Induced polarization effects in fixed-wing airborne EM: the TEMPESTTM system—Part A, connecting numerical modelling with field evidence at continental scale

SUMMARY Induced polarization (IP) effects in airborne electromagnetic (AEM) surveys have commonly been investigated in helicopter-borne systems, leaving both a bibliographic and application gap for fixed-wing configurations. This gap partly reflects the large relative number of helicopter compared to fixed wing AEM systems, but also the geometric complexity of fixed wing platforms. In these platforms, nine geometric parameters come into play: the pitch, roll and yaw of both transmitter and receiver, plus the three-axis offsets between the coils. Shifts in these factors can distort the measured data in ways that are not uniquely attributable, making it hard to pinpoint whether negative recordings truly arise from IP or from geometry-related effects. The non-fixed geometry also complicates removal of the primary field, often requiring iterative processing steps that may suppress or alter spectral content linked to IP. With advances in airborne IP understanding from helicopter-borne systems, revisiting fixed-wing platforms is both timely and necessary. Part A of this two-part study addresses this issue using the TEMPEST™ fixed-wing system connecting numerical modelling with field evidence. A suite of synthetic two-layer models with variable resistivity and chargeability parameters was developed to evaluate the system’s sensitivity to polarizable structures. The experiments demonstrate that IP effects, including negative secondary field responses, can be reliably detected in fixed-wing AEM data, both in X and Z magnetic field components. The capacity of these systems to detect IP phenomena is, however, strongly dependent on the electrical conductance of the environment. For instance, both fixed-wing and helicopter-borne systems, elevated near-surface conductance enhances the amplitude of purely electromagnetic induction currents, which in turn can dominate the recorded response and obscure the comparatively weaker polarization currents. More in general, IP detectability depends on the strength of the EM response generated by induction currents flowing elsewhere, which can dominate the small reverse current flow from a polarizable target. This highlights the critical role of near-surface conductivity in controlling the expression of IP responses and underscores the need to carefully account for these factors when interpreting survey data. The synthetic results are then connected with field-scale observations from a subset of the AusAEM data set, over 470 000 line-km of TEMPESTTM data, where negative responses align with areas of low shallow conductance, confirming the simulation results. These finding open the way to the Part B of this study, where TEMPESTTM data are inverted taking into account IP and compared with helicopter-borne results and geological information.