GB18/56, flight day 184b/2018, Harwell

[dac]

Data location: /users/rsg/arsf/arsf_data/2018/flight_data/uk/GB18_56-2018_184b_Harwell

Data arrived from NERC-ARF hard drive on 13/07/2018

Scientific objective: Investigate well-defined local methane emission sources in the UK to apply and evaluate the hyperspectral processing method currently developed at the University of Leicester.

PI: Hartmut Boesch
BAS Project Code: D056

Issues identified from unpacking checks:

• Owl capture data missing dark frames

Sensors:

• Fenix (requested, flown)
• OWL (requested, flown)
• Phase One (not requested, flown)

[mark1]

Navigation Processing

Complete. Used Oxford (oxfr) basestation RINEX downloaded from OS. Used the daily brdc file downloaded from CDDIS for the .18n file.

Did basestation PPP verification and decided to use the values in the RINEX header as they are the precise coordinates and agreed to a few centimetres with the basestation PPP.

IpasTC processing complete with good results.

NOTE: this also covers the trajectory for flight 184a

[mark1]

Fenix processing

SCTs

line number	SCT
1	1.00
2	2.00
3	1.00

[mark1]

Fenix processing
Delivery created - ready for delivery check.

[wja]

Fenix Delivery Check
Have conducted check Fenix delivery. Here are my comments:

-'Abstract' and 'Purpose' headings contain same text in project informtion XML.
-Text to be edited under 'Data Quality' heading of XML: "A report detailing issues with data quality. This is provided with the data:true".
-proj_tidy.sh does not work as there is no 2018 regrex file. Manually checked that all data is present and no additional files are present.
-dac adds that the ReadMe should mention that some buildings are saturated, notably the Diamond Light Source synchrotron.

[mark1]

• Abstract and purpose are the same because the summary and objective are the same in our database.

• Don't think the "'Data Quality' heading of XML" is a problem - the XML looks fine, it's probably the stylesheet that's missing a space or something.

• proj_tidy is an old script that shouldn't be used anymore.

• Read me has been changed to add that the source of overflowed pixels is mainly rooftops.

[wja]

Fenix Delivery

Fenix data delivered via FTP on 01/08/2018. E-mail notification has been sent to PI.

[wja]

Owl Processing

Initial check:

• 5 flightlines
• Dark frames missing.
• Flightline 5 missing T2 calibration file.

[wja]

Owl Processing

Generating Level1b Products:

• Flightlines 1 & 2 are small (length of 927 & 586 lines, respectively).
• Warning: "Error in proctool_owl_2_6_2 (line 412)" in all logs.
• Flightline 1 is noisy (in all bands) - will investigate.
• Flightline 5 missing T2 calibration file. Will try to process using flightline 4's T2.

[wja]

Owl Processing

• Level 1b flightlines produced.
  
• T2 calibration file for flightline 4 has been symlinked to flightline 5.
  
• Flightlines 1 & 2 will not be processed further.
• Issue producing APL config file - seems like a larger DEM to cover extent of the navigation file is needed.

[wja]

Owl Processing

• APL config generated using larger ASTER DEM.

[wja]

Owl Processing

• Mapped lines processing using original hyperspectral ASTER DEM (not larger one used to produce APL config only).
• SCTs look ~2.00, closer inspection and comparison to mapped Fenix data suggest the following SCT values:
  

Flightline	SCT Value
3	1.96
4	1.96
5	1.96

[wja]

Owl Processing

• Mapped lines have been produced.
• Errors returned when creating delivery. Level1b data seems to have been processed correctly, but capture/ directory and tmp files were not automatically removed.
• Logsheet manually created.

Currently producing ReadMe, which still required APL example commands.

[wja]

Owl Processing
Delivery has been produced, awaiting delivery check.

[dac]

Owl Delivery Check

Starting delivery check.

[dac]

Owl Delivery Check

• In readme "flightline 4 (the closest available). Nevertheless, these data have been calibrated to at-sensor radiance using blackbody calibration data recorded within the sensor manufacturer (Specim)'s guidelines (30 minutes)." I would remove the 'Nevertheless' and change to something like: "flightline 4 (the closest available), which was acquired within the 30 minute guideline provided by the sensor manufacturer."

Apart from this all looks good and ready to deliver. Have started zipping mapped files.

[wja]

Archiving
Starting preparing for archive to CEDA.

[wja]

Archiving
Upload to CEDA started.

[wja]

Archiving
Upload to CEDA complete (23/11/2018)

[wja]

Archived
Received confirmation of upload to CEDA. archived_flight.txt has been updated. Closing ticket.