Opened 12 years ago
Last modified 7 years ago
#459 new flight processing
BGS11/01, flight day 228a/2012, Carlsberg — at Version 23
Reported by: | knpa | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | alpha 4 high | Milestone: | 2012 data processing completion |
Component: | Processing: general | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Other processors: |
Description (last modified by edfi)
Data location: /users/rsg/arsf/arsf_data/2012/flight_data/greenland_iceland/BGS11_01-2012_228a_Carlsberg
Data arrived from ARSF via SATA disk on 24/09/2012
BGS11/01 Scientific objective: unknown
BGS11/01 Priority: a4h
PI: Tapani Tukiainen
Sensors:
Camera (12/12/2012)
Eagle (12/12/2012)
Hawk (12/12/2012)
LiDAR (12/12/2012)
Change History (23)
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by knpa
- Description modified (diff)
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Ignore above comment - wrong ticket. Starting the navigation processing now.
comment:4 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Navigation processing completed - get a poor result for one and a half flight lines in centre of area where the number of GPS satellites drops to 6 and PDOP is ~5.
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by knpa
- Description modified (diff)
comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Have processed raw camera files to tiff.
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Processed lidar (quick process not final) to get tif for checking timing corrections
comment:8 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
Vertical overlap error inconsistent along flightline, possibly due to the navigation file inaccuracy
comment:9 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
LiDAR delivery created. Please check wording in data quality. Is it clear?
comment:10 Changed 12 years ago by besm
Beginning delivery check.
comment:11 Changed 12 years ago by besm
- Wording of the data quality. Maybe want to mention where the recommended value for distance between GCP and site comes from? Will accuracy of navigation also be affected?
- Logsheet included is the scanned paper version (albeit unusually neatly written). Is there a reason not to include the digital version?
- Screenshots were very large. Added some lower resolution versions.
Otherwise, looks fine.
comment:12 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
Data quality wording edited.
Digital version of logsheet added
comment:13 follow-up: ↓ 17 Changed 12 years ago by besm
Removed old version of log sheet. We tend not to deliver both. (Although maybe we should?) Looks ok otherwise.
comment:14 Changed 12 years ago by anhi
RCD Delivery Created
comment:15 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
Beginning RCD delivery check
comment:16 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
Check complete all looks fine
comment:17 in reply to: ↑ 13 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
Replying to besm:
Removed old version of log sheet. We tend not to deliver both. (Although maybe we should?) Looks ok otherwise.
Might be good to deliver both, as it can sometimes be challenging to read the hand writing. If we did then the PI would be able to look back at the original if they think something is a bit strange.
comment:18 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Hyperspectral delivery created
comment:19 Changed 12 years ago by anhi
Hyperspectral delivery check:
- Dem incorrectly named and if changed Read Me commands need updating
- Mention dropped scans in lines e7 and h7
No other problems found
comment:20 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Above hyperspectral delivery check points fixed.
comment:21 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
Hyperspectral and lidar deliveries have been put onto disk 136
comment:22 Changed 12 years ago by mark1
SCT values
Line | Eagle SCT | Hawk SCT |
1 | 2.30 | -0.06 |
2 | -0.02 | -0.06 |
3 | -0.02 | -0.06 |
4 | -0.06 | -0.06 |
5 | 0.02 | -0.06 |
6 | -0.02 | -0.06 |
7 | -0.05 | -0.02 |
8 | -0.03 | -0.06 |
9 | -0.03 | -0.02 |
comment:23 Changed 12 years ago by edfi
- Description modified (diff)
Navigation processing completed