European Space Weather Week 11 Confronting the AP9/AE9 Radiation Belt Models with Spacecraft Data and Other Models 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium D.Heynderickx DH Consultancy, Leuven, Belgium P.R. Truscott Kallisto Consultancy, Farnborough, UK ESA Contract No. 4000108483/13/NL/AK ESA Technical Officers H. Evans, E.J. Daly European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 Context Concern in European space industry about higher fluxes (and thus doses) predicted by AP9/AE9 Analysis of differences with other models Implementation in SPENVIS User education Recommendations for ECSS space environment standard Feedback to the IRENE team of issues encountered during the analysis 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 Comparison methods Intercomparison of models Run different models on a spacecraft trajectory set of points, for representative orbits (LEO, MEO, GTO, GEO) Comparison of trajectory fluences Comparison of fluences used in radiation effects models (TID, NIEL, solar cell degradation) Comparisons of model fluxes to spacecraft data Run models on the trajectory data in the various datasets, for the energy bins of the instruments. Compare time series and fluence spectra. Try to account for anisotropy effects in LEO. 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

Test scenarios: generic trajectories Geostationary at longitudes 75°, 180° and 285° Comparison with AP/AE-8, IGE GTO: inc 5°, perigee 300 km, apogee 36,000 km Comparison with AP/AE-8, CRRESELE, CRRESPRO MEO (Galileo GNSS): circular, altitude 23,222 km, inc 56° MEO (GPS): altitude 20,200 km Comparison with AP/AE-8, CRRESPRO, CRRESELE, MEO-V1/2 Sun-synchronous: altitude 800 km (inc 98.6°) Comparison with AP/AE-8 Large Observatory for X-ray Timing (LOFT): circular, altitude 600 km 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 SSO Proton spectra 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 SSO Electron spectra 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

SSO SHIELDOSE-2: protons 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

SSO SHIELDOSE-2: e-, Bremsstrahlung 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 GEO electron flux 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

MEO (GPS) electron flux 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

Test scenarios: datasets Procedure: Convert spacecraft ephemeris to SPENVIS and IRENE trajectory file format (identical for GDZ except for shift in MJD) Run models using the instrument energy channels Compare orbit evolution plus trajectory fluence spectra Datasets: CRRES/MEA: 110 keV – 1.6 MeV electrons AZUR/EI-88: 1.5–104 MeV protons Giove-B/SREM: calibrated electron channels Integral/SREM: calibrated electron channels SAMPEX/PET: 19–500 MeV protons 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 AZUR data selection 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 AZUR data comparison 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

AZUR mission comparison 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

CRRES/MEA data selection 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

CRRES/MEA: quiet conditions 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

CRRES/MEA: active conditions 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

CRRES/MEA: active spectra 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

Giove-B/SREM: active spectra 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 Conclusions (1) More analysis is needed to compare the models to longer time averages of the datasets. GEO environment AE-8 and AE-9 Mean are comparable, AE-9 extends the energy range (needs evaluation). IGE2006 (ECSS model) is (much) lower. High energy flux predictions need further evaluation in view of updates of ECSS Are longitudinal effects important? LEO AP-9 overestimates the extent of the SAA region. AP-9 overestimates below ~70 MeV and underestimates above. AE-9 is consistently higher than AE-8 except for >1.5 MeV 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 Conclusions (2) MEO MEOV2 mean is lower than AE-9 mean, MEOV2 upper is in good agreement with AE-9 90%. High energy component needs further evaluation. Until then, AE-8/MAX can be used in this region. Pending long term model to data comparisons, the ECSS recommendation (MEOV2) can be maintained. 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11

European Space Weather Week 11 Recommendations A more in-depth analysis is needed to evaluate the models (IRENE and other) with longer time averages of spacecraft data. Construct (omni-)directional flux maps from AZUR/EI-88 and SAMPEX/PET proton data Analyse PROBA-V/EPT data Analysis of the high energy electron spectrum Ingest AZUR/EI-88, SAMPEX/PET and RBSP/REPT/MAGEIS data into the IRENE models. Provide more detailed information on the construction of the IRENE models. Review the usage of the confidence level and Monte Carlo versions of the models. 20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium European Space Weather Week 11