DOCSLIB.ORG

Reducing Landsat MSS Scene Variability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reducing Landsat MSS Scene Variability Ross NELSON Earth Resources Branch NASAIGoddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD 20771 Reducing Landsat MSS Scene Variability Reflectance calculations were most effective overall for reducing interscene variability; however, band ratioing proved most useful on the bright targets. INTRODUCTION LANDSAT DIGITAL TRANSFORMATIONS HE SPECTRAL VARIABILIn of a particular land-cover The Landsat MSS sensor response to radiance T feature over time is a function of changes in from an unchanging target is affected by factors the spectral response characteristics of the target which may be grouped into three generic catego- and viewing conditions. In terms of land-cover as- ries: sessment, the first factor may be considered useful information, the second, noise. Accounting for the Viewing Factors: Sensor response varies due to latter without affecting the former is important in changes in the sun-target-sensor geometry (Potter, situations where multiple scenes are used to assess/ 1974; Malila et al., 1975; Kowalik et al., 1982). monitor land cover. Studies which utilize multiple Atmospheric Factors: Sensor response varies due to acquisition Landsat MSS data must be concerned changes in the capability of the atmosphere to with apparent scene changes which are due to the transmit and scatter radiation (Rogers and Peacock, effects of changing sun angle, atmospheric condi- 1973; Potter, 1974; Turner et al., 1974; Hulstrom, tions, or sensor differences. Correcting or removing 1974; Fraser, 1974; Fraser et al., 1977; Dozier and scene noise should interest those involved with dig- Frew, 1981). ABSTRACT:Landsat 1, 2, and 3 MSS data acquired for six different nonvegetated targets over a three-year period were used to determine which of five transfor- mations was most useful for reducing between-scene variability. The following values were calculated from the MSS digital numbers (dn): (1) radiance; (2) reflec- tance; (3) reflectance corrected for changes in the Earthfsun distance; (4) normal- ized dn (normalizing equations proposed by ERIM researchers); and (5)band ratios. Results indicated that reflectance calculations were most effective overall for re- ducing interscene variability; ratios proved most useful on the bright targets. ital change detection and digital data base manipu- Systems Factors: Spectral variability is a function of lations which include multite~nporalor mosaicked the instrument used to detect target radiance (Slater, MSS scenes. 1979). Also, data preprocessing may be a source of The purpose of this study was to determine the variation (Grebowsky, personal communication). utility of various published transformations for re- Transformations which account for and remove ducing scene variability. These included calcula- variability associated with the viewing and systems tions of radiance and reflectance using linear models factors were tested in order to determine which available in the Landsat Data Users Handbook transforms were most effective. The MSS digital (USGS, 1979), linear normalizing equations empir- number (dn) responses acquired over unchanging ically derived by Environmental Research Institute targets over a period of three years were trans- of Michigan (ERIM) personnel, and band ratioing. In formed using the following calculations in order to addition, climatological data were assessed to de- determine if scene variability could be significantly termine the utility of archived weather information reduced. for further reducing scene variability. Radiance: The radiance calculation attempts to PHOTOGRAMMETRICENGINEERING AND REMOTESENSING, 0099-1112/85/5105-0583$02.25/0 Vol. 51, No. 5, May 1985, pp. 583-593 O 1985 American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing account for response differences between satellites. The satellite responses are corrected to Landsat 2 Digital numbers were converted to radiance mea- data processed prior to 16 July 1975, which corre- sures using transformations available in the Landsat spond to preprocessing steps implemented for all Data Users Handbook (USGS, 1979). LACIE (Large Area Crop Inventory Experiment) seg- dn ments. Radiance = -(L,, - L,in) + Lmin Dm, ERIM = (m:::') - (m- dn + b) where dn = digital number (unitless); Dm, = the maximum digital number where m, b = linear coefficients (Table 2). that can be recorded by the sat- dn = Landsat MSS digital number. ellite: 127 for bands 4, 5, and 8 = solar zenith angle. 6; 63 for band 7 (unitless); and L,,, L,,, = the saturation and threshold ra- The ERIM calculation results in a unitless digital diance levels, respectively, for number value corrected to a nominal sun angle. a given satellite and band; in Ratios: Ratioing has been used to reduce the ef- milliwatts per square centi- fects of solar zenith angle (Crane, 1971; Vincent, metre per steradian. These 1972, 1973) and topography (Holben and Justice, values are given in Table 1. 1980; Justice et al., 1981) on sensor response. Ad- jacent band ratios and a common vegetation index Reflectance (at the top of the atmosphere): Re- were tested to determine how well such calculations flectance, a unitless number varying between 0 and removed scene variability. The ratios tested were: 1.0, is a measure of the percentage of light reflected from a given target. Radiance measures were con- band 41band 5 band 6hand 7 verted to reflectance measurements by accounting band 5lband 6 band 7hand 5 for the strength of the incoming solar radiation and The effects of changes in atmospheric conditions the angle of incidence of radiation on the target at on Landsat MSS response have been documented by the time of the overpass (USGS, 1979). This reflec- numerous authors. Potter (1974), Turner et al. tance measure assumes (1) that the target is lam- (1974), and Fraser et al. (1977) have documented bertian, and (2) that the affects of the atmosphere the effects of changing atmospheric conditions on on target response are lambertian. the ability to accurately classify MSS data. Atmo- IT spheric differences which affect MSS sensor response Reflectance = (Radiance) E . sin(a) (thereby affecting recognition capability) are a func- tion of changes in particulate concentrations (Fraser, where E = the solar constant for a given band at 1974), aerosol concentrations (Fraser et al., 1977), the top of the atmosphere (in mWIsq and aerosol and water vapor content (Dozier and cm) Frew, 1981). The effects of changing atmospheric band 4 = 17.70 band 6 = 12.37 haze levels on target response can be appreciable. band 5 = 15.15 band 7 = 24.91. Rogers and Peacock (1973) calculated that over 50 a = solar elevation, or 90-solar zenith angle percent of the MSS signal in bands 4, 6, and 7 was (degrees). attributable to atmospheric path radiance for a dark Reflectance, EarthlSun: The Earth is closest to water target. the sun in early January each year, and farthest away Numerous factors are available in weather records in early July. This variation can alter the strength of which may explain interscene variability. Three the incoming solar radiation by as much as 6.7 per- variables are found which may be related to haze cent.' The Earthlsun (EIS) distance variation was level. Two, relative humidity and precipitable taken into account to correct the solar constant water, describe water content characteristics of the values. One astronomical unit (AU) = 1.496 x surface and atmospheric column, re~~ectively.~Al- 10**11 metres, which is the nominal distance be- though no historical descriptors of particulate or tween the Earth and the sun. aerosol concentrations could be found, horizontal visibility measurements were used to characterize Reflectance, EIS = AU2 . (Reflectance) atmospheric tran~parency.~Cloud cover adjacent to where AU is the Earthlsun distance (in astronomical the target may also affect sensor response. Clouds units, Nautical Almanac Office, 1975-1978). in the vicinity of a target may decrease satellite re- sponse to that target due to the resampling filter ERIM Transformations: The ERIM transforms cor- rect for satellite differences and correct for sun angle by normalizing to a 39 degree solar zenith angle. Precipitable water is the amount of rain which would be generated &om the atmosphere if all the moisture con- densed and fell. ' Difference in light intensity between 3 January and 3 Turner et al. (1974) and Malila et al. (1975) express July: 3 January, AU = 0.9833, 3 July, AU = 1.0167. In- reservations concerning the use of horizontal visibility to tensity Difference = (1/.98332 - 111.01672)*100.0 describe atmospheric conditions. Visibility, however, was = 6.7% considered in lieu of an alternative. REDUCING LANDSAT MSS SCENE VARIABILITY TABLE1. LINEARCOEFFICIENTS USED TO CALCULATERADIANCE VALUESFROM LANDSATMSS DIGITALNUMBER RESPONSES(FROM LANDSAT DATA USERS HANDBOOK, USGS (1979) OR ROBINOVE(1982)). THEU~ITS ARE MILLI~VATTS PERSQUARE CENTIMETRE PER STERADIAN. Landsat 1 Landsat 2* Landsat 2* Landsat 3t Landsat 3t band Lm,, Lma Lnn,,, La Lnun Lax Lnun 'max Lmln Lax 4 0 2.48 0.10 2.10 0.08 2.63 0.04 2.20 0.04 2.59 5 0 2.00 0.07 1.56 0.06 1.76 0.03 1.75 0.03 1.79 6 0 1.76 0.07 1.40 0.06 1.52 0.03 1.45 0.03 1.49 7 0 4.00 0.14 4.15 0.11 3.91 0.03 4.41 0.03 3.83 * Landsat 2 coeffic~entslisted for data processed before (first two columns) and after 16 July 1975 t Landsat 3 coeffic~entsl~sted for data processed before (first two columns) and aRer I June 1978 used in preprocessing the MSS data (Grebowsky, mitted. The remaining three targets were located at personal communication). Conversely, clouds near the northern end of the Gulf of California (path 41, the target may, through reflection, increase the row 38, see Figure 2). Two of the three targets were amount of light falling on the target andlor may in- quartz sand north and west of the Gulf of California. crease atmospheric path radiance over the target. The third target included deep water in the Gulf Rainfall may also affect target response because soil, south of the mouth of the Colorado River.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Landsat Collection 2
    Landsat Collection 2 Landsat Collection 2 marks the second major reprocessing of the U.S. Geological Top of atmosphere Surface reflectance Surface temperature Survey (USGS) Landsat archive. In 2016, the USGS formally reorganized the Landsat archive into a tiered collection inventory structure in recognition of the need for consis- tent Landsat 1–8 sensor data and in anticipa- tion of future periodic reprocessing of the archive to reflect new sensor calibration and geolocation knowledge. Landsat Collections ensure that all Landsat Level-1 data are con- sistently calibrated and processed and retain traceability of data quality provenance. Bremerton Landsat Collection 2 introduces improvements that harness recent advance- ments in data processing, algorithm develop- ment, data access, and distribution capabili- N ties. Collection 2 includes Landsat Level-1 data for all sensors (including Landsat 9, Figure 1. Landsat 5 Collection 2 Level-1 top of atmosphere (TOA; left). Corresponding when launched) since 1972 and global Collection 2 Level-2 surface reflectance (SR; center) and surface temperature (ST [K]; right) Level-2 surface reflectance and surface images. temperature scene-based products for data acquired since 1982 starting with the Landsat Digital Elevation Models Thematic Mapper (TM) sensor era (fig. 1). The primary improvements of Collection 2 data include Collection 2 uses the 3-arc-second (90-meter) digital eleva- • rebaselining the Landsat 8 Operational Landsat Imager tion modeling sources listed and illustrated below. (OLI) Ground
    [Show full text]
  • A Systematic Review of Landsat Data for Change Detection Applications: 50 Years of Monitoring the Earth
    remote sensing Review A Systematic Review of Landsat Data for Change Detection Applications: 50 Years of Monitoring the Earth MohammadAli Hemati 1 , Mahdi Hasanlou 1 , Masoud Mahdianpari 2,3,* and Fariba Mohammadimanesh 2 1 School of Surveying and Geospatial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran 14174-66191, Iran; [email protected] (M.H.); [email protected] (M.H.) 2 C-CORE, 1 Morrissey Road, St. John’s, NL A1B 3X5, Canada; [email protected] 3 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1C 5S7, Canada * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: With uninterrupted space-based data collection since 1972, Landsat plays a key role in systematic monitoring of the Earth’s surface, enabled by an extensive and free, radiometrically consistent, global archive of imagery. Governments and international organizations rely on Landsat time series for monitoring and deriving a systematic understanding of the dynamics of the Earth’s surface at a spatial scale relevant to management, scientific inquiry, and policy development. In this study, we identify trends in Landsat-informed change detection studies by surveying 50 years of published applications, processing, and change detection methods. Specifically, a representative database was created resulting in 490 relevant journal articles derived from the Web of Science and Scopus. From these articles, we provide a review of recent developments, opportunities, and trends in Landsat change detection studies. The impact of the Landsat free and open data policy in 2008 is evident in the literature as a turning point in the number and nature of change detection Citation: Hemati, M.; Hasanlou, M.; studies.
    [Show full text]
  • NOAA TM GLERL-33. Categorization of Northern Green Bay Ice Cover
    NOAA Technical Memorandum ERL GLERL-33 CATEGORIZATION OF NORTHERN GREEN BAY ICE COVER USING LANDSAT 1 DIGITAL DATA - A CASE STUDY George A. Leshkevich Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory Ann Arbor, Michigan January 1981 UNITED STATES NATIONAL OCEANIC AND Environmental Research DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AlMOSPHERlC ADMINISTRATION Laboratofks Philip M. Klutznick, Sacratary Richard A Frank, Administrator Joseph 0. Fletcher, Acting Director NOTICE The NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories do not approve, recommend, or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned in this publication. No reference shall be made to the NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories, or to this publication furnished by the NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories, in any advertising or sales promotion which would indicate or imply that the NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories approve, recommend, or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material men- tioned herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly or indirectly the advertized product to be used or purchased because of this NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories publication. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract 1. INTRODUCTION 2. DATA SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 2.1 Data Source 2.2 Description of Study Area 3. DATA ANALYSIS 3.1 Equipment 3.2 Approach 5 4. RESULTS 8 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 17 7. REFERENCES 17 8. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 19 iii FIGURES Page 1. Area covered by LANDSAT 1 scene, February 13, 1975. 3 2. LANDSAT 1 false-color image, February 13, 1975, and trainin:: set locations (by group number). 4 3. Transformed variables (1 and 2) for snow covered land (group 13) plotted arouwl the group means for snow- covered ice (group 15).
    [Show full text]
  • Panagiotis Karampelas Thirimachos Bourlai Editors Technologies for Civilian, Military and Cyber Surveillance
    Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications Panagiotis Karampelas Thirimachos Bourlai Editors Surveillance in Action Technologies for Civilian, Military and Cyber Surveillance Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications Series editor Anthony J. Masys, Centre for Security Science, Ottawa, ON, Canada Advisory Board Gisela Bichler, California State University, San Bernardino, CA, USA Thirimachos Bourlai, WVU - Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources, Morgantown, WV, USA Chris Johnson, University of Glasgow, UK Panagiotis Karampelas, Hellenic Air Force Academy, Attica, Greece Christian Leuprecht, Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, ON, Canada Edward C. Morse, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA David Skillicorn, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada Yoshiki Yamagata, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan The series Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications comprises interdisciplinary research covering the theory, foundations and domain-specific topics pertaining to security. Publications within the series are peer-reviewed monographs and edited works in the areas of: – biological and chemical threat recognition and detection (e.g., biosensors, aerosols, forensics) – crisis and disaster management – terrorism – cyber security and secure information systems (e.g., encryption, optical and photonic systems) – traditional and non-traditional security – energy, food and resource security – economic security and securitization (including associated
    [Show full text]
  • Information Summaries
    TIROS 8 12/21/63 Delta-22 TIROS-H (A-53) 17B S National Aeronautics and TIROS 9 1/22/65 Delta-28 TIROS-I (A-54) 17A S Space Administration TIROS Operational 2TIROS 10 7/1/65 Delta-32 OT-1 17B S John F. Kennedy Space Center 2ESSA 1 2/3/66 Delta-36 OT-3 (TOS) 17A S Information Summaries 2 2 ESSA 2 2/28/66 Delta-37 OT-2 (TOS) 17B S 2ESSA 3 10/2/66 2Delta-41 TOS-A 1SLC-2E S PMS 031 (KSC) OSO (Orbiting Solar Observatories) Lunar and Planetary 2ESSA 4 1/26/67 2Delta-45 TOS-B 1SLC-2E S June 1999 OSO 1 3/7/62 Delta-8 OSO-A (S-16) 17A S 2ESSA 5 4/20/67 2Delta-48 TOS-C 1SLC-2E S OSO 2 2/3/65 Delta-29 OSO-B2 (S-17) 17B S Mission Launch Launch Payload Launch 2ESSA 6 11/10/67 2Delta-54 TOS-D 1SLC-2E S OSO 8/25/65 Delta-33 OSO-C 17B U Name Date Vehicle Code Pad Results 2ESSA 7 8/16/68 2Delta-58 TOS-E 1SLC-2E S OSO 3 3/8/67 Delta-46 OSO-E1 17A S 2ESSA 8 12/15/68 2Delta-62 TOS-F 1SLC-2E S OSO 4 10/18/67 Delta-53 OSO-D 17B S PIONEER (Lunar) 2ESSA 9 2/26/69 2Delta-67 TOS-G 17B S OSO 5 1/22/69 Delta-64 OSO-F 17B S Pioneer 1 10/11/58 Thor-Able-1 –– 17A U Major NASA 2 1 OSO 6/PAC 8/9/69 Delta-72 OSO-G/PAC 17A S Pioneer 2 11/8/58 Thor-Able-2 –– 17A U IMPROVED TIROS OPERATIONAL 2 1 OSO 7/TETR 3 9/29/71 Delta-85 OSO-H/TETR-D 17A S Pioneer 3 12/6/58 Juno II AM-11 –– 5 U 3ITOS 1/OSCAR 5 1/23/70 2Delta-76 1TIROS-M/OSCAR 1SLC-2W S 2 OSO 8 6/21/75 Delta-112 OSO-1 17B S Pioneer 4 3/3/59 Juno II AM-14 –– 5 S 3NOAA 1 12/11/70 2Delta-81 ITOS-A 1SLC-2W S Launches Pioneer 11/26/59 Atlas-Able-1 –– 14 U 3ITOS 10/21/71 2Delta-86 ITOS-B 1SLC-2E U OGO (Orbiting Geophysical
    [Show full text]
  • The Space-Based Global Observing System in 2010 (GOS-2010)
    WMO Space Programme SP-7 The Space-based Global Observing For more information, please contact: System in 2010 (GOS-2010) World Meteorological Organization 7 bis, avenue de la Paix – P.O. Box 2300 – CH 1211 Geneva 2 – Switzerland www.wmo.int WMO Space Programme Office Tel.: +41 (0) 22 730 85 19 – Fax: +41 (0) 22 730 84 74 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.wmo.int/pages/prog/sat/ WMO-TD No. 1513 WMO Space Programme SP-7 The Space-based Global Observing System in 2010 (GOS-2010) WMO/TD-No. 1513 2010 © World Meteorological Organization, 2010 The right of publication in print, electronic and any other form and in any language is reserved by WMO. Short extracts from WMO publications may be reproduced without authorization, provided that the complete source is clearly indicated. Editorial correspondence and requests to publish, reproduce or translate these publication in part or in whole should be addressed to: Chairperson, Publications Board World Meteorological Organization (WMO) 7 bis, avenue de la Paix Tel.: +41 (0)22 730 84 03 P.O. Box No. 2300 Fax: +41 (0)22 730 80 40 CH-1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] FOREWORD The launching of the world's first artificial satellite on 4 October 1957 ushered a new era of unprecedented scientific and technological achievements. And it was indeed a fortunate coincidence that the ninth session of the WMO Executive Committee – known today as the WMO Executive Council (EC) – was in progress precisely at this moment, for the EC members were very quick to realize that satellite technology held the promise to expand the volume of meteorological data and to fill the notable gaps where land-based observations were not readily available.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Process for Limiting Orbital Debris
    NASA-HANDBOOK NASA HANDBOOK 8719.14 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Approved: 2008-07-30 Washington, DC 20546 Expiration Date: 2013-07-30 HANDBOOK FOR LIMITING ORBITAL DEBRIS Measurement System Identification: Metric APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE – DISTRIBUTION IS UNLIMITED NASA-Handbook 8719.14 This page intentionally left blank. Page 2 of 174 NASA-Handbook 8719.14 DOCUMENT HISTORY LOG Status Document Approval Date Description Revision Baseline 2008-07-30 Initial Release Page 3 of 174 NASA-Handbook 8719.14 This page intentionally left blank. Page 4 of 174 NASA-Handbook 8719.14 This page intentionally left blank. Page 6 of 174 NASA-Handbook 8719.14 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 SCOPE...........................................................................................................................13 1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................................ 13 1.2 Applicability ....................................................................................................................... 13 2 APPLICABLE AND REFERENCE DOCUMENTS................................................14 3 ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS ...........................................................................15 3.1 Acronyms............................................................................................................................ 15 3.2 Definitions .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Cloud and Cloud Shadow Identification in Landsat MSS Imagery for Temperate Ecosystems
    Automated cloud and cloud shadow identification in Landsat MSS imagery for temperate ecosystems Braaten, J. D., Cohen, W. B., & Yang, Z. (2015). Automated cloud and cloud shadow identification in Landsat MSS imagery for temperate ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment, 169, 128-138. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2015.08.006 10.1016/j.rse.2015.08.006 Elsevier Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Remote Sensing of Environment 169 (2015) 128–138 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Remote Sensing of Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rse Automated cloud and cloud shadow identification in Landsat MSS imagery for temperate ecosystems Justin D. Braaten a,⁎,WarrenB.Cohenb, Zhiqiang Yang a a Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, 321 Richardson Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, United States b Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Corvallis, OR 97331, United States article info abstract Article history: Automated cloud and cloud shadow identification algorithms designed for Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) and Received 14 October 2014 Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+) satellite images have greatly expanded the use of these Earth observation data Received in revised form 27 July 2015 by providing a means of including only clear-view pixels in image analysis and efficient cloud-free compositing. Accepted 6 August 2015 In an effort to extend these capabilities to Landsat Multispectal Scanner (MSS) imagery, we introduce MSS clear- Available online 21 August 2015 view-mask (MSScvm), an automated cloud and shadow identification algorithm for MSS imagery. The algorithm fi Keywords: is speci c to the unique spectral characteristics of MSS data, relying on a simple, rule-based approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive
    CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY HAER FL-8-B BUILDING AE HAER FL-8-B (John F. Kennedy Space Center, Hanger AE) Cape Canaveral Brevard County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 100 Alabama St. NW Atlanta, GA 30303 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY BUILDING AE (Hangar AE) HAER NO. FL-8-B Location: Hangar Road, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Industrial Area, Brevard County, Florida. USGS Cape Canaveral, Florida, Quadrangle. Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: E 540610 N 3151547, Zone 17, NAD 1983. Date of Construction: 1959 Present Owner: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Present Use: Home to NASA’s Launch Services Program (LSP) and the Launch Vehicle Data Center (LVDC). The LVDC allows engineers to monitor telemetry data during unmanned rocket launches. Significance: Missile Assembly Building AE, commonly called Hangar AE, is nationally significant as the telemetry station for NASA KSC’s unmanned Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) program. Since 1961, the building has been the principal facility for monitoring telemetry communications data during ELV launches and until 1995 it processed scientifically significant ELV satellite payloads. Still in operation, Hangar AE is essential to the continuing mission and success of NASA’s unmanned rocket launch program at KSC. It is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A in the area of Space Exploration as Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) original Mission Control Center for its program of unmanned launch missions and under Criterion C as a contributing resource in the CCAFS Industrial Area Historic District.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Land-Observing Program, Fact Sheet 023-03 (March 2003) 05/31/2006 12:58 PM
    Landsat: A Global Land-Observing Program, Fact Sheet 023-03 (March 2003) 05/31/2006 12:58 PM Landsat: A Global Land-Observing Program Fact Sheet 023-03 (March 2003) || A Brief History of the Landsat Program || Characteristics of the Landsat System || || Applications of Landsat Data || Landsat Data Continuity Mission || Information || The Landsat Program is a joint effort of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to gather Earth resource data using a series of satellites. NASA was responsible for developing and launching the spacecrafts. The USGS is responsible for flight operations, maintenance, and management of all ground data reception, processing, archiving, product generation, and distribution. A primary objective of the Landsat Program is to ensure a collection of consistently calibrated Earth imagery. Landsat's mission is to establish and execute a data acquisition strategy that ensures the repetitive acquisition of observations over the Earth's land mass, coastal boundaries, and coral reefs and to ensure that the data acquired are of maximum utility in supporting the scientific objective of monitoring changes in the Earth's land surface. || Top || Main Table of Contents || A Brief History of the Landsat Program In the mid-1960s, stimulated by success in planetary exploration using unmanned remote sensing satellites, the Department of the Interior, NASA, the Department of Agriculture, and others embarked on an ambitious initiative to develop and launch the first civilian Earth-observing satellite to meet the needs of resource managers and earth scientists. The USGS assumed responsibility for archiving the data acquired by the new program and for distributing the anticipated data product.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Kit Pr°I§£L LANDSAT D RELEASE NO: 82-100
    News National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546 AC 202 755-8370 For Release IMMEDIATE Press Kit Pr°i§£L LANDSAT D RELEASE NO: 82-100 (NASA-News-Belease-82-100)- 1ANDSAT D TO ' • N82-26741 TEST THEHATIC HAPPEE, INAUGURATE -. CPEKATIONAL SYSTEM (National Aeronautics and Space f , Administration) 43 p...Avail;r ;> NASA .. ' ^ unclfa;s\. VW Scientific_and. Technical Inf CSCX_22A -00/43 _ 24227v V Contents GENERAL RELEASE 1 THE LANDSAT STORY 5 DESCRI PTION OF OPERATIONAL SYSTEM 16 PLANNING TO MEET USER NEEDS 17 MISSION DESCRIPTION. 18 LAUNCH VEHICLE DESCRIPTION 19 LANDSAT D FLIGHT SEQUENCE OF EVENTS 22 SPACECRAFT ACTI VATION . 24 SPACECRAFT DESCRI PTION 27 MULTI SPECTRAL SCANNER 32 THEMATIC MAPPER ............ 35 LANDSAT D GROUND PROCESSING SYSTEM 38 NASA LANDSAT D PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 40 CONTRACTORS 42 IWNSANews National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546 AC 202 755-8370 For Release. Charles Redmond IMMEDIATE Headquarters, Washington, D.C. (Phone: 202/755-3680) James C. Elliott Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. (Phone: 301/344-8955) Hugh Harris Kennedy Space Center, Fla. (Phone: 305/867-2468) RELEASE NO: 82-100 LANDSAT D TO TEST THEMATIC MAPPER, INAUGURATE OPERATIONAL SYSTEM NASA will launch the Landsat D spacecraft, a new generation Earth resources satellite, from the Western Space and Missile Center, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., no earlier than 1:59 p.m. EOT July 9, 1982, aboard a new, up-rated Delta 3920 expend- able launch vehicle. Landsat D will incorporate two highly sophisticated sensors: the flight proven multispectral scanner (MSS), one of the sensors on the Landsat 1, 2 and 3 spacecraft; and a new instrument ex- pected to advance considerably the remote sensing capabilities of Earth resources satellites.
    [Show full text]
  • Civilian Satellite Remote Sensing: a Strategic Approach
    Civilian Satellite Remote Sensing: A Strategic Approach September 1994 OTA-ISS-607 NTIS order #PB95-109633 GPO stock #052-003-01395-9 Recommended citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Civilian Satellite Remote Sensing: A Strategic Approach, OTA-ISS-607 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1994). For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP. Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN 0-16 -045310-0 Foreword ver the next two decades, Earth observations from space prom- ise to become increasingly important for predicting the weather, studying global change, and managing global resources. How the U.S. government responds to the political, economic, and technical0 challenges posed by the growing interest in satellite remote sensing could have a major impact on the use and management of global resources. The United States and other countries now collect Earth data by means of several civilian remote sensing systems. These data assist fed- eral and state agencies in carrying out their legislatively mandated pro- grams and offer numerous additional benefits to commerce, science, and the public welfare. Existing U.S. and foreign satellite remote sensing programs often have overlapping requirements and redundant instru- ments and spacecraft. This report, the final one of the Office of Technolo- gy Assessment analysis of Earth Observations Systems, analyzes the case for developing a long-term, comprehensive strategic plan for civil- ian satellite remote sensing, and explores the elements of such a plan, if it were adopted. The report also enumerates many of the congressional de- cisions needed to ensure that future data needs will be satisfied.
    [Show full text]