NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.

To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.

Re: [ldm-users] GRB specific information.

  • To: Pete Pokrandt <poker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ldm-users] GRB specific information.
  • From: Stonie Cooper <cooper@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 14:26:31 -0600
Pete - fortunately, I will have Tom to help me, but current understanding
is that it will be G19, as we just make a change to the config file for our
ingestor.  But . . . you have reminded me to reach out to SSEC and see how
they will configure the naming for the inserts.  I want us all to be the
same.
-
Stonie Cooper, PhD
Software Engineer III
NSF Unidata
cooper@xxxxxxxx


On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 2:24 PM Pete Pokrandt <poker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Stonie,
>
> For the GRB satellite data feed - currently GOES East/16 products come
> through looking something like
>
>
> /data/cspp-geo/GRB-R/OR_ABI-L1b-RadM1-M6C11_G16_s20250642015250_e20250642015307_c20250642015351.nc
>
> /data/cspp-geo/GRB-R/OR_SEIS-L1b-MPSL_G16_s20250642013300_e20250642013590_c20250642014002.nc
>
> Will this change other than changing G16 to G19 and maybe GRB-R to GRB-U
> (I think that's what G19 was..)
>
> I know at one point there was talk of changing 'GRB-R' to 'EAST' - which
> was done for the GOES-West GRB already, like
>
>
> /data/cspp-geo/WEST/OR_ABI-L1b-RadM1-M6C03_G18_s20250642015252_e20250642015309_c20250642015337.nc
>
> Thanks for the heads-up!
> Pete
>
> Pete Pokrandt - System Engineer IV
> UW-Madison Dept of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
> 608-262-3086  - poker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> ------------------------------
> *From:* ldm-users <ldm-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
> Stonie Cooper <cooper@xxxxxxxx>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 5, 2025 1:39 PM
> *To:* LDM <ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; NOAAPORT <
> noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject:* [ldm-users] GRB specific information.
>
> If you don't operate or care about GRB ground station operations, please
> just hit delete.  For those that operate a GRB ground station, here is some
> important information from Toby Hutchings with NESDIS on the upcoming
> roll-out of GOES 19 into operations:
>
> Greetings User Community,
>
> Broadcasting answers to frequently asked questions to the community.
> Below you will find the latest topic of discussion.
>
> *Is there an expectation that some GRB users may need to re-point their
> antennas in connection with the G16 "nudge", and then re-point again for
> the transition to G19 GRB? If so they might like to know the specific date
> of the nudge.*
>
> *"Short answer:  Assuming GRB users are operating an antenna 7m or
> smaller, they should not have to re-point their antennas during the G16 to
> G19 transition.*
>
> *Longer answer:  GOES 16 is being nudged from 75.2 deg W to 75.5 deg W.*
>
> *Using our HR5 antenna here at WCDAS as a reference, the difference in
> ground antenna pointing angles between these two orbit locations is as
> follows:*
>
> *HR5 - GOES 16 (75.2 deg) = 179.50 deg AZ and 44.95 deg EL*
> *HR5 - GOES 16 (75.5 deg) = 180.06 deg AZ and 44.85 deg EL*
>
> *The difference in ground antenna pointing angles is 0.47 deg AZ and 0.1
> deg EL*
>
> *Assuming a GRB user is operating a 7 meter antenna, the half-beam width
> calculations of that antenna at 1.686 GHz is as follows:*
> *0.25 deg = 0.25 dB*
> *0.35 deg = 0.5 dB*
> *0.5 deg = 1 dB*
> *0.86 deg = 3 dB*
>
> *Since the expected pointing angle offsets are 0.47 deg AZ and 0.1 deg
> EL, the expected downlink degradation should be between 0.5 and 1 dB.  This
> expected degradation should not cause an issue with users assuming that
> their antennas are peaked on G16 at its current location.  If they are not
> peaked currently, this move and resulting degradation could cause issues.*
>
> *Additionally, any users with antennas larger than 7m will have narrower
> beam widths and thus experience a greater signal drop from this move.  For
> example, if our 16.4m HR antennas were not autotracking, we would
> experience a 6dB drop in signal from this move if we did not re-peak."*
>
> Special thanks to Matt Sullivan from our WCDAS Team for providing a
> detailed response!
>
> -
> Stonie Cooper, PhD
> Software Engineer III
> NSF Unidata
> cooper@xxxxxxxx
>
  • 2025 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the ldm-users archives: