Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Proposal for new entries in Common Code Tables C5 and C8 #11

Closed
erget opened this issue Apr 21, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Proposal for new entries in Common Code Tables C5 and C8 #11

erget opened this issue Apr 21, 2020 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@erget
Copy link
Member

erget commented Apr 21, 2020

Summary and purpose

This document proposes new entries to Common Code Tables C5 and C8 in order to represent satellites and instruments operated by ROSHYDROMET.

Action proposed

The meeting is requested to approve the contents for inclusion within the next update to the WMO Manual on Codes.

Discussions

A number of key meteorological satellite launches are foreseen in the coming months. In order to allow the unambiguous representation of data from these missions, additional entries are required in Common Code Tables C5 and C8.

During December 2019 and January 2020, the proposed entries have been shared with the CGMS Task Force on Satellite Data and Codes and found to be acceptable.

Detailed proposal

Add the following elements to Common Code Table C5 Satellite identifier:

Code figure for I6I6I6 Code figure for BUFR (Code table 0 01 007) Code figure for GRIB Edition 2
324 324 324 Meteor-M N2
325 325 325 Meteor-M N2 2

Add the following elements to Common Code Table C8 Satellite instruments:

Code Agency Type Instrument short name Instrument long name
861 ROSCOSMOS Atmospheric temperature and humidity sounder MTVZA-GY Module for temperature and humidity sounding in the atmosphere
862 ROSCOSMOS Spectrometer IKFS-2 Infrared Fourier spectrometer

Note that the proposed code table entry 816 is based upon the existing entry 940, used for MTVZA-OK.

@jbathegit
Copy link
Contributor

I have no issues with the proposal itself, but for organizational purposes I'm wondering if it should be categorized under wmo-im/CCT, rather than under wmo-im/BUFR4? Maybe something for Enrico to clarify.

@SimonElliottEUM
Copy link
Contributor

I agree

@erget
Copy link
Member Author

erget commented Apr 28, 2020

@jbathegit you're right, I should have submitted that in wmo-im/CCT; I've now duplicated the issue in wmo-im/CCT#13 and am closing this as a duplicate.

@erget erget closed this as completed Apr 28, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants