Opened 5 months ago

Last modified 2 months ago

#629 new flight processing

CA18/207, flight day 123/2018, Rothamsted (UK)

Reported by: asm Owned by:
Priority: immediate Milestone: The Glorious Future
Component: Processing: general Keywords:
Cc: dac Other processors:

Description (last modified by dac)

Data location: ~arsf/arsf_data/2018/flight_data/uk/CA18_207-2018_123_Rothamsted

Data arrived via USB hard drive on 14/May/2018.

Scientific objective: Test in Alconbury (UK) for this project. Canadian Wildfire Observations with SLSTR & Aircraft: Directional Effects of Thermally Emitted Radiation & Exploration of Flaming/Smouldering Partitioning and Plume Trace Gas Emission Ratios

Priority: High for Fenix, low for digital camera

PI: Martin Wooster

Sensors:

  • Fenix (requested, flown)
  • OWL (not requested, not flown)
  • PhaseOne (requested, flown, low priority)

Change History (21)

comment:1 Changed 5 months ago by asm

Unpacking

Project unpacked, checks have been run and output saved within the same unpacking log. Problems with Fenix files:
-No time stamps in the nav files
-2 incidents of 68 dropped frames in line 1
-Quite a few problems with the fps:
fps differs from fps_qpf by 3.413 in file: FENIX123-18-1.hdr
fps differs from fps_qpf by 1.905 in file: FENIX123-18-3.hdr
fps differs from fps_qpf by 0.508 in file: FENIX123-18-4.hdr
fps differs from fps_qpf by 1.564 in file:FENIX123-18-5.hdr
fps differs from fps_qpf by 1.555 in file: FENIX123-18-7.hdr

comment:2 Changed 5 months ago by dac

  • Cc dac added

comment:3 Changed 5 months ago by asm

  • Summary changed from CA18/207, flight day 207/2018, Alconbury (UK) to CA18/207, flight day 123/2018, Alconbury (UK)

comment:4 Changed 5 months ago by asm

Navigation Processing

In order to check if the fps problem still persist in the Fenix, have started the navigation processing. The basestation included was .18o files that needed to be concatenated with teqc but no .nav files were given. To process the data, downloaded another basestation using IpasTC and used the given .epp to process the original .18o in grafnav as suggested in the wiki. Basestation verification is then:
Lat: 51 54 05.42297
Lon: -0 10 42.59936
EllHeight: 158.680 m
AntHeight: 0.172m

IpasTC complained that the navigation had a gap but looks like it is outside the flight. Needed to interpolate the basestation data to 1s as it was given with 30s interval. Done the navigation processing, the lat and lon sepparation accuracy is better than 1m (better than Fenix) except for a couple of spikes. This should be good for this test dataset. Data copied across.

Navigation and basestation verification finished.

comment:5 Changed 5 months ago by dac

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Summary changed from CA18/207, flight day 123/2018, Alconbury (UK) to CA18/207, flight day 123/2018, Rothamsted (UK)

comment:6 Changed 5 months ago by dac

Digital Camera

Converted raw phase one images to tiffs.

comment:7 Changed 5 months ago by asm

Hyperspectral Fenix

Processing started.

comment:8 Changed 5 months ago by asm

Hyperspectral Fenix

Flightline 1 is noisy recorded ~150m altitude. Flightline 6 has incorrect starting/ending points and times (they are the same). Will change the hdr to address for that and process it.

comment:9 Changed 4 months ago by dac

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:10 Changed 4 months ago by asm

Hyperspectral Processing

It looks there is a very small fps error on some lines that will need much more processing time to correct for as I have not been able to pinpoint yet. However, geometric accuracy is good and should be enough for this project. Found SCTs:

Flightline FENIX
2 17.64
3 3.36
4 3.33
5 3.10
6 4.45
7 3.67

comment:11 Changed 4 months ago by asm

Hyperspectral Processing

Have created delivery with a readme included. Awaiting delivery check.

comment:12 Changed 4 months ago by dac

Hyperspectral

Starting delivery check

comment:13 Changed 4 months ago by dac

Hyperspectral delivery check

  • Should add in introduction of readme as well as in data quality that the flight was primarily to test thermal cameras. Something like "The primary aim of this flight was to test the fitting and operation of non-standard thermal instruments. Therefore, data quality may be lower than for standard science flights"
  • Under data quality issues mention the navigation synchronisation as well as framerate, can refer to data quality report where it is described.
  • Missing our logsheet
  • check_ap_cmd runs through OK.
  • Geolocation accuracy looks good. Checked lines against each other and OS District buildings vector layer
  • Checks against Py6S simulations all look good

Once readme has been updated and our logsheet generated (even though it won't have all the info) ready to deliver.

comment:14 Changed 4 months ago by asm

Hyperspectral delivery

-Added changes to the readme.
-Created the logsheet using Fenix data
-Zipped files (all correct)

comment:15 Changed 4 months ago by dac

Hyperspectral Delivery Check

Updated readme and logsheet look good. Ready to deliver.

comment:16 Changed 4 months ago by asm

Delivery

Delivered on 26/07/2018 via FTP slot 1 and notification sent to PI.

comment:17 Changed 3 months ago by dac

Digital Camera

The time offset used for the other projects didn't work. Using 7283 seconds looks about right so processing with this.

comment:18 Changed 2 months ago by wja

Camera Delivery Check

KML has animation points recorded at Cranfield (away from project area).
Otherwise looks ready to deliver.

comment:19 Changed 2 months ago by dac

Digital Camera

Eventfile contained image at start which should have been removed. Fixed and regenerated KML. Ready to deliver.

comment:20 Changed 2 months ago by dac

Digital Camera

Placed on FTP slot 1. Will send notification with delivery of 129 Owl.

comment:21 Changed 2 months ago by dac

Digital Camera

Sent delivery notification email.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.