Opened 2 years ago
Last modified 22 months ago
#697 new flight processing
Owl Test, flight day 185/2022, Alconbury
Reported by: | wja | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | immediate | Milestone: | |
Component: | Processing: general | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Other processors: |
Description
Owl on mount with adjustable roll.
Received 30/06/2022 via FTP.
Change History (11)
comment:1 Changed 2 years ago by wja
comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Navigation Processing
Received RINEX data from BIGF for the following stations:
- ARDL
- ATTL
- NEWR
- PETE
- SKEE
- SNEO
- STEE
- WELL
- WEYB
Along with broadcast ephemeris data.
BIGF will need acknowledging in data delivery.
comment:3 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Navigation Processing
Navigation data processed for IPAS20 IMU (only to be used with Owl).
Quality looks good.
comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Owl Processing
Currently running radiometric calibration on raw data
comment:5 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Owl Processing
Owl radiometric calibration complete.
comment:6 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Owl Processing
Error in APLNAV when processing line 15:
########## ERROR ######### Frame number is less than current sync message frame. This cannot yet be handled, there may be an error with the nav file. Contact developers for information. ########## ERROR #########
Unsure what's causing this, will try the nav sync with --firstonly.
All other lines look good. Processing with all bands.
comment:7 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Owl Processing
All lines processed with all bands.
Line 15 processed with -firstonly, results look good.
comment:8 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Creating Owl Delivery
comment:9 Changed 2 years ago by wja
Delivery needs checking
comment:10 Changed 22 months ago by wja
Delivery Check
(done by anla)
- Minor typos in ReadMe
- Missing geom file for line 2
- Need to add BIGF acknowledgement to ReadMe.
Zipping mapped files.
comment:11 Changed 22 months ago by wja
Data Delivered
Put on FTP slot 5, PI notified.
Unpacking
Checks raised possible issue with line number 9901 (timestamp doesn't make sense?)