Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.mpeg-dvb (
More info?)
Thanks for taking a stab at it, was hoping that someone had
created a specific graphic describing it. It's tough to
describe in words.
One of the details I was looking for, concerns the actual
vertical transmitting element of the transponder in orbit.
Is it aligned perpendicular to a plane passing through the
equator, or is it aligned perpendicular to a plane passing
through a point on the surface of the earth (possibly near
the center of the intended footprint)?
If the transmitting element is perpendicular to a plane passing
through the equator, it appears that (without a graphic), by
pointing the dish (and linear polarization lnbf) down (as
compared to an elevation due south of my location), to a
satellite west of me, that the skew (as viewed from the rear
of the dish), should be counter clockwise. This is exactly
opposite from what I understand is being published.
Zoyburg <rats@attib.com> wrote in message news:<KcnLc.150359$Oq2.99134@attbi_s52>...
> rose wrote:
>
> > Has anyone seen a graphic representation of Ku lnbf skew, as
> > it relates to linear polarization? Would like to better
> > understand how "positive" skew has been determined to be
> > CCW on satellites west of my location.
>
> Here's one:
>
>
http/cobaltqube.org/goods/basketball01.jpg
>
> Imagine you're looking at a picture of the earth, and the
> line that says "cobalt networks" represents the equator;
> the line perpendicular to that represents the north-sole
> pole.
>
> Now, imagine a point some distance above the earth's equator,
> and then picture a plane going through that point, parallel
> to the equator, but hitting the earth some distance north of
> the equator.
>
> The intersection of that plane and the earth is represented
> by the curved line above the "equator". That line also
> represents horizontal planar polarization. In addition,
> the angle between any point on that line and a line parallel
> to the equator is representative of the skew.
>
>
> Now, if you just meant why is "positive" skew one way and
> "negative" another, well, that's just by convention, as far
> as I can tell.
>
> Here's some more info:
>
>
http/www.satsig.net/polangle.htm