Full text: Resource and environmental monitoring

storage 
nto the 
system 
e-shelf 
[fective 
romise 
  
urrently 
Trimble 
id high- 
vigation 
sselblad 
re was 
e.g., the 
ometers 
jPS/INS 
| model, 
Besides 
quipped 
running 
form for 
T 
Digital 
sor with 
ng area), 
Fairchild 
ipporting 
camera- 
ible with 
:hable to 
tures an 
necessary 
trolled — 
d 80 mm 
| camera 
"urations. 
| and data 
acquisition system around the BigShot™ camera-back 
equipped Hasselblad camera involved several hardware 
and software subtasks, see (Toth, 1997). 
  
Figure 3. BigShot™ camera-back. 
4. AIMS™ TEST RESULTS 
AIMS™ system performance has been repeatedly 
checked at different phases of the development process. 
Major building blocks were first tested in laboratory 
environment, and then several road tests were 
conducted before the actual test flights started. Table 1 
shows the major AIMS™ test flights. 
  
Table 1. AIMS™ test flights. 
Performance assessment of a navigation system is 
difficult and requires an independent reference system 
with accuracy characteristics at least an order better 
than that of the navigation system being tested. 
Unfortunately, there are no such systems available in 
the AIMS™ target accuracy range. Photogrammetric 
techniques can provide independently determined 
position and attitude data at image exposure times. 
Besides the AIMS™ camera, traditional large-format 
area camera was in test flight series in order to eliminate 
the camera calibration uncertainty of the AIMS™ 
camera. Table 2 shows typical results from test flight 7. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Photo ID eg Height difference [m] 
1011 -0.09 0.22 
1012 20.03 20.06 
1213 0.28 20.05 
1014 0.11 0.18 
4041 0.09 -0.04 
4042 20.31 0.10 
4043 0.12 0.22 
2021 0.06 0.11 
2022 0.05 0.10 
2023 0.15 20.20 
2024 20.04 001 
RMS 0.15 0.14 
  
  
  
  
  
Table 2. AIMSTM performance data. 
We believe that the evaluation results produced by the 
above method might be very conservative in the sense 
that real GPS/INS system performance could be much 
better than evident in the evaluation results. This is 
because the airborne data, as well as the ground control 
simply was not good enough to produce the accurate 
exterior orientation needed. Figure 4 depicts an image 
taken at the Madison County Calibration Range, 
London, OH, test flight 11. 
  
Figure 4. Typical image captured over the Madison 
County Calibration Range, London, OH. 
5. ONGOING AIMS™ TESTS 
The primary AIMS™ objectives can be separated into 
two categories: (1) direct platform orientation, and (2) 
promotion of digital imaging sensor technologies. It is 
important to emphasize that with emerging imaging 
techniques such as laser and radar imagers, platform 
orientation has become an absolute necessity to achieve 
proper georeferencing. In fact, there is no viablé 
alternative, unlike in visual image-based techniques 
where by using control points the sensor geometry can 
always be reconstructed. From the very beginning, the 
AIMS™ project has had a layered concept regarding the 
imaging component with following phases: 
Intemational Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. XXXII, Part 7, Budapest, 1998 49 
 
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.