Re: [cf-satellite] related to scanning direction

NOTE: The cf-satellite mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.

Ghansham,

Yes, that's a conical scanning in a low inclination orbit. So, the specs I outlined in my previous email [orbit & scanning information] will also apply to this type of satellite.

Dave

On 8/22/12 9:03 AM, ghansham sangar wrote:
Here is the attached snapshot of one of the parameter.


On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM, ghansham sangar <ghanshamsangar@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:ghanshamsangar@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    Hello Sir..
    Hope you are doing fine.

    I understand you point of frame of reference. Even I was also
    confused when
    I saw that dataset for the first time. But later I realized in one
    of the conversation with
    Tom Rink Sir, also, this is what came out (as told in earlier mail
    too):
    The orbit has an inclination of as low as 20 deg (no coverage on
    poles).
    The reason is to improve the temporal resolution over the tropics.
    And the sensor scans across track w.r.t to such low inclination track.
    And that is why the data is packed also in that manner (up down).
    The best thing I can do is post one snapshot generated  from
    toolsUI of one
    of the parameter displayed as image to have a better understanding
    of what exactly
    the data looks like. I know its a pretty tough scanning geometry
    to understand.

    regards
    Ghansham


    On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Tom Whittaker <whittaker@xxxxxxxx
    <mailto:whittaker@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:

        Hello Ghansham...

        I hope you are well.

        I believe the "scan direction" (either "up/down" or
        "left/right") is a
        matter of perspective -- if the frame of reference is on the
        satellite, looking "forward" along the flight path, then I
        would be
        more inclined to say "left/right", as "up/down" would refer to
        some
        vertical scanning -- from my frame of reference on the satellite.

        Regarding CF Conventions.  There are no conventions for
        dealing with
        this.  There have been discussions in the past dealing with "swath
        data", and you might have a Google of that (plus 'netcdf') and see
        what others have been thinking about.

        There is also at least one reference to some data already being
        written to hdf files, which might prove of interest.  The sad
        fact is
        that the satellite community for the longest time did not embrace
        NetCDF, and so we must play "catch-up" with the people who have
        defined conventions for model/gridded data and in-situ data.

        My take is that some common characteristics (like 'band' and
        'central_wavelength' (or _wavenumber) should be defined using
        conventions and "standard_names", but that characteristics of
        particular platforms must, by necessity, be defined for those
        platforms.  I also think that the use of the "standard_names"
        will go
        a long way toward helping application developers in writing file
        readers that can understand some of the basic structures of
        the data,
        while at the same time providing end users an opportunity to write
        specialized interfaces that meet their particular research or
        operational needs.

        Best wishes,

        tom


  • 2012 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the cf-satellite archives: