of the polar ionosphere) by using data on AGW propagation velocities for the same set of paths and archival ionospheric sounding data during atmospheric nuclear explosions at various geophysical conditions. The above-mentioned asymmetry of AGW propagation leads to di erences in variations of F region parameters on the day- and night-sides of the Earth after a nuclear explosion. That is clearly seen for the October 30, 1961, explosion. The redistribution of atmospheric explosion energy around the globe takes place over several days thus the terms \daytime" and \nighttime" sides of the Earth are determined by the time of the explosion itself. The general geophysical situation and variation

of ionospheric parameters during these nuclear explosions may be described as follows. The explosion took place at the end of the recovery phase of a magnetic storm, the main phase of which began on October 28. At the moment of the explosion, a poststorm restoration of electron concentration was taking place, and the latter practically reached its quiet-condition level. Propagation of explosion induced AGW above the stations in the sunlit hemisphere is clearly seen at the f0 F 2 curves for these stations as a pronounced impulse. The critical frequency of the F region above North America (White Sands station) reached its minimum on November 1, in other words a recovery of the ionosphere took place above Europe and Asia on the third day after the explosion. In that case the circulation processes were probably responsible for the f0 F 2 depletion, transporting the modi ed ionospheric plasma. In fact, if the transport of nuclear-explosion energy to the North American region were provided by AGW or by switching on of the ionosphere-magnetosphere interactions (a possibility that also can not be excluded), the ionospheric e ects of the nuclear explosion would appear on the rst day after the explosion. Thus the AGW generated during the atmospheric nuclear explosions transport their energy signi cant distances from the explosion, in fact imitating the natural process observed during ionospheric storms. There is an asymmetry in the AGW propagation governed by the state of the propagation paths. In particular, for nuclear explosions produced in the sunlit hemisphere, the propagation of their e ects at the F 2 layer level is limited by the terminator position at ionospheric heights. AGW propagation velocities above the polar regions are higher than those along midlatitude paths. When an atmospheric nuclear explosion happens at the dayside of the Earth, the maximum amount of explosion energy transported by the AGW is absorbed there, providing a strong modi cation of the ionosphere. On the nightside, the gas modi ed by the explosion is transported by upper atmospheric circulation, which produces smaller e ects than those on the dayside.

References
Karpov, I. V., and S. B. Leble, Analiticheskaya teoria ionosfernogo e ecta VGV v F 2 oblasti ionosferi (Analytical theory of the IGW ionospheric e ect in the F 2 region), Geomagn. aeron. 26, 2, 234, 1986. Katadia, K. M., Ionospheric e ect of nuclear explosion, Annal. Geophys., 23, 1, 1, 1967. Ress, M. H., Magnetospheric substorm energy dissipation in the atmosphere, Planet. Space Sci., 23, 12, 1589, 1975. Samuel, H. F., Global propagation of atmospheric gravity waves: A review, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 37, 6, 7, 1011, 1967.

adushkin et al.: asymmetry of atmospheric nuclear explosion effects

83

Shashunkina, V. M., Gravitatzionnie volni v oblasti F iono- Taran, V. I., Yu. N. Podiachyi, A. N. Smirnov, and L. Ya. Gershtein, Vozmushchenia ionosferi posle nazemsferi (Gravitational waves in the ionospheric F region), nogo yadernogo vzriva po nabludeniam nekogerentnogo in Ionosfernie issledovania (Ionosphere Research), Nauka, rasseiania (Ionospheric disturbances after the ground Moscow, 154 pp., 1972. based explosion observed by the incoherent scatter Talusch, D. R., Structure of electrodynamics and particle method), Izv. AN SSSR. Fizika Zemli, 11, 75, 1985. heating in the disturbed polar thermosphere, J. Geophys. (Received January 22, 1993.) Res. 32, 4, 455, 1977.