Hi all,
The angles are viewing angles from the perspective of the satellite. It’s the
line connecting the satellite’s view (of the Earth) and the instrument. So as
the satellite scans along its scan track, for example, the X-axis viewing angle
changes. Knowing the satellite’s position and that its X axis is positive
easting and Y axis is positive northing, you can compute the intersection of
the viewing angle with the Earth’s surface.
In the specific case of geostationary satellites, these geometries are fairly
consistent over time and indeed data is often corrected so that the views are
resampled onto a fixed grid before dissemination to users. This means that what
you’re actually dealing with is the theoretical viewing angle of the satellite
at its ideal position.
The swath proposal deals with the more general case of having views across and
along tracks which are aligned with a satellite’s flight path as it orbits
about the Earth.
Best regards,
Daniel
From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: 20 April 2018 10:06
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Fix Geostationary projection, including proposal for
two new standard names
Dear All,
I agree with Jim that a little more basic information is needed about what the
angles are. I may be misinterpreting the discussion, but I had imagined that
the angles as components of a spherical coordinate system centred on the
satellite, with the nadir at (0,0) ... is that correct?
If this is true, we could have a fairly simple definition in terms of what the
angles mean relative to the satellite. What determines the orientation of the
coordinates? Is it assumed that the satellite has a well defined axis acting as
the coordinate pole?
regards,
Martin
________________________________
From: CF-metadata <[email protected]> on behalf of Jim Biard
<[email protected]>
Sent: 19 April 2018 16:35
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Fix Geostationary projection, including proposal for
two new standard names
Daniel,
My two thoughts were independent. I agree that parametric coordinates are more
abstract, and thus possibly more confusing, than linear coordinates. But, as
Randy pointed out in his reply, the relationship between the angles and
longitude and latitude are quite complex. The abstraction of parametric
functions and parameters avoids the problem of making definitions that are so
specific that they aren't good for anything other than the one geostationary
projection. I also am happy to admit to having made a less-than-perfect first
pass at a definition.
Grace and peace,
Jim
On 4/19/18 10:18 AM, Randy Horne wrote:
Folks:
RE: “ Definition: "x" indicates a vector component along the grid x-axis, when
this is not true longitude, positive with increasing x. Angular projection
coordinates are
onto which the surface of the Earth has been projected according to a map
projection. The relationship between the angular projection coordinates and
latitude and longitude is described by the grid_mapping.”
specifically,
"are angular distances in the x- and y-directions on a plane onto which the
surface of the Earth has been projected”
In the case of both the GOES-R and EUMETSAT, the angular distances are
projected onto an Earth ellipsoid, whose definition is captured in the grid
mapping.
v/r
randy
On Apr 19, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Daniel Lee
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Jim,
I for one find this more confusing than Ethan's definition, but maybe it's
because I'm too far gone in my discipline to see the scope for misunderstanding.
That being said, if we're being that general my feeling says to me that we may
risk converging on a standard which isn't really applicable to any more
specific application. Currently there is a proposal for CF-2 devoted
specifically to swath
data<https://github.com/Unidata/EC-netCDF-CF/blob/master/swath/swath.adoc>, and
this has the potential to cover the need for a specific geostationary
projection as well. Maybe that would also be a good path to take for other
coordinate systems with non-linear relationships between projection coordinates
and coordinates of other CRS - kind of general, but not overly abstract.
Cheers,
Daniel
From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim
Biard
Sent: 19 April 2018 15:32
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Fix Geostationary projection, including proposal for
two new standard names
Hi.
Here's a couple of thoughts.
The definition that Ethan has proposed fails to note that the angles are with
respect to a normal to the projection surface at a point along the normal. I
guess the phrase "angular distance" implies this, but my first read had me
feeling confused about what was being described. On checking, I see that this
is a minimalist variation on the projection_x/y_coordinate definitions. Do
folks think that this is clear enough as is?
I know we tend not to follow this course, but I am wondering if we might not be
better served overall by taking a more generic approach and defining parametric
coordinates u and v (projection_u_coordinate and projection_v_coordinate). The
canonical units would be '1' (unitless). The definition for
parametric_u_coordinate would be something like
"u" indicates an independent variable, or parameter, associated with an axis of
a coordinate grid where this parameter is not a linear distance in a projection
coordinate system, a Cartesian coordinate element, or a geographic latitude or
longitude. The geographic latitude and longitude of each point in the
coordinate grid are functions of the parameters associated with the grid axes.
The relationship between the parametric coordinates and latitude and longitude
is described by the grid_mapping.
The geostationary projection is one use case covered by parametric coordinates,
and there are others. The native coordinates for most all satellite swath data
are parametric - mirror angle and time, for example.
Grace and peace,
Jim
On 4/19/18 5:06 AM, Daniel Lee wrote:
Hi Ethan,
At first blush this looks pretty good. If we can agree on this in a short-ish
time frame, it might be possible for EUMETSAT to publish data exclusively using
these standard names - the planned launch date for MTG I1 is late 2021. This
sounds like it's very far away, but in the space sector our planning horizons
are a lot longer, so there's already a lot of work being done on it right now
and at some point in the near future the specs will freeze.
Best regards,
Daniel
From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ethan
Davis
Sent: 19 April 2018 05:40
To: CF metadata <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [CF-metadata] Fix Geostationary projection, including proposal for two
new standard names
Hi all,
Here's an initial proposal for fixing the geostationary projection as we've
been discussing.
Two new standard names:
Name: projection_x_angular_coordinate
Canonical units: radian
Definition: "x" indicates a vector component along the grid x-axis, when this
is not true longitude, positive with increasing x. Angular projection
coordinates are angular distances in the x- and y-directions on a plane onto
which the surface of the Earth has been projected according to a map
projection. The relationship between the angular projection coordinates and
latitude and longitude is described by the grid_mapping.
Name: projection_y_angular_coordinate
Canonical units: radian
Definition: "y" indicates a vector component along the grid y-axis, when this
is not true latitude, positive with increasing y. Angular projection
coordinates are angular distances in the x- and y-directions on a plane onto
which the surface of the Earth has been projected according to a map
projection. The relationship between the angular projection coordinates and
latitude and longitude is described by the grid_mapping.
Replace the text of the current "Map coordinates:" section with
The x (abscissa) and y (ordinate) projection coordinates are identified by the
`standard_name` attribute values `projection_x_angular_coordinate` and
`projection_y_angular_coordinate` respectively. In the case of this projection,
the projection coordinates are directly related to the scanning angle of the
satellite instrument.
Add a deprecation note below the current "Notes:"
Deprecation Note:
The use of `projection_x_coordinate` and `projection_y_coordinate` for this
projection has been deprecated.
The initial definition of this projection used these standard names to identify
the projection coordinates even though their canonical units (meters) do not
mach those required for this projection (radians).
Perhaps we should include information on when the deprecated feature was in
effect:
The initial definition for this projection was agreed on in May 2012 though it
was not in the CF document until 1.7 was released in Sept 2017. It was
corrected in ??? 2018.
And do we also want to include information about large datasets that use this
deprecated technique:
In that time, several satellite missions were developed and launched that
generate data that use this now deprecated method including GOES-R (operational
in Dec 2017), EUMETSAT ???? ...
That could alert people to the likelihood they (or any software they develop)
might run into data using this deprecated feature.
I'll move this to a Trac ticket (with an accompanying GitHub PR) once we
discuss a bit.
Cheers,
Ethan
Any email message from EUMETSAT is sent in good faith but shall neither be
binding nor construed as constituting a commitment by EUMETSAT, except where
provided for in a written agreement or contract or if explicitly stated in the
email. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of EUMETSAT.
This message and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the
addressee(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorised use, disclosure, dissemination or distribution (in whole or in
part) of its contents is not permitted. If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
<~WRD000.jpg><http://www.cicsnc.org/>Visit us on
Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/cicsnc>
Jim Biard
Research Scholar
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC <http://cicsnc.org/>
North Carolina State University <http://ncsu.edu/>
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information <http://ncdc.noaa.gov/>
formerly NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
o: +1 828 271 4900
Connect with us on Facebook
forclimate<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and ocean and
geophysics<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIoceangeo>information, and follow us
on Twitter at@NOAANCEIclimate<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIclimate>
and@NOAANCEIocngeo<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIocngeo>.
Any email message from EUMETSAT is sent in good faith but shall neither be
binding nor construed as constituting a commitment by EUMETSAT, except where
provided for in a written agreement or contract or if explicitly stated in the
email. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of EUMETSAT.
This message and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the
addressee(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorised use, disclosure, dissemination or distribution (in whole or in
part) of its contents is not permitted. If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_____________________________________
Randy C Horne ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>)
Principal Engineer, Excalibur Laboratories Inc.
voice & fax: (321) 952.5100
cell: (321) 693.1074
url: http://www.excaliburlabs.com
--
[CICS-NC] <http://www.cicsnc.org/> Visit us on
Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/cicsnc> Jim Biard
Research Scholar
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC <http://cicsnc.org/>
North Carolina State University <http://ncsu.edu/>
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information <http://ncdc.noaa.gov/>
formerly NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
o: +1 828 271 4900
Connect with us on Facebook for
climate<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and ocean and
geophysics<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIoceangeo> information, and follow
us on Twitter at @NOAANCEIclimate<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and
@NOAANCEIocngeo<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIocngeo>.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Any email message from EUMETSAT is sent in good faith but shall neither be
binding nor construed as constituting a commitment by EUMETSAT, except where
provided for in a written agreement or contract or if explicitly stated in the
email. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of EUMETSAT.
This message and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the
addressee(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorised use, disclosure, dissemination or distribution (in whole or in
part) of its contents is not permitted. If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
