You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One of the sp3 files for ESA's Swarm mission (ftp://swarm-diss.eo.esa.int/Level1b/Latest_baselines/GPSxNAV/, Satellite A, file for November 26th 2013) contains the following line:
2013 11 26 0 1 60.00000000
When trying to read this line with load_sp3, the datetime library complains with the following error:
ValueError: second must be in 0..59
The error is of course correct (this one file alone contains this error 64 times), so I see two options here:
Put on my Don-Quijote-hat and try to convince ESA that this is an error and that they should debug their data product processing chain and reprocess the entire seven years of Swarm data; or
check for such errors in sp3dt, and fix them there.
Now, I know what I am going to do. So the real question becomes: would you be interested in pulling such a correction of wrong times into the georinex package, or is your position that whoever is responsible for producing sp3 files should take care of this issue, and it is not the responsibility of georinex to handle other people's mistake?
Cheers
Lasse
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi there,
One of the sp3 files for ESA's Swarm mission (ftp://swarm-diss.eo.esa.int/Level1b/Latest_baselines/GPSxNAV/, Satellite A, file for November 26th 2013) contains the following line:
When trying to read this line with load_sp3, the datetime library complains with the following error:
ValueError: second must be in 0..59
The error is of course correct (this one file alone contains this error 64 times), so I see two options here:
Now, I know what I am going to do. So the real question becomes: would you be interested in pulling such a correction of wrong times into the georinex package, or is your position that whoever is responsible for producing sp3 files should take care of this issue, and it is not the responsibility of georinex to handle other people's mistake?
Cheers
Lasse
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: