Remote Sensing C

[alchzh]

Is it important to know in-depth information on the instruments on the listed satellites:

• ABI
  EXIS
  ATMS
  CRiS
  CERES
  MODIS
  etc.

like bands and products?

[whythelongface]

MODIS, CERES, AMSR2, AMSR-E, MSS, ETM+, and CALIOP are the instruments I most commonly see on tests. Generally, they will only ask for detailed information on the EOS satellites, especially the A-train ones. I've never heard of some of the ones you brought up. Maybe I should

For the large part, know how many bands each has, their resolutions, and what spectral regions they image in. For example, ETM+ has 8 bands, 6 general all-purpose bands across visible and infrared, one band measuring specifically cirrus clouds, and one panchromatic band. Each has a 30m resolution except for the panchromatic band, which is twice as resolved.

EDIT: just realized having a 15m squares makes the instrument four times as resolved.

[alchzh]

I've never heard of some of the ones you brought up. Maybe I should

I was looking a stuff based on the rules manual for this year mostly (mentioned satellites are GOES-16, NPP, Terra (well, MODIS), CALIPSO, CloudSat, OCO-2, Aura, TOPEX/Poseidon, Jason-1, Jason-3). Do they regularly test on other satellites and instruments?

EDIT: GOES-16 is pretty recent (operational as of 2.5 ago)

[knottingpurple]

I've never heard of some of the ones you brought up. Maybe I should

I was looking a stuff based on the rules manual for this year mostly (mentioned satellites are GOES-16, NPP, Terra (well, MODIS), CALIPSO, CloudSat, OCO-2, Aura, TOPEX/Poseidon, Jason-1, Jason-3). Do they regularly test on other satellites and instruments?

I honestly don't know how it will be this year, since the list of satellites changed, but I think in the past Landsat and a couple of the most important ones would come up even if they weren't listed, and more satellites come up in, like, multiple choice questions about what they do, than show up in image analysis, so maybe knowing basic information about more satellites than is specifically given on the rules could be a good idea?

[whythelongface]

Also, GOES-16 is known as GOES-EAST now. It's how I get all my pretty pictures of the winter storm I sat through today.



Edit: I'm referring to the explosive extratropical cyclone in the upper right portion of the image.

[alchzh]

Also, GOES-16 is known as GOES-EAST now

I don't think the test writers would be so troll to call it "GOES-East" instead of "GOES-16" in referring to the satellite or "GOES-R" in referring to the instumentation on the entire series (maybe as its position or something)

EDIT: GOES-R is the series (satellite should now be called GOES-16)

[knottingpurple]

Also, GOES-16 is known as GOES-EAST now

I don't think the test writers would be so troll to call it "GOES-East" instead of "GOES-16" in referring to the satellite or "GOES-R" in referring to the instumentation (maybe as its position or something)

Agreed, GOES-East is a position more than a satellite, and the past referred to GOES-13 rather than 16, so talking about the satellite I think they'd generally still use GOES-16.

[geniusjohn5]

Can anyone briefly explain why longer waves generally penetrate objects more and shorter waves don't penetrate objects as well as longer waves?

[knottingpurple]

Can anyone briefly explain why longer waves generally penetrate objects more and shorter waves don't penetrate objects as well as longer waves?

I had a long, irrelevant, not very clear explanation but then I saw the word briefly, so anyway.

That's not always the case (think x-rays, think blue penetrating ocean water more than red, etc), and although I think there is some explanation for that trend being true some places, I would just say it depends on what object you're trying to look through and what you're looking for, there will be certain wavelengths that are absorbed by each of the substances and certain wavelengths which are not.

[biz11]

Can anyone briefly explain why longer waves generally penetrate objects more and shorter waves don't penetrate objects as well as longer waves?

I had a long, irrelevant, not very clear explanation but then I saw the word briefly, so anyway.

That's not always the case (think x-rays, think blue penetrating ocean water more than red, etc), and although I think there is some explanation for that trend being true some places, I would just say it depends on what object you're trying to look through and what you're looking for, there will be certain wavelengths that are absorbed by each of the substances and certain wavelengths which are not.

Warning: This might be way off base, if someone else can provide a better answer please do.

Not sure whether or not you've taken chemistry or physics, if not then you should look into how exactly absorption of photons works.

Now to answer your question. Differences in energy levels of electrons most often fall around the "middle" of the spectrum meaning that those wavelengths are the ones most often absorbed. This means that I believe that longer wavelengths should not necessarily have more penetrating power, it is just that the middle of the spectrum has the least penetrating power. This diagram from http://www.hyperphisics.com represents it nicely.



Other aspects of beam attenuation such as different light-matter interactions which occur at different energies also have an effect I'm sure, but I think those are more minor issues.

tl;dr Extremes of the spectrum on either side have the highest penetrating power, the middle hast the lowest.