HS2-AF14H788, flight day 236/2014, Blom Toton

[knpa]

Data location: /users/rsg/arsf/arsf_data/2014/flight_data/blom/HS2-AF14H788/

Data arrived from Blom via disk Friday 5th September

Scientific objective:

Priority: Immediate

PI: Blom [Travis Mayne, Hamish Grierson]

Sensors:

Fenix (Requested)

[knpa]

There is a wide range of SCT values located between -13 and -15.

[knpa]

The first line is not covered by the navigation files.

[knpa]

SCTs

There were virtually no wobbles in the flightlines, so these values don't have a high a confidence as usual.

1: -14.07
2: -15.23
3: -13.98
4: -13.07
5: -14.52
6: -14.0
7: -13.67
8: -15.27
9: -13.40
10: -14.29
11: -13.53
12: -13.82
13: -13.61
14: -13.52
15: -13.48

[dac]

Starting delivery check.

[dac]

Delivery check complete. Apart from only 3 bands present in mapped files nothing major. Most issues related to standard ARSF text being used in readme/metadata.

Readme

• States ARSF project - is this correct? There are some other ARSF specific things (Carl as contact, copyright etc.,)
• In paragraph on 'Level 3' data phrases like 'will have had' imply some uncertainty - suggest 'have had'.
• Paragraph on sensor calibration - suggest removing / rephrasing.
• In DEM section 'Data Analysis Node' used, whereas DAN used earlier (suggest switching to define earlier).
• In DEM section 'Will have been' used instead of just 'have been'.
• Space in '( 30m)' change to '(30m)'

DEM

• There are 2 DEMs - suggest just keeping the Blom DEM used for processing (patched_blom_wgs84.dem). Checked and both look the same. Readme should be updated accordingly.

Metadata:

• Originator in metadata is ARSF Gloucester - Change to Blom(?)
• Online resource is ​http://www.eufar.net - not sure what this should be.
• Calibration lab for is ARSF - Change to Specim?
• Navigation unit was Oxford Technical Solution (OXTS) RT3050 (according to email).
• Change captured by ARSF ops to captured by Specim(?)

Project Information

• Also have ARSF details for flight details

• Logsheet missing (as expected)

• Data quality report missing (as expected for non-ARSF flight)

Level 1b

• Band 149 - no data shown in zoom in fastQC - overview OK. Also OK in ENVI.
• Bands 237 - 262 noise

Mapped

• Line 11 looks about 10 m too far south, likely SCT problem. The rest of the lines match well.
• Mapped files only contain 3 bands.

[dap]

Fixing issues found in delivery check

[dap]

New SCT value for line 11 is -13.85

[dap]

Replying to knpa:

Note change in SCT value for line 11, as shown below:

SCTs

There were virtually no wobbles in the flightlines, so these values don't have a high a confidence as usual.

1: -14.07
2: -15.23
3: -13.98
4: -13.07
5: -14.52
6: -14.0
7: -13.67
8: -15.27
9: -13.40
10: -14.29
11: -13.85
12: -13.82
13: -13.61
14: -13.52
15: -13.48

[dap]

Fixed most issues with the delivery. Note that some things will need removing/changing after being checked and before being delivered. These are emboldened below.

Readme

• Replaced almost every instance of ARSF with PML
• Removed whole section on Pixels of Unreliable Quality
• Fixed typo in dac's surname
• Removed picture of aircraft
• Removed part about DEMs being available from NEODC for academic use.
• Space in "( 30m)" was due to a tilde not being escaped - have fixed this with \textasciitilde LaTeX command.
• Replaced ARSF banner with PML logo, fit to text block width.
• Haven't changed read me DEM text - READ ME needs to be changed before delivery is sent. This has been made obvious.
• Have removed non-blom dem
• Added comment in data quality remarks about severe underflows between specified bands in previous comment.

Metadata

• Replaced almost every instance of ARSF with PML in project information and line information xml.
• Changed the project_information xml file so ARSF ops are not mentioned and ARSF DAN are only mentioned were appropriate. The original file is in the project_information directory as HS2-AF14H788-2014_236-project_original.xml for the purpose of quality checking. This will need to be removed if everything looks ok with the new xml file.
• As above with line_information files. Original files are kept in line_information/original for the purpose of delivery checking. These will need to be removed before data is sent.

[dac]

Delivery re-checked. The issues identified have been addressed.

The following additional changes have been made:

• Commented out 'doc' in Delivery contents - directory also needs to be removed if nothing will be added.
• Added section on DEM to Readme - specific to Blom
• Removed eufar.net link from project_information metadata.
• Fixed XML for flightline information (missing end tag).
• Changed disclaimer on XML to apply to PML (rather than NERC) and replaced remaining instances of ARSF in first file, dap to apply to remaining files.
• Removed *.aux.xml files from mapped data (created by TuiView)
• Created new screenshot mosaic (with updated SCT data) and added to Readme.

To do before delivering data:

• Apply changes to all XML metadata files.
• Remove original XML files.
• Remove doc directory if unused.

[dap]

Fixed more issues with line_information files in delivery. Changes made as follows:

• Changed mentions of NERC to PML
• Added PI to empty <gco:CharacterString> tag
• Changed calibration file laboratories to "Unknown"
• Changed .cal file name to Blom calibration file used
• Changed .wls calibration file name to "Unknown"
• Changed calibration file dates to "Unknown"
• Changed base to "Unknown"
• Changed sensor specifics from those of NERC's sensor to those of Blom's sensor
• Changed platform to "Unknown"
• Changed DEM source to "Unknown"
• Removed data quality report references
• Changed NERC/ARSF mentions in disclaimer to PML

[dap]

• Moved original xml files to the relevant processing directories.
• Did not remove doc directory, as it contains xsl and css files and not sure whether these are needed.