Articles | Volume 40, issue 5
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed underthe Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Temporal and altitudinal variability of the spread F observed by the VHF radar over Christmas Island
- Final revised paper (published on 05 Sep 2022)
- Preprint (discussion started on 03 Jan 2022)
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor |
: Report abuse
RC1: 'Comment on angeo-2021-70', Anonymous Referee #1, 18 Feb 2022
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Ricardo Cueva, 11 Apr 2022
RC2: 'Comment on angeo-2021-70', Anonymous Referee #2, 21 Feb 2022
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Ricardo Cueva, 11 Apr 2022
Peer review completion
AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload
ED: Publish subject to revisions (further review by editor and referees) (19 Apr 2022) by Dalia Buresova
AR by Ricardo Cueva on behalf of the Authors (21 Apr 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (25 Apr 2022) by Dalia Buresova
RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (06 Jun 2022)
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (10 Jun 2022)
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (22 Jun 2022) by Dalia Buresova
AR by Ricardo Cueva on behalf of the Authors (12 Jul 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript
ED: Publish as is (18 Jul 2022) by Dalia Buresova
AR by Ricardo Cueva on behalf of the Authors (05 Aug 2022) Author's response Manuscript
Revision of "Time and altitude Spread F echoes distribution over
Christmas Island VHF radar" by Cueva et al.
This manuscript presents a short report on the altitudinal and
temporal distribution of Spread F echoes in the equatorial region. The
authors used VHF radar data from Christmas Island and investigated the
solar cycle dependence of the time of occurrence and concentration
height of equatorial Spread F (plumes). This topic is within the scope
of the Annales Geophysicae and the results sound interesting. However,
I would suggest major revisions before the final publication. Please
see the following some of my concerns. It that can help the authors in
the conduction of the revision process:
1. The title is confusing, I guess that "Temporal and altitudinal
variability of the Spread F observed by a VHF radar over Christmas
Island" sounds better for the purpose of the manuscript.
2. Several sentences of the manuscript are not written in the usual
English language, producing some misunderstanding. So, I suggest a
deep revision of the concepts. A strong example is that: the work
investigates Spread F from VHF radar echoes. Sometimes, the authors
say that they are investigating "Spread F echoes" that is correct, but
sometimes, they refer simply as echoes and it can make confusion in
the reader. I suggest using the same term in all sentences or define
all the terms that could have the same meaning.
3. The definition of season presented in the lines 99-100 is not
correct. It can produce different interpretations for the results. For
instance, the Summer usually starts on 21 June and ends on 22
September. In my opinion, if the authors would like to emphasize the
seasonal effects on the Spread F, they should use the correct
definition for the season. Additionally, it can be interesting for the
discussion because they will be able to make comparisons with other
observations (previous works) that use the correct definition of the
seasons. Only after these corrections, we can examine the real effect
of the season on the Plumes over Christmas Island. I have other
observations to make on this topic that are presented in the
manuscript, but I prefer to see whether the correct definition of the
season will not address those points.
4. The authors are suggesting that the occurrence of Spread F are
inversely proportional to the solar cycles. They must explore this
result more and try to explain how it can be explained physically.
5. Is Figure 4 really necessary in the Conclusion section? Why do not
the author include it in the result and Result and Discussion section
to explore better the results?
6. Line 59: "large data" => "long term data".
7. What is "SRI" in line 71?
8. Line 74: Please, explain what is the reason to use the North beam
of the radar only.
9. Lines 85-89: I guess it can be removed to another section. It is
not necessary in the Data analysis description
10. Lines 91-94: The authors must remind that the disburbed dynamo is
another phenomenon that can produce unexpected behaviour in the
dynamics of the F region at low latitudes in addition to the prompt
penetration electric field..
11. Lines 112-116: This paragraph could be shifted to a place after
the presentation of the results. It could help the author in the
12. Line 131: "... provided by Digisondes." I could not see those
profiles in the chart of Figure 3 and 4.
13. Lines 174-177: I do not agree with the author that it is clear in Figure 4.
14. Lines 179-181: I guess these conclusions are not totally supported
by the results. However, after the revision of the seasons, the
authors can do a check.