86 
The International Archives ofthe Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing andSpatial Information Sciences. Vol. XXXVII. Part Bl. Beijing 2008 
Plot of Tim* V* Scan Differences of Cl, For* camrea at Test Bed 
GCPS of 08 Jun. OS 
-SO 
? 
1-100 
Ï 
I -ISO 
£ 
? -200 
—Tim* V* Scar Diff*r*r>c*s (Wo txa«) 
——Tim* Vt Scar Dtffiraoa» (wsT Bi*t( 
'V'V-'V —v— 
19138 19140 19142 
Tim# (twscond*) 
Figure 1.0 Bias estimation from FORE camera 
DATE 
OFPASS 
AFT 
FORE 
No. 
GCPs 
SCAN 
RMS 
(pixels) 
PIXEL 
RMS 
(pixels) 
SCAN 
RMS 
(pixels) 
PIXEL 
RMS 
(pixels) 
Below: Before using biases 
19May 05 
178.41 
43.27 
158.82 
173.02 
8 
28May 05 
218.71 
21.49 
291.24 
129.86 
38 
04 Jun 05 
170.79 
85.72 
232.78 
180.79 
18 
08 Jun 05 
207.02 
15.66 
299.71 
165.02 
49 
21 Jun 05 
186.28 
15.3 
239.43 
134.81 
7 
Below: After using all estimated and accounted biases 
30 Aug.05 
31.28 
25.12 
43.45 
25.36 
12 
05 Sep.05 
25.39 
18.99 
43.36 
19.05 
10 
03 Oct.05 
34.45 
22.69 
50.66 
7.92 
10 
14 Oct.05 
37.14 
26.66 
50.30 
13.64 
17 
17 Oct.05 
16.57 
27.76 
32.31 
14.47 
8 
01 Mar.06 
38.10 
18.26 
53.66 
21.93 
21 
Plot of Pixel Vs. Scan Diff at GCPs 
Figure 2.0 Fore camera bias estimation 
2000 
4DQ0 coco aro moro 
HDCL№ 
12000 
K№. canra Kxii kqgh dfat 
* OdJoBljrdlf 
Nawfad_pbdff 
Figure 3.0 Focal length adjustment for 
Table 1.0 Cartosat-1 system level accuracy