the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Ion composition of the Earth plasmasphere observed by the PEP JEI and RPWI instruments on the JUICE spacecraft
Abstract. During the first Earth gravity assist maneuver of JUICE on 20th August 2024 the spacecraft passed through the Earth plasmasphere for about 2 hours. Before closest approach at a distance of 2.1 RE the Jovian Electron and Ion spectrometer JEI of the PEP instrument suite was switched on for 40 min in an ion mode test configuration. The high plasma density of about 3000/cm3 (observed by the RPWI plasma wave instrument) led to a negative charging of the spacecraft which allowed a rare observation of the cold and dense plasmaspheric ion populations. Since the ions are only corotating with the Earth at a velocity of about 1 km/s at this distance the observed ion speed is dominated by the spacecraft velocity of about 8 km/s. For this reason ions with different mass appear at different energies in the energy spectrum observed by the JEI sensor. In addition the spacecraft potential leads to specific filtering of ion masses in the observed angular distribution. By calculating the sensor response function for these specific observing conditions it is possible to quantify densities of the different ion species. But this response calculation depends critically on the response of the JEI channel electron multipliers to the ion velocity and mass. Since the sensor was operated with a low post-acceleration further laboratory calibrations may be needed for this specific setup. Still we can already conclude from the observations that ions with mass >4 amu/q contribute at least 30 % to the observed total ion density. A flux peak observed in the energy spectrum at 15 eV can only be explained by the presence of heavy molecular ions with mass ~30 amu/q. Molecular ions have only been rarely detected in the outer Earth plasmasphere. The observations indicate that the JEI sensor can also be used to achieve ion composition measurements in the exospheres of the Jovian moons.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Annales Geophysicae.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(5805 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 08 Jul 2026)
- AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2030', Markus Fränz, 20 May 2026 reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2030', Anonymous Referee #1, 02 Jun 2026
reply
Comments on “Ion Composition of the Earth plasmasphere observed by the PEP JEI and RPWI instruments on the JUICE spacecraft”
The paper presents interesting and new observations of the cold ion population in the plasmasphere. I have a few comments and questions that should be addressed before publication.
General: The motivation for this study is very well laid out, but the results are not put into context enough. Simply comparing with old measurements is not sufficient, I would like to see some discussion on how the new findings from this study influence our general understanding of the plasmasphere and how knowledge of plasmasphere composition can advance our understanding of the wider field.
I also suggest a review of the font sizes in the figures, as some are very small (Fig. 6, 8, 14, 15).
Line by line:
L. 25 is this height or radius?
L. 26 a reference for the temperature and density would be good
l. 50 I think the reader would appreciate a short summary of the contents of that paper. Why is the cold ion population important for the magnetospheric dynamics?
l. 60 wrong parentheses on citation
Fig.1 Some of the text is overlapping in the figure. It is also unclear which direction the moon is moving.
Fig. 4 I cannot read the labels in this figure, they are too small and the contrast especially in the blue is poor.
Fig. 8 The figure should really be inverted to be printer friendly. I also recommend against the use of the rainbow colour scale, it is not colour blind friendly and the hues also do not have a linear brightness. Viridis is usually a good alternative. The same goes for the colorbar in the other figures.
L. 137 - 139 “It is interesting…” Is this statement to confirm that the spacecraft potential measured by RPWI is reasonable?
L. 142 “the asymmetric shape of the spacecraft potential” this may need some more explanation. Why is it asymmetric, how does that influence the detection direction?
l. 158 have you calculated the errors? Are they small compared to the overall counts?
l. 166 so would you characterise your values as a lower limit?
Fig. 11 Could you add error bars to the counts here? It would help to affirm the detection
l. 255 How did you get to 30%? is this from the numbers in equation 3 and the RPWI density?
l. 271-273 So could you explain at least the 15eV peak by a B parallel beam? Because the other peaks seemed less conclusive in the discussion in section 3. If you can attribute the 15eV peak to accelerated ions, then do you have sufficient evidence for the other heavy ions? What velocity would be necessary to achieve that signature with a B parallel beam? I think this one sentence needs more careful discussion.
Conclusion: I find it difficult to understand what your main conclusions are. The overall density is from RPWI and the 30% figure has not been explained sufficiently in the text. The 15eV peak could be due to magnetic field. I think there is sufficient new knowledge here, but a more precise conclusion would improve the paper. You say further laboratory calibration is needed, but why was it not included in this publication?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2030-RC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 229 | 150 | 19 | 398 | 20 | 24 |
- HTML: 229
- PDF: 150
- XML: 19
- Total: 398
- BibTeX: 20
- EndNote: 24
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
We meanwhile noticed a mathematical error in the first equation of the paper. The impact on the results is minor. The revised version will contain an extended analysis of the phase space distribution of a drifting Maxwellian in a planar potential.