ibul 2004 International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B5. Istanbul 2004 
  
  
  
  
  
we dX dY  dXY dZ 7. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK 
Statistic Remarks 
: un] ey (m im) = In this paper, the test results of a number of test flights flown by 
RMS 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.15 No GC Ps : the DSS are presented. The results show consistent performance 
Max 011 0.14 0.15 -0.36 16 Checkpoints of the DSS between different test flights. After performing the 
RMS 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.13 1 GCP Used airborne calibration and quality control, the accuracy of the 
ev: Mes 010 -014 014 0.30 15 Checkpoints checkpoint residuals was consistently about 4 to % the GSD in 
=——-—-—-—-— the horizontal components while about twice as much in the 
T | RMS 0.06 0.05 0.07 09.17 4 GCPs elevation. Evaluating the orthophoto mosaic produced using the 
  
Max -0.09 . -0.09 0.10 -0.38 12 Checkpoints DSS data showed that the orthomosaic checkpoint residuals are 
accurate to 1.5 times the GSD in both X and Y components. 
  
Table 3: Statistics of Check Point Residuals Using the 
an04 | Integrated Sensor Orientation Concept - PASCO Toyonaka 
0.05m GSD Test Flight (after Tachibana et al, 2004) 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
GSD 
lar04 | A number of tests have been done to evaluate the performance 
igher | of the DSS using the ISO concept. The results of using the ISO 
n the in different configurations are listed in Table 3, where the 
ch is | statistics of the checkpoint residuals are shown for three 
of the | different cases: using no GCPs, using one GCP, and using 4 
IS of | GCPs, respectively. Note that the results are consistent among 
mm the three mentioned configurations. Also, note that using no 
ht in | GCPs still means that the ISO concept has been used. 
Is for | Tachibana et al (2004) concluded that the DSS performance 
> two | when flown a 0.05 m GSD and using the ISO concept results in 
ure o | an accuracy that meets the Japanese mapping accuracy 
f the | standards for 1:500 scale mapping. 
es of 
6. AUTOMATED ORTHOMOSAIC PRODUCTION 
ING | USING THE DSS DATA 
To evaluate the map production capabilities of the DSS data, 
scale | one of the data sets of the Southern Ontario flights has been 
SCO | used to produce a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and an 
. For | orthophoto mosaic. The data has been airborne calibrated and 
inted quality controlled using the same procedure discussed earlier. 
| Was Then the DSS images together with the exterior orientation 
38D. | parameters were used in ERDAS to automatically generate a 
inant | DEM with no manual interaction or editing. The resulting DEM 
rned. has been used together with the georeferenced images to 
the produce an orthophoto mosaic, shown in Figure 11. 
an 
come All the data flow was done automatically on ERDAS and 
The | without using ground control. The location of checkpoints were 
il in | measured on the resulting orthophoto mosaic and compared to 
the land-surveyed ones. The statistics of the checkpoint 
| residuals are listed in Table 4. Note that the final absolute 
| orthophoto mosaic accuracy is about 1.5 of the GSD. For a 
| detailed discussion, see Ip et al (2004). 
| Figure 11: Automated Orthophoto Mosaic produced using the 
| Ajax03 DSS Test Flight 
| Overall Area 
Type dX dY $. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
(m) GSD (m) GSD 
| Min -0.09 -0.5 -0.28 -1.4 Z/| Imaging Corporation provided the ISAT software which has 
| Max 0.67 34 0.59 3.0 been used in the automated tie point generation and EO analysis 
Mean 0.02 0.1 0.06 0.3 used in this research. Leica Geosystems provided the ERDAS 
RMS 0.29 Ls 030 15 Imagine software which has been used for the DEM generation 
Y check and orthophoto production used to process the DEM and 
Points 40 Orthomosaic of the Ajax flight. : Aircraft and Crew were 
ka provided by The Airborne Sensing Corporation, Toronto, 
Table 4: Orthomosaic Checkpoint Residuals Canada. BAE Systems provided Socet Set for internal research 
and analysis. NOAA collected the ground control points in