Physics of auroral phenomena : proceedings of the 33rd Annual seminar, Apatity, 02 - 05 March, 2010 / [ed.: A.G. Yahnin, A. A. Mochalov]. - Апатиты : Издательство Кольского научного центра РАН, 2011. - 206 с. : ил.

L.N. Makarova at al. Table 1 Difference between real data and simulation results о HmF2 [km] HmF2 difference [a] 1 £ u fc E z e NmF2 difference [a] E w E X в HmE difference [a] a NmE [cm-3] NmE difference [a| September 2009 10.88 -2.66 36409 2.58 9.68 -1.12 9825 -0.05 October 2009 10.66 -3.61 63677 1.64 6.79 -0.60 8992 0.46 November 2009 10.24 -3.08 68151 1.70 3.30 -0.34 5764 0.87 December 2009 13.29 -2.18 22955 -0.65 0.00 0.00 1213 1.39 January 2010 12.14 -2.49 54463 0.29 3.18 -0.23 3679 1.11 February 2010 11.06 -2.35 73005 1.33 4.47 -0.43 8669 0.73 The comparison of simulation data with real sounding parameters o f high-latitude ionosphere shows that there is rather good agreement a significant both in maximal altitude and maximal electron density o f E layer. Figure 1 shows behavior of simulation results (red line) and real sounding data (blue line) of maximal electron density o f E layer (NmE). Green line characterizes magnitude o f magnetic field (Ap index). Model and real curves have practically similar shape during all investigated period. So one can see that ionosphere model IRI-2007 can exactly describe E layer in concrete geophysical conditions. Talking about maximal altitude of F2 layer (HmF2) (Figure 2) we can mention that simulation results are overrated real values. Also there are no fluctuations in simulation results. 126