Opened 6 years ago
Closed 6 years ago
#629 closed flight processing (fixed)
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 (25)
comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by asm
comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by dac
- Cc dac added
comment:3 Changed 6 years 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 6 years 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 6 years 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 6 years ago by dac
Digital Camera
Converted raw phase one images to tiffs.
comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by asm
Hyperspectral Fenix
Processing started.
comment:8 Changed 6 years 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 6 years ago by dac
- Description modified (diff)
comment:10 Changed 6 years 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 6 years ago by asm
Hyperspectral Processing
Have created delivery with a readme included. Awaiting delivery check.
comment:12 Changed 6 years ago by dac
Hyperspectral
Starting delivery check
comment:13 Changed 6 years 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 6 years ago by asm
Hyperspectral delivery
-Added changes to the readme.
-Created the logsheet using Fenix data
-Zipped files (all correct)
comment:15 Changed 6 years ago by dac
Hyperspectral Delivery Check
Updated readme and logsheet look good. Ready to deliver.
comment:16 Changed 6 years ago by asm
Delivery
Delivered on 26/07/2018 via FTP slot 1 and notification sent to PI.
comment:17 Changed 6 years 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 6 years 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 6 years 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 6 years ago by dac
Digital Camera
Placed on FTP slot 1. Will send notification with delivery of 129 Owl.
comment:21 Changed 6 years ago by dac
Digital Camera
Sent delivery notification email.
comment:22 Changed 6 years ago by wja
Archiving
Starting to archive at CEDA.
comment:23 Changed 6 years ago by wja
Archiving
rsync to NEODC in progress.
comment:24 Changed 6 years ago by wja
Archiving
rsync to CEDA complete (20/11/2018).
Awaiting confirmation from CEDA.
comment:25 Changed 6 years ago by wja
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Archived
Received confirmation of upload to CEDA. archived_flight.txt has been updated. Closing ticket.
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