[Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 130, Issue 21
geodesy99 at gmail.com
Wed Jul 8 04:57:34 UTC 2020
> > global coverage datasets tend to be so generalized and large scale that
> they often do not fit well with the human scale that we survey on the
In my area of the world, https://soilgrids.org/ shows about 600ft, and the
types pretty well match up with the ground around here. So, well within
walking distance (for me, a mile radius ) scale. As data accumulates from
repeated SAR passes, that will probably drop considerably in the next few
years. URBAN-TEP ( https://urban-tep.eu/puma/tool/?id=574795484&lang=en
)has global data ranging from 5 meters to tens of meters. And these are
derived normalized data, the raw observational data is much better in some
regions ( See their projects page ). The resolution is more determined by
maintaining a global 90% bar than the underlying observations.
Not your backyard, but considerably better than what has been available:
"Worldwide inventory of human settlements (urban & rural) using one global
coverage of SAR data with 0.4 arcsec (~12 m) ground resolution collected by
the satellites TerraSAR-X / TanDEM-X in 2011-2013."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging