RE: Can you recommend a netCDF convention for satellite time series data?

Ken,

My bad here.  I didn't thoroughly read your email.  I jump to GOES.  Our
format is for the imager/sounder data not the other instruments.

My apologies,
David Wilensky 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Tanaka [mailto:Ken.Tanaka@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:35 PM
To: David Wilensky
Cc: netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Can you recommend a netCDF convention for satellite time
series data?

Hi David,

Yes, I would be interested in seeing the ncdump -h of your format. If it
is very large, you can send it to just me rather than the email list. Is
your data type a geomagnetic time series?

Thanks,
Ken

David Wilensky wrote:
> We use a derivative of netCDF but the format will apply to netCDF as 
> well.  Would you like me to send you the equivalent of an ncdump -h of

> our format?
>
> Regards,
> David Wilensky
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Caron
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 9:53 AM
> To: Ken Tanaka
> Cc: netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Can you recommend a netCDF convention for satellite time 
> series data?
>
> Hi Ken:
>
> I dont know anything about this kind of data, but
>
>   http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/docs/BestPractices.html
>
> is worth reading.
>
> When you have a format, I'd be happy to comment on it.
>
> Ken Tanaka wrote:
>   
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We are planning to archive geomagnetic time series data from 
>> geostationary satellites. The data are measured on GOES geostationary

>> satellites, and consist mainly of 4 floating point values, 3 
>> component
>>     
>
>   
>> vectors and 1 total magnetic intensity. The data are available at two

>> frequency formats, half second (512 ms) and 1 minute. We will be 
>> converting a simple binary format into the netCDF standard for
>>     
> archive.
>   
>> Does anyone here recommend a netCDF convention for this type of data?

>> If there is not a geomagnetic convention for netCDF, what would be 
>> the
>>     
> closest?
>   
>> For navigation, the measurements are in-situ, but not located near 
>> the
>>     
>
>   
>> surface of the Earth. The component intensities are measuring 
>> magnetic
>>     
>
>   
>> field at the satellite, but they are defined in terms of North, East,

>> and Earth-ward. The satellites are geostationary, but there can be 
>> very slight orbital inclination variations of less than .5 degrees, 
>> and ground control can choose to alter the longitude as well 
>> (normally
>>     
>
>   
>> done only for replacing old satellites with new ones). As far as 
>> visualization tools go, is there any advantage to including the 
>> latitude, longitude and geostationary altitude of 35,786 km? That is,

>> we could put it on a map, but it's debatable on whether it should be 
>> presented that way.
>>
>> -Ken
>>
>>     
>
> =====================================================================
> =
> ======
> To unsubscribe netcdfgroup, visit:
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing-list-delete-form.html
> =====================================================================
> =
> ======
>
>
>   



==============================================================================
To unsubscribe netcdfgroup, visit:
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing-list-delete-form.html
==============================================================================