Here in podunk, our topo still shows glaciers On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 5:11 PM Dan Spitler <d...@common.net> wrote:
> Just to chime in here: Nearmap is doing yearly, higher-res > photogrammetry captures of major (sub)urban areas across the US. You can > purchase pre-rendered surface models from which you can do all sorts of fun > things with. > Also, Google's SAS program has a network planner included which allows you > to get elevation profiles *with* clutter using the same data as seen on > Google Earth. My only problem with it is it only does low-rez RF > propagation (no simple viewesheds) and the data is of unknown vintage. > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 1:19 PM Chuck Hogg <ch...@allpointsbroadband.com> > wrote: > >> Here's 2 examples of 2m vs 30m data as well for Google Earth. If the >> list serv strips them, let me know. >> >> Look at the shadows created by buildings and trees as far as coverage >> goes in the 2M data. >> >> These are random locations in Louisville. The City of Louisville >> released their data for free. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:14 PM Chuck Hogg <ch...@allpointsbroadband.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Also, check your states/counties/cities. Some states have had >>> initiatives to map this data. The forestry fire service also maps this >>> data. There are also point clouds created with this data. Ky for example >>> has this data from 2013 to 2018. The 2018 data is still being compiled. >>> It's also free. Virginia had whole portions of the state done in 2017. >>> >>> One good resource is: >>> https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/3dep >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:11 PM Chuck Hogg <ch...@allpointsbroadband.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The LIDAR data processing for a 2M resolution of an OMNI on the >>>> platform I'm using takes about 45-75 seconds. The same 30M resolution is >>>> typically a done in a second. These are done using 10km radiuses >>>> currently, but I'm increasing it to 20km. As you know this will cause it >>>> to be significantly heavier on the processing. A geotiff file for one >>>> access point using 2M data at 10km radius is about 18MB. The same GeoTIFF >>>> for 30M data is under 1MB. 30M is 900Meters squared. 2M is 4M squared. >>>> Roughly 225x more datapoints in 2M. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, Chuck Hogg | *SVP/Director of Acquisitions* >>>> *ALL POINTS* *BROADBAND *| *Live Connected.* >>>> mobile 502.435.6649 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 3:45 PM Brian Webster <i...@wirelessmapping.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I do not know the answer to that but I suspect that they are just >>>>> using the images from multiple angles. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Adam >>>>> Moffett >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 18, 2019 3:23 PM >>>>> *To:* af@af.afmug.com >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Good question >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/18/2019 3:05 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Does Google actually have LIDAR or are they just running the images >>>>> that they collect from multiple angles through an algorithm to guess at >>>>> the >>>>> obstructions? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> *From: *"Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com> <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>>>> *To: *af@af.afmug.com >>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, December 18, 2019 1:53:10 PM >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> Looks like no 3D building/trees in the profile. >>>>> >>>>> On 12/18/2019 1:57 PM, Brian Webster wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Adam, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you draw a line between the AP and the address point and then right >>>>> click to show elevation profile, does it look like it’s including the 3D >>>>> building/tree as part of the profile or just terrain. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We are lucky in NY that the state has mapped every 911 address to the >>>>> rooftop and they make it available for download. Not everyone has data >>>>> that >>>>> accurate. 911 address collection quality varies county by county. Not >>>>> every >>>>> county has put it in the public domain for download either. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>] *On >>>>> Behalf Of *Adam Moffett >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 18, 2019 1:09 PM >>>>> *To:* af@af.afmug.com >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NY State makes E911 address points available online. Imported a >>>>> subset of that, turned on the "3D Buildings" layer in Google Earth, and >>>>> then adjust the view until I'm looking from where the hypothetical AP >>>>> would >>>>> be. >>>>> >>>>> I can click on each point to get the street address, but I'm not keen >>>>> to sit here and do that one point at a time. Seems like a job for a >>>>> computer. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/18/2019 12:33 PM, Steve Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thats really cool, how did you get that? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 11:13 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Is the USGS LIDAR/clutter data available in a format that you could >>>>> open in Manifold GIS? >>>>> >>>>> See the Google Earth screenshot below. Wouldn't it be nice to just >>>>> have one more command to select only the address points that are "visible" >>>>> based on the 3D clutter? I'm betting I could make that work in Manifold. >>>>> >>>>> Not an RF projection of any sort, just filter out the address points >>>>> that can't be "seen" due to 3D clutter. It's an imperfect approach for a >>>>> lot of reasons, but it would give me hundreds of almost definite LOS >>>>> households that I could sell 100mbps to if I wanted to. >>>>> >>>>> Or Brian, if that's something you could do as a service that would be >>>>> something I'd be willing to talk about offlist. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/18/2019 11:40 AM, Brian Webster wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I don’t have that level of detail and haven’t personally done any of >>>>> the processing, I just know that on the Google Fiber project they would >>>>> drive a bunch of streets in a city and then the dedicated server would run >>>>> for two or three days to create a usable point cloud data set. Then it had >>>>> to be hosted on a separate server due to space requirements. This process >>>>> was done by a company who specialized in these LIDAR projects so they had >>>>> the tools to do it the most efficient way. I would guess the overall >>>>> project file sizes were a couple of terabytes. If you think about it, you >>>>> have to have a data record for everything you can see/reflect from because >>>>> that data is used to recreate that object in 3D, so the latitude, >>>>> longitude >>>>> and elevation needs to be built for something as simple as a road sign, >>>>> all >>>>> the points on the post and all the points to be able to recreate the sign >>>>> and on both sides. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>] *On >>>>> Behalf Of *Steve Jones >>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 17, 2019 4:49 PM >>>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can either of you describe the data size, and processing time? say >>>>> clutter per uban square unit (mile kilometers, etc) at this res takes x >>>>> time to collect with this particular method, it takes roughly y time to >>>>> process it, and it requires z storage. >>>>> >>>>> Generalization is all im looking for here like , current drone/blimp, >>>>> sensor tied to an eagle can only collect an x meter wide path per sweep so >>>>> it would take y number of sweeps to cover a square km, the average speed >>>>> of >>>>> collection is x meters per minute and it would take so many fuel stops to >>>>> gain that coverage >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> assuming you have that detail of information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 3:29 PM Brian Webster < >>>>> i...@wirelessmapping.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yes Chuck the post processing time it takes to create the 3 >>>>> dimensional/axis point cloud data (points with a lat, long and height >>>>> value) is massive. When I worked the Google Fiber projects in California >>>>> we >>>>> in cities like San Jose and the post processing took days on dedicated >>>>> high >>>>> end servers for the limited geographic areas we needed. If you have >>>>> clutter >>>>> data at 2 meter resolution you get a much better result of treating the >>>>> clutter as a solid object than if doing that with 30 meter resolution >>>>> data. >>>>> The 2 meter resolution will have such high accuracy of being able to see >>>>> each building and any single tree that might block a path. In the case of >>>>> 30 meter data, the clutter gets classified as only one type. So in many >>>>> non-dense urban areas, the 30 meter square gets classified as low density >>>>> urban, but then you don’t get any information for a tree lined street or >>>>> even the rural plains areas where it’s all open crop land with the >>>>> exception of the single tree line planted to block wind on typical rural >>>>> farm homes. So averaging the clutter classes becomes more necessary and >>>>> not >>>>> treating it all like solid objects. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When I worked for EarthLink and we were designing the outdoor Wi-Fi >>>>> network, we did have the 2 meter resolution tree and building data in >>>>> Philadelphia. It made a big difference but as I recall we also paid >>>>> $250,000 just for that single city area clutter at that resolution. As you >>>>> state there have been business models made on creating this type of data >>>>> for years. It’s not cheap to create, so the cost justification vs. the >>>>> added resolution accuracy of your intended project is a key consideration. >>>>> I do know that NYC has LIDAR data for the whole city in the public domain, >>>>> worked nice on the WISP propagations I did for the NY State broadband map >>>>> when they had me produce the WISP coverage areas. In the end it’s all >>>>> about >>>>> who is paying to have that high resolution data created. If the government >>>>> eventually pays for it, then it should be released in the public domain >>>>> because the public funded it (just like their existing map data is today). >>>>> It’s still going to take a lot of computing horsepower to digest and use >>>>> that data in any RF propagation tool however. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck Hogg >>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 17, 2019 12:46 PM >>>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I thought I would chime in here a bit. Not disputing Brian or anyone >>>>> else here, as many accurate statements have been made. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I've done some LIDAR propagations at 2M vs 30M DEM data. I found in >>>>> areas around mountains and hills (consistent in KY/VA markets) it is very >>>>> helpful to treat "clutter" as obstructions. I have reviewed areas where >>>>> 30M DEM data shows 400 homes serviced, and 2M LIDAR data shows 17. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Going back to the original question, I know 2 people here in KY that >>>>> fly drones for Engineering, Architectural, and Construction firms and I >>>>> talked to some of the people at Common Networks, who use some version of >>>>> Drone Photogrammetry to create their own datasets. In the construction >>>>> industry it is being used to track building things like bridges, tunnels, >>>>> commercial buildings, etc. These photogrammetry drone setups are $2-25k. >>>>> The Drone Lidar setups are $5-300k and require much larger drones. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also, it takes a long time to take this data and compile it. I know >>>>> they take anywhere from 3-18 months to do this in KY depending on how >>>>> large >>>>> the area and how high of a resolution it is. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here's a pretty good video and some tech in the beginning of one in >>>>> use showing 5cm accuracy: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8piSF40StQ&feature=emb_title >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Just an FYI, the opportunity to create a business out of this has been >>>>> going on for many years. They have used planes, blimps, and balloons for >>>>> years. I could see a move to drones. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best Regards, *Chuck Hogg* | *SVP/Director of Acquisitions* >>>>> >>>>> *ALL POINTS* *BROADBAND *| *Live Connected.* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 12:14 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Brian, >>>>> >>>>> Assuming the software allows you to input your own clutter data, at >>>>> high resolution, what impact on processing the models is there as the >>>>> clutter data gets higher in resolution? Are we talking massive >>>>> percentage? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think im maybe overestimating clutter datas usefulness. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would first need to have accurate topo data that knows what is >>>>> ground, and what is treetop/building roof. And that data really would need >>>>> to be at the same, or better resolution than my clutter data. (if my topo >>>>> data is 30 meter, and my clutter data is 3 meter, my output will be best >>>>> guess on top of the 30 meter average that may or may not have already >>>>> included the clutter, depending on when the sampling was done?) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am I misunderstanding clutter data? I had thought it was plotted >>>>> elevations of clutter, but is it more just regionated averages? if that >>>>> question makes any sense >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When the topo data was/is collected, are there mechanisms in play to >>>>> differentiate terrain from structure/clutter? Say chicago was collected, >>>>> would it show ground elevation or would it show the rooftop elevations as >>>>> the average ground elevation? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Back to the original query, assuming a guy had a drone with the >>>>> capability of carrying the equipment and the battery life to not have to >>>>> constantly recharge. Would a person be able to collect both topo and >>>>> clutter data, that can differentiate it, and at a fine detail. What kind >>>>> of >>>>> data size is that information? I know that the data available to radio >>>>> mobile in the day could be downloaded over dialup given some time, so it >>>>> didnt seem to be overly massive. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 9:07 AM Brian Webster <i...@wirelessmapping.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Clutter data in the public domain is mostly 30 meter square >>>>> resolution. Cameron has talked about a lot of the issues with the data. >>>>> Radio Mobile (and TowerCoverage since it runs on that) has the ability to >>>>> tune the cluster classifications a bit. I worked with Roger in >>>>> implementing >>>>> that clutter model. It is not actually part of the Longley Rice >>>>> propagation >>>>> model, what he did at my begging was allow a user to manually edit the >>>>> height and density for each clutter class and then the tool assigns a loss >>>>> factor per pixel/30 meter square of clutter and then subtracts the sum >>>>> total of the clutter loss for the ray being propagated. This is not >>>>> perfect >>>>> but when the cell companies use their expensive propagation tools, they >>>>> tune their clutter models for each market by drive testing a known >>>>> transmitter with a roving unit and run those drive test results against >>>>> what the software thinks the signals should be. In this process they >>>>> compare the know clutter classes that were propagated through and it >>>>> self-tweaks the loss factors is applies for each clutter class. In radio >>>>> mobile you do basically the same thing but without automation. To get it >>>>> right you have to go out and measure a lot of your real world signal >>>>> levels >>>>> and manually run propagations until the two match (minus your fade margins >>>>> built in to your plots). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This works well if you spend the time, the bigger issue is that the 30 >>>>> meter square is assigned just one clutter class code. In general it works >>>>> well for free stuff. The reality of knowing about specific tree lines >>>>> alongside a house or in urban environments with tree lined streets or in >>>>> back years, those individual trees to not get factored in to your >>>>> propagation, just the building losses if that building clutter is set to a >>>>> height to show as an obstruction(in WISP cases most are not if you are >>>>> mounting your antenna on the roof for average suburban clutter). The >>>>> answer >>>>> to this is to have higher resolution clutter. The terrain data used is 10 >>>>> meter resolution, meaning there have been hard data points gathered at >>>>> least every 10 meters horizontally and interpolated. Some terrain data is >>>>> available at 3 meters but that is not as widely available. So the issue >>>>> remains how do you get better resolution clutter data. LIDAR can indeed be >>>>> used and the best versions are actually driven on the streets and not >>>>> flown >>>>> from the air. As Cameron mentioned however that data still only gives you >>>>> the height/size/area where the clutter is. It does not tell you what type >>>>> of class that it is and/or what type of RF losses each pixel of that data >>>>> should be assigned, plus you are typically only getting the clutter data >>>>> from the street facing side. Think of the old movie sets and only seeing >>>>> the building face. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Another method of increasing clutter accuracy is to resample the data >>>>> from 30 meter pixels down to smaller sized pixels. This has limited >>>>> benefit. Mostly this can allow you to take things like tree clutter and >>>>> trim out the highway areas and or possibly cut out the trees with specific >>>>> building data footprints and assign a different clutter class by pixel. >>>>> This is very tedious to do on a large scale and you first have to have >>>>> other good data sources to trim or reclassify these smaller pixels >>>>> properly >>>>> to a new clutter class. While all of this gives you a better physical map >>>>> of what and where you have clutter down to a more realistic reality, you >>>>> would then have to go back and manually recalibrate the tuning because >>>>> tuning over larger pixels is an averaging process using the single clutter >>>>> class. As you might guess all of this takes time and money. At some point >>>>> there will likely be some cool efforts done by others where we can >>>>> integrate this. For instance Microsoft released building outline GIS data >>>>> for the whole country that they machine learned from aerial imagery. That >>>>> could be used over resampled data although if the buildings had tree cover >>>>> they didn’t get captured in the first place because they are not visible >>>>> in >>>>> the images. There are other open source projects for things like spectrum >>>>> sensing on a Raspberry Pi and software defined radio that if you put >>>>> enough >>>>> sensors out there they might help tune the clutter loss models. >>>>> https://electrosense.org/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This is probably way more than you wanted to read about clutter data >>>>> and RF propagations but hey I am a geek like that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *castarritt >>>>> . >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 05, 2019 4:47 PM >>>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Google maps uses some of the 1M resolution LIDAR data. Check out >>>>> Austin, TX (maybe most other metro areas as well?) in google, enable >>>>> "globe >>>>> view", and then turn on 3D. Now use left ctrl and drag with the mouse to >>>>> move your view angle. This is the data cnHeat and the Google CBRS SAS >>>>> solution supposedly use. OT: I wonder if any of the usual suspects are >>>>> making PC flight simulators that use this data. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:30 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The issue with publicly available clutter data is it seems old, poor >>>>> resolution or inaccurate. If heat is using the same data as linkplanner, >>>>> its definitely bunk. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:26 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Have you looked at CnHeat? >>>>> >>>>> We're about to do some testing with it here. They mentioned USGS >>>>> LIDAR as one of the data sources. Presumably that's blended with other >>>>> imaging somehow. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/5/2019 4:02 PM, Cameron Crum wrote: >>>>> >>>>> LIDAR is not clutter specific, it just can't penetrate clutter (it's >>>>> light) so clutter ends up looking like terrain. The benefit is that you >>>>> get >>>>> an elevation, the drawback is that you don't know the type of clutter or >>>>> how high it is above the terrain. I suppose if you compare the lidar data >>>>> against a terrain only DEM, you could extract the clutter height. Here is >>>>> the thing... some propagation does penetrate vegetation to some degree, so >>>>> if you are talking about frequencies that do, then lidar is not >>>>> necessarily >>>>> a good thing to use as everything ends up looking like an obstruction. You >>>>> also need a model that can actually account for clutter (vegetation) >>>>> density when talking about how much it will affect the signal. Obviously >>>>> leaf types and things like that can have other effects, but I'm unaware of >>>>> any model that goes to that depth. While some account for clutter heights >>>>> to use diffraction losses and some lump-sum type losses for a given >>>>> clutter >>>>> category, none of the models that are in use in the wisp industry account >>>>> for clutter density and there are only a few in existence that do. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You can get high res clutter data (types) from thermal satellite >>>>> imaging from one of the geospatial data companies like Terrapin >>>>> Geographic, >>>>> or SPOT. It is surprisingly accurate and is what real prop tools like >>>>> Planet use. The downside is no elevations, so you still have user input >>>>> for >>>>> that. Unless you are willing to shell out big bucks, don't bother looking. >>>>> We are talking about 10's of thousands for a modestly sized area. The >>>>> cellcos can afford it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:41 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Interesting. And unfortunately I don't know any more about LIDAR than >>>>> a Google Search does. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/5/2019 11:27 AM, Steve Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just the SAS administrators will be competitive product. So garbage >>>>> in garbage out will really apply. Basic SAS functionality is uniform, but >>>>> feature sets will differ. More accurate propagation modeling every night >>>>> will be something we benefit from and Im thinking that will be one of the >>>>> things they compete against each other with. They didnt say that >>>>> specifically, but the second iteration of SAS will be more bigger, >>>>> potentially even bigly in its scope. I really thought it was all going to >>>>> be modeled after cellco, with a bend toward cellcos overtaking CBRS with >>>>> shady handshakes and involuntary roaming agreements, but it appears >>>>> winnforum isnt just government lackeys, the people involved have actually >>>>> put gear in the air or at least listen to those that have. I think >>>>> cantgetright may have been a co-chair of a committee somewhere >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Where would a guy who doesnt know what LIDAR is go to find out more >>>>> about that clutter data? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:12 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think the USGS is making 3D clutter maps with LIDAR. CnHeat is >>>>> supposed to use that wherever it's available. >>>>> >>>>> I haven't heard how that relates to the SAS though. Is this something >>>>> you learned from the "450 Lady"? Care to share? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/5/2019 10:25 AM, Steve Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>> first question is if a guy collects accurate clutter data, can he use >>>>> it in any of the propagation tools we use? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> second, and this is where you braniacs come in, what equipment would >>>>> it take on a drone to collect this data? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> IIRC drone limit without FAA is something like 300 feet. would that >>>>> even be tall enough to sweep a wide enough path that it wouldnt take 300 >>>>> battery charges to do a square mile? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I envision a course plotted drone trip that will fly over with a pilot >>>>> car trailing to maintain the required operator LOS. >>>>> >>>>> If you think about how many miles youve put on verifying link paths >>>>> over the years, its not really a prohibitive thing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> CBRS and SAS is whats driving this query, but general propagation >>>>> anomalies creates quite a pickle that better accuracy/resolution clutter >>>>> accuracy would alleviate. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please tell me there is already a consortium thats built out a clutter >>>>> standard with a clutter submission mechanism, that would completely tickle >>>>> me silly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I also dont know the impact to the propagation back ends as you >>>>> increase the resolution of the data. Im assuming the SAS administrators >>>>> are >>>>> running something a little beefier than Radio Mobile. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I could see this being a lucrative niche market, if there were a way >>>>> around the drone operator licensing requirements (though that cost is >>>>> pretty minimal). Basically a company builds up a small fleet of drones, >>>>> outfitted with the appropriate gear. You create an account, input your >>>>> coverage area (or any region) that you want high resolution data for. they >>>>> reprogram the course and ship it to you (after collecting the upfront >>>>> payment, deposit, and massive liability release) they provide you with a >>>>> road course to drive while the drone does its thing, anticipate points of >>>>> retrieval for recharge, etc. when its all done, you stick it in the box >>>>> and >>>>> ship it back. would be cooler if the whole thing was transported back and >>>>> forth by amazon drones. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If I had a guarantee that the collected data would be useful to the >>>>> company, into radio mobile, link planner, towercoverage, and SAS >>>>> administrators, its something i could see a fair price tag of 3-10k on it >>>>> for our coverage area, and no farmers blasted it out of the sky. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> we use clutter data now thats antiquated so it would come with the >>>>> understanding that photosynthesis and bulldozers impact accuracy from the >>>>> minute its collected. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> maybe this data is already out there and i dont know? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> AF mailing list >>>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>>> >>>> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
