EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 16 (2026) J. Space Weather Space Clim., 16 (2026) 7 References
Open Access
Issue
J. Space Weather Space Clim.
Volume 16, 2026
Article Number 7
Number of page(s) 10
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2026005
Published online 06 April 2026
  • Anz-Meador P, Opiela Jacobs J, Liou JC. 2023. History of on-orbit satellite fragmentations. (16th edn). Technical Publication. NASA/TP-20220019160, Orbital Debris Program Office, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center: Houston, TX. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20220019160. [Google Scholar]
  • Baker D. 2000. The occurrence of operational anomalies in spacecraft and their relationship to space weather. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 28(6): 2007–2016. [Google Scholar]
  • Berger TE, Dominique M, Lucas G, Pilinski M, Ray V, Sewell R, Sutton EK, Thayer JP, Thiemann E. 2023. The thermosphere is a drag: The 2022 starlink incident and the threat of geomagnetic storms to low earth orbit space operations. Space Weather 21(3): e2022SW003330. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Berger TE, Holzinger MJ, Sutton EK, Thayer JP. 2020. Flying through uncertainty. Space Weather 18(1): e2019SW002373. [Google Scholar]
  • Bowman BW, Tobiska K, Marcos F, Huang C, Lin C, Burke W. 2008. A new empirical thermospheric density model JB2008 using new solar and geomagnetic indices AIAA 2008-6438. In: AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-6438. [Google Scholar]
  • Bruinsma S. 2015. The DTM-2013 thermosphere model. J Space Weather Space Clim 5: A1. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Bruinsma S, Boniface C. 2021. The operational and research DTM-2020 thermosphere models. J Space Weather Space Clim 11: 47. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Bruinsma S, Sutton E, Solomon SC, Fuller-Rowell T, Fedrizzi M. 2018. Space weather modeling capabilities assessment: neutral density for orbit determination at low earth orbit. Space weather 16(11): 1806–1816. [Google Scholar]
  • Bussy-Virat CD, Ridley AJ, Getchius JW. 2018. Effects of uncertainties in the atmospheric density on the probability of collision between space objects. Space Weather 16(5): 519–537. [Google Scholar]
  • Buzulukova N, Tsurutani B. 2022. Space weather: from solar origins to risks and hazards evolving in time. Front Astron Space Sci 9: 1017103. [Google Scholar]
  • Clette F, Cliver EW, Lefèvre L, Svalgaard L, Vaquero JM, Leibacher JW. 2016. Preface to topical issue: recalibration of the sunspot number. Solar Phys 291: 2479–2486. [Google Scholar]
  • Clette F, Lefèvre L. 2015. SILSO sunspot number V2.0. WDC SILSO. Royal Observatory of Belgium (ROB). https://doi.org/10.24414/qnza-ac80. [Google Scholar]
  • Dhadly M, Sassi F, Emmert J, Drob D, Conde M, Wu Q, Makela J, Budzien S, Nicholas A. 2023. Neutral winds from mesosphere to thermosphere – past, present, and future outlook. Front Astron Space Sci 9: 1050586. [Google Scholar]
  • Dimmock AP, Lanabere V, Johlander A, Rosenqvist L, Yordanova E, Buchert S, Molenkamp S, Setréus J. 2024. Investigating the trip of a transformer in Sweden during the 24 April 2023 storm. Space Weather 22(11): e2024SW003948. [Google Scholar]
  • Doornbos E, Bruinsma S, Pilinski MD, Bowman B. 2013. The need for a standard for satellite drag computation to improve consistency between thermosphere density models and data sets. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Space Debris – ESA SP-723. Darmstadt, Germany: ESA Space Debris Office. Available at https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc6/paper/130. [Google Scholar]
  • Doornbos EN. 2011. Thermospheric density and wind determination from satellite dynamics. Ph.D. Thesis, Delft University of Technology. [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT. 2009. A long-term data set of globally averaged thermospheric total mass density. J Geophys Res Space Phys 114(A6): A06315. [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT. 2015. Thermospheric mass density: a review. Adv Space Res 56(5): 773–824. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT, Dhadly MS, Segerman AM. 2021a. A globally averaged thermospheric density data set derived from two-line orbital element sets and special perturbations state vectors. J Geophys Res Space Phys 126(8): e2021JA029,455. [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT, Drob DP, Picone JM, Siskind DE, Jones M Jr., et al. 2021b. NRLMSIS 2.0: a whole-atmosphere empirical model of temperature and neutral species densities. Earth Space Sci 8(3): e2020EA001321. [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT, Meier RR, Picone JM, Lean JL, Christensen AB. 2006. Thermospheric density 2002–2004: TIMED/GUVI dayside limb observations and satellite drag. J Geophys Res Space Phys 111(A10): A10S16. [Google Scholar]
  • Emmert JT, Warren HP, Segerman AM, Byers JM, Picone JM. 2017. Propagation of atmospheric density errors to satellite orbits. Adv Space Res 59(1): 147–165. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Friis-Christensen E, Lühr H, Knudsen D, Haagmans R. 2008. Swarm–an earth observation mission investigating geospace. Adv Space Res 41(1): 210–216. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fuller-Rowell T, Solomon SC. 2010. Flares, coronal mass ejections, and atmospheric responses. In: Heliophysics: space storms and radiation: causes and effects, Siscoe GL, Schrijver CJ (Eds.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 321–358. [Google Scholar]
  • Geul J, Mooij E, Noomen R. 2017. Assessment and modelling of space surveillance network. In: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Space Debris. Darmstadt, Germany: ESA Space Debris Office. https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc7/paper/1014. [Google Scholar]
  • Hajra R, Tsurutani BT, Lakhina GS, Lu Q, Du A. 2024. Interplanetary causes and impacts of the 2024 May superstorm on the geosphere: an overview. Astrophys J 974(2): 264. [Google Scholar]
  • Hanslmeier A. 2002. The NOAA space weather scales. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. ISBN 978-0-306-48211-3. [Google Scholar]
  • Hedin AE, Biondi MA, Burnside RG, Hernandez G, Johnson RM, et al.. 1991. Revised global model of thermosphere winds using satellite and ground-based observations. J Geophys Res Space Phys 96(A5): 7657–7688. [Google Scholar]
  • Hejduk MD, Casali SJ, Cappellucci DA, Ericson NL, Snow DE. 2013. A catalogue-wide implementation of general perturbations orbit determination extrapolated from higher-order theory solutions–AAS 13–240. In: Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Kauai, HI. [Google Scholar]
  • Hejduk MD, Snow DE. 2018. The effect of neutral density estimation errors on satellite conjunction serious event rates. Space Weather 16(7): 849–869. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hładczuk NA, van den Ijssel JKodikara T, Siemes C, Visser P. 2024. GRACE-FO radiation pressure modelling for accurate density and crosswind retrieval. Adv Space Res 73(5): 2355–2373. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hoots FR, Roehrich RL. 1980. Models for propagation of NORAD element sets. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center. https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA093554. [Google Scholar]
  • Interrante AA. 2024. NASA, NOAA announce that the sun has reached the solar maximum period. NASA Scientific Visualization Studio. [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson NL, Stansbery E, Liou JC, Horstman M, Stokely C, Whitlock D. 2008. The characteristics and consequences of the break-up of the Fengyun-1C spacecraft. Acta Astronaut 63: 128–135. [Google Scholar]
  • Kastinen D, Vierinen J, Grydeland T, Kero J. 2023. Using radar beam-parks to characterize the Kosmos-1408 fragmentation event. Acta Astronaut 202: 341–359. [Google Scholar]
  • Kessler DJ, Cour-Palais BG. 1978. Collision frequency of artificial satellites: the creation of a debris belt. J Geophys Res Space Phys 83(A6): 2637–2646. [Google Scholar]
  • King-Hele DG. 1987. Satellite orbits in an atmosphere: theory and applications (1st edn). Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 978-0-216-92252-5. [Google Scholar]
  • Krauss S, Drescher L, Temmer M, Suesser-Rechberger B, Strasser A, Kroisz S. 2024. SODA – a tool to predict storm-induced orbit decays for low earth-orbiting satellites. J Space Weather Space Clim 14: 23. [Google Scholar]
  • Landerer FW, Flechtner FM, Save H, Webb FH, Bandikova T, et al. 2020. Extending the global mass change data record: GRACE follow-on instrument and science data performance. Geophys Res Lett 47(12): e2020GL088306. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lepping RP, Acũna MH, Burlaga LF, Farrell WM, Slavin JA, et al. 1995. The WIND magnetic field investigation. Space Sci Rev 71(1): 207–229. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Li C. 2024. Python package–Pyatmos 1.2.7. Available at https://github.com/lcx366/ATMOS. [Google Scholar]
  • Li T, Zheng D, He C, Ye F, Yuan P, Yao Y, Liao M, Xie J. 2025. Ionospheric response to the 24–27 February 2023 solar flare and geomagnetic storms over the European region using a machine learning-based tomographic technique. Space Weather 23(1): e2024SW004146. [Google Scholar]
  • Licata RJ, Mehta PM. 2023. Reduced order probabilistic emulation for physics-based thermosphere models. Space Weather 21(5): e2022SW003345. [Google Scholar]
  • Lilensten J, Dudok de Wit T, Kretzschmar M, Amblard P-O, Moussaoui S, Aboudarham J, Auchère F. 2008. Review on the solar spectral variability in the EUV for space weather purposes. Ann Geophys 26(2): 269–279. [Google Scholar]
  • Lucas G. 2024. Python package–Pymsis. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14188070. [Google Scholar]
  • March G, Doornbos EN, Visser PNAM. 2019. High-fidelity geometry models for improving the consistency of CHAMP, GRACE, GOCE and Swarm thermospheric density data sets. Adv Space Res 63(1): 213–238. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mehta PM, Licata RJ. 2025. TIE-GCM ROPE–Dimensionality reduction: Part I. Space Weather 23(1): e2024SW004,185. [Google Scholar]
  • Mehta PM, Paul SN, Crisp NH, Sheridan PL, Siemes C, March G, Bruinsma S. 2023. Satellite drag coefficient modeling for thermosphere science and mission operations. Adv Space Res 72(12): 5443–5459. [Google Scholar]
  • Moe K, Moe MM. 2005. Gas–surface interactions and satellite drag coefficients. Planet Space Sci . 53 (8): 793–801. [Google Scholar]
  • Moritz H. 2000. Geodetic reference system 1980. J Geodesy . 74 (1): 128–133. [Google Scholar]
  • Mutschler SM, Axelrad P, Sutton EK, Masters D. 2023. Physics-based approach to thermospheric density estimation using CubeSat GPS data. Space Weather 21(1): e2021SW002997. [Google Scholar]
  • Nose M, Sugiura M, Kamei T, Iyemori T, Koyama Y. 2015. Dst index. Kyoto: World Data Center for Geomagnetism. https://doi.org/10.17593/14515-74000. [Google Scholar]
  • Ogilvie KW, Chornay DJ, Fritzenreiter RJ, Hunsaker F, Keller J. et al. 1995. SWE, a comprehensive plasma instrument for the wind spacecraft. Space Sci Rev. 71 (1): 55–77. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oliveira DM, Zesta E. 2019. Satellite orbital drag during magnetic storms. Space Weather 17(11): 1510–1533. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oliveira DM, Zesta E, Schuck PW, Sutton EK. 2017. Thermosphere global time response to geomagnetic storms caused by coronal mass ejections. J Geophys Res Space Phys 122(10): 10762–10782. [Google Scholar]
  • Oltrogge D, Ramrath J. 2014. Parametric characterization of SGP4 theory and TLE positional accuracy. in: Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, E87. Available at https://amostech.com/TechnicalPapers/2014/Poster/OLTROGGE.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Paetzold HK, Zschörner H. 1961. An annual and a semiannual variation of the upper air density. Geofisica Pura Applicata 48(1): 85–92. [Google Scholar]
  • Pancheva D, Mukhtarov P, Bojilova R. 2024. Response to geomagnetic storm on 23–24 March 2023 long-lasting longitudinal variations of the global ionospheric TEC. Adv Space Res 73(12): 6006–6028. [Google Scholar]
  • Pardini C, Anselmo L. 2023. The short-term effects of the cosmos 1408 fragmentation on neighboring inhabited space stations and large constellations. Acta Astronaut 210: 465–473. [Google Scholar]
  • Parker WE, Linares R. 2024. Satellite drag analysis during the May 2024 gannon geomagnetic storm. J Spacecr Rockets 61(5): 1412–1416. [Google Scholar]
  • Pesnell WD. 2020. Lessons learned from predictions of solar cycle 24. J Space Weather Space Clim 10: 60. [Google Scholar]
  • Picone JM, Emmert JT, Lean JL. 2005. Thermospheric densities derived from spacecraft orbits: accurate processing of two-line element sets. J Geophys Res Space Phys 110(A3): A03301. [Google Scholar]
  • Picone JM, Hedin AE, Drob DP, Aikin AC. 2002. NRLMSISE-00 empirical model of the atmosphere: statistical comparisons and scientific issues. J Geophys Res Space Phys 107(A12): SIA 15–1–SIA 15–16. [Google Scholar]
  • Poblet FL, Azpilicueta F. 2018. 27-day variation in solar-terrestrial parameters: global characteristics and an origin based approach of the signals. Adv Space Res 61(9): 2275–2289. [Google Scholar]
  • Pulkkinen T. 2007. Space weather: terrestrial perspective. Living Rev Solar Phys 4(1): 1. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Qian L, Burns AG, Emery BA, Foster B, Lu G, Maute A, Richmond AD, Roble RG, Solomon SC, Wang W. 2014. The NCAR TIE-GCM. In: Chapter 7: Modeling the ionosphere – thermosphere system. American Geophysical Union, pp. 73–83. ISBN 978-1-118-70441-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118704417.ch7. [Google Scholar]
  • Qian L, Solomon SC, Kane TJ. 2009. Seasonal variation of thermospheric density and composition. J Geophys Res Space Phys 114(A1): A01312. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Siemes C, Borries C, Bruinsma S, Fernandez-Gomez I, Hładczuk N, den Ijssel J, Kodikara T, Vielberg K, Visser P. 2023. New thermosphere neutral mass density and crosswind datasets from CHAMP, GRACE, and GRACE-FOJ Space Weather Space Clim 13: 16. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Sridharan R, Pensa AF. 1998. U.S. space surveillance network capabilities. Proc SPIE 3434: 88–100. [Google Scholar]
  • Storz MF, Bowman BR, Branson MJI, Casali SJ, Tobiska WK. 2005. High accuracy satellite drag model (HASDM). Adv Space Res 36(12): 2497–2505. [Google Scholar]
  • Sugiura M. 1963. Hourly values of equatorial Dst for the IGY. Ann Int Geophys Year 35: 9–45. [Google Scholar]
  • Sutton EK. 2018. A new method of physics-based data assimilation for the quiet and disturbed thermosphere. Space Weather 16(6): 736–753. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tapping KF. 2013. The 10.7 Cm solar radio flux (F10.7). Space Weather 11(7): 394–406. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Thayer JP, Tobiska WK, Pilinski MD, Sutton EK. 2021. Chapter 5: Remaining issues in upper atmosphere satellite drag. In: Space weather effects and applications. American Geophysical Union, pp. 111–140. ISBN 978-1-119-81557-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119815570.ch5. [Google Scholar]
  • Vallado DA, Finkleman D. 2014. A critical assessment of satellite drag and atmospheric density modeling. Acta Astronaut 95: 141–165. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • van den IJssel J, Doornbos E, Iorfida E, March G, Siemes C, Montenbruck O. 2020. Thermosphere densities derived from swarm GPS observations. Adv Space Res 65(7): 1758–1771. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • WalkerA, Mehta P, Koller J. 2014. Drag coefficient model using the Cercignani–Lampis–Lord gas–surface interaction model. J Spacecr Rockets 51(5): 1544–1563. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Walterscheid RL. 1989. Solar cycle effects on the upper atmosphere – implications for satellite drag. J Spacecr Rockets 26(6): 439–444. [Google Scholar]
  • Wen HY, Kruizinga G, Paik M, Landerer F, Bertiger W, Sakumura C, Bandikova T, Mccullough C. 2019. Gravity recovery and climate experiment follow-on (GRACE-FO) level-1 data product user handbook. Technical Report JPL D-56935 (URS270772), NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. [Google Scholar]
  • Yamazaki Y, Matzka J, Stolle C, Kervalishvili G, Rauberg J, Bronkalla O, Morschhauser A, Bruinsma S, Shprits YY, Jackson DR. 2022. Geomagnetic activity index HPO. Geophys Res Lett 49(10): e2022GL098860. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.