Talk to Jeremy Fishman at Terrapin Geographic. https://www.terrapingeographic.com/
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:49 PM Dan Spitler <d...@common.net> wrote: > https://www.quantumspatial.com/ > > On Friday, March 27, 2020, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> reviving this one >> >> where all would a guy go if he wanted to get pricing on fresh data >> collection? ie hiring one of these drone/blimp/plane firms? >> >> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:57 PM Chuck Hogg <ch...@allpointsbroadband.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Nice, I was curious if any Common people would be on here. Welcome to >>> the farm, where pigs fly. >>> >>> Best Regards, Chuck Hogg | *SVP/Director of Acquisitions* >>> *ALL POINTS* *BROADBAND *| *Live Connected.* >>> mobile 502.435.6649 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 6:11 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 >>> >> -- > 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
