Submitted:
26 February 2024
Posted:
27 February 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. SCR Overview
2.1. Rationale
- Effectively transfer TOA radiance measurements from a reference or benchmark satellite to one or more client satellites.
- Through effective cross-calibration, enable improved quality, consistency, and interoperability of data from multiple EO missions globally.
- Facilitate the generation of science-quality data streams from multiple satellites to support a broader range of EO applications.
- Consolidate procedures for routine space-based cross-calibration that can be applied to development of future missions.
2.3. SCR Concept

3. SCR Instrument Requirements
3.1. Spatial Requirements
3.1.1. Ground sampling and swath
3.1.2. Modulation Transfer Function and Field of View
- SCR only: 0.1<MTF@Nyquist<0.35 (can be relaxed)
- Multi-user mission (more typical): 0.2<MTF@Nyquist<0.35 The upper value was set because the aliasing starts to be substantial, while the lower value was set to avoid excess blurring and the inability to measure the MTF@Nyquist properly.
3.1.3. Geometric accuracy
3.2. Spectral Requirements
3.2.1. Spectral range
3.2. Spectral bandwidth

3.3. Radiometric Requirements
3.3.1. Radiometric accuracy
3.3.2. Transfer Calibration Uncertainty
3.3.3. Signal-to-Noise Ratio
3.4. Orbital Characteristics
- 16 Landsat 8 and 9 overpasses covering 729,000 square km
- 14 Sentinel-2a/2b overpasses covering 980,000 square km
- 4 Single Planet Flock-3p Dove overpasses covering 100,000 square km.
4. SCR Instrument Calibration
5. Notional SCR System Architecture
6. Discussion
7. Conclusion
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Disclaimer of Endorsement
References
- Australian Space Agency, 2021: Earth Observation from Space Roadmap. Australian Space Agency web page, 26 November 2021. Available online: https://www.space.gov.au/about-agency/publications/earth-observation-space-roadmap (accessed on February 2024).
- FrontierSI, 2021: AusCalVal: Establishing Australia as a global leader in delivering quality as sured satellite Earth observation data. FrontierSI web page. Available online: https://frontiersi.com.au/auscalval/ (accessed on February 2024).
- Ohring, G., B. A. Wielicki, R. Spencer, B. Emery, and R. Datla, 2005: Satellite instrument calibration for measuring global climate change: Report on a workshop. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 86, 1303–1313. [CrossRef]
- Ohring, G. B., Ed., 2007: Achieving satellite instrument calibration for climate change (ASIC3). NOAA, 142 pp.
- GEO, 2005: The Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) 10-year implementation plan. Group on Earth Observations, 11 pp. —, 2010: A quality assurance framework for Earth observation: Principles, version 4. Group on Earth Observations, 17 pp.
- Global Climate Observing System, 2011: Systematic observation requirements for satellite-based data products for climate: 2011 update. GCOS-154, WMO, 128 pp.
- Group on Earth Observations (GEO/CEOS), 2010: A quality assurance framework for Earth Observation: Principles, Version 4.0, 14 January 2010. QA4EO Principles v. 4.0, Group on Earth Observations web page. Available online: https://qa4eo.org/docs/QA4EO_Principles_v4.0.pdf (accessed on September 2023).
- Goldberg, M., Ohring, G., Butler, J., Cao, C., Datla, R., Doelling, D., Gartner, V., Hewison, T., Lacovazzi, B., Kim, D., Kurino, T., Lafeuille, J., Minnis, P., Renaut, D., Schmetz, J., Tobin, D., Wang, L., Weng, F., Wu, X., Yu, F., Zhang, P. and Zhu, T., 2011: The Global Space-Based Inter-Calibration System (GSICS). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 92, 467–475. [CrossRef]
- GSICS, 2006: Implementation plan for a Global Space-Based Inter-Calibration System (GSICS). WMO-CGMS, 22 pp.
- Bishop-Taylor, R., Sagar, S., Lymburner, L., & Beaman, R. J., 2019: Between the tides: Model ling the elevation of Australia’s exposed intertidal zone at continental scale. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 223, 115–128. [CrossRef]
- Shea, Y., Fleming, G., Kopp, G., Lukashin, C., Pilewskie, P., Smith, P., Thome, K., Wielicki, B., Liu, X., Wu, W., 2021: CLARREO Pathfinder: Mission overview and current status. In Proceedings of the IGARSS 2020 - 2020 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium; 2020; pp. 3286–3289. [CrossRef]
- Fox, N. P., Green, P. D., Winkler, R., Lobb, D. and Friend, J., 2016: Traceable Radiometery Underpinning Terrestrial- and Helio- Studies (TRUTHS): Establishing a climate and calibration observatory in space. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS); 2016; pp. 1939–1942. [CrossRef]
- Zhang, P.; Lu, N.; Li, C.; Ding, L.; Zheng, X.; Zhang, X.; Hu, X.; Ye, X.; Ma, L.; Xu, N.; Chen, L.; Schmetz, J., 2020: Development of the Chinese Space-Based Radiometric Benchmark Mission LIBRA. Remote Sens. 12, 2179. [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z., Snyder, G., Vadnais, C., Arora, R., Babcock, M., Stensaas, G., Doucette, P., Newman, T., 2019: User needs for future Landsat missions. Remote Sensing of Environment 231, 111214, ISSN 0034-4257. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425719302275. [CrossRef]
- UNSW Canberra Space, 2021: Pre-Phase A study for an Australian Satellite Cross-Calibration Radiometer (SCR) series including potential to support partner land imaging programs. UNSW Canberra Space web page. Available online: https://www.unsw.edu.au/ (accessed on February 2024).
- Ryan, R. E., Pagnutti, M., Huggins, M., Burch, K., Sitton, D., Manriquez, K., Ryan, H., 2023: Impact of a hyperspectral satellite cross calibration radiometer’s spatial and noise characteristics on cross-calibration. Remote Sensing 15(18), 4419. [CrossRef]
- Roithmayr, C. M., Lukashin, C., Speth, P. W., Kopp, G., Thome, K., Wielicki, B.A., Young, D. F. 2014: CLARREO approach for reference intercalibration of reflected solar sensors: On-orbit data matching and sampling. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 52(10). [CrossRef]
- Chander, G., Hewison, T. J., Fox, N., Wu, X., Xiong, X., Blackwell, W. J., 2013: Overview of intercalibration of satellite instruments. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 51(3), 1056-1080.
- Cao, C., Weng, F., Goldberg, M., Wu, X., Xu, H., Ciren, P., 2005: Intersatellite calibration of polar-orbiting radiometers using the SNO/SCO method. Proceedings. 2005 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IGARSS '05, Seoul, 2005, pp. 4. [CrossRef]
- Chander, G., Mishra, N., Helder, D. L., Aaron, D. B., Angal, A., Choi, T., Xiong, X., Doelling, D.R., 2013: Applications of spectral band adjustment factors (SBAF) for cross-calibration. IEEE Transactions of Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 51(3), March 2013, 1267-1281. [CrossRef]
- Bouvet, M.; Thome, K.; Berthelot, B.; Bialek, A.; Czapla-Myers, J.; Fox, N. P.; Goryl, P.; Henry, P.; Ma, L.; Marcq, S.; et al., 2019: RadCalNet: A radiometric calibration network for Earth observing imagers operating in the visible to shortwave infrared spectral range. Remote Sens. 11, 2401. [CrossRef]
- Christopherson, J.B., Helder, D., Anderson, C., Daniels, D., Ramaseri, S. N., 2019: Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation -- Concept for improved calibration of disaggregated Earth observing satellite systems, JACIE, 26 September 2019. U.S. Geological Survey web page. Available online: https://calval.cr.usgs.gov/apps/sites/default/files/jacie/Christopherson-Need-for-an-On-Orbit-Gold-Standard.pdf (accessed on February 2024).
- Berk, A., Conforti, P., Kennett,R., Perkins, T., Hawes, F., van den Bosch, J., 2014: MODTRAN6: a major upgrade of the MODTRAN radiative transfer code. Proc. SPIE 9088, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XX, 90880H (June 13, 2014). [CrossRef]
- Doelling, D. R., Morstad, D., Scarino, B. R., Bhatt, R., Gopalan, A., 2013: The characterization of Deep Convective Clouds as an invariant calibration target and as a visible calibration technique. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 51(3), 1147-1159, March 2013. [CrossRef]
- Bhatt, R., Doelling, D. R., Scarino, B., Haney, C., Gopalan, A., 2017: Development of seasonal BRDF models to extend the use of Deep Convective Clouds as invariant targets for satellite SWIR-band calibration. Remote Sens. 9, 1061. [CrossRef]
- Doelling, D., Morstad, D., Bhatt, R., Scarino, B., 2023: Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD) for Deep Convective Cloud (DCC) technique of calibrating GEO sensors with Aqua-MODIS for GSICS. University of Maryland web page. Available online: http://gsics.atmos.umd.edu/pub/Development/AtbdCentral/GSICS_ATBD_DCC_NASA_2011_09.pdf (accessed on November 2023).
- Lee, Y., Ahn, M.-H., Kang, M., 2020: The new potential of Deep Convective Clouds as a calibration target for a geostationary UV/VIS hyperspectral spectrometer. Remote Sens. 12, 446. [CrossRef]
- Christopherson, J. B., Ramaseri Chandra, S. N. and Quanbeck, J. Q., 2019: Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation—Land remote sensing satellite compendium. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1455. [CrossRef]
- Ramaseri Chandra, S. N., Christopherson, J. B., Casey, K. A., Lawson, J., Sampath, A., 2022: Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation---Remote sensing satellite compendium: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1500. [CrossRef]
- Irons, J. R., Dwyer, J. L., Barsi, J. A., 2012: The next Landsat satellite: The Landsat Data Continuity Mission. Remote Sensing of Environment, 122, 11-21, ISSN 0034-4257. [CrossRef]
- Ryan, R. E., 2022: Parametric spectral synthesis errors of hyperspectral simulation of multispectral imagers, JACIE, 10 January 2022. U.S. Geological Survey web page. Available online: https://calval.cr.usgs.gov/apps/sites/default/files/jacie/2022-S2-Robert_Ryan_SpectralSynth.pptx (accessed on February 2024).
- Saunier, S., Pflug, B., Lobos, I. M., Franch, B., Louis, J., De Los Reyes, R., Debaecker, V., Cadau, E. G., Boccia, V., Gascon, F., et al., 2022: Sen2Like: Paving the way towards harmonization and fusion of optical data. Remote Sens. 14, 3855. [CrossRef]







| Step | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 | Identify coincident imaging windows between SCR and the reference satellite system over land areas imaged by both satellites nominally within ± 20 minutes of each other. |
| 2 | Select matching near-coincident imagery from both satellites to use for cross-calibration, avoiding data that are affected by clouds or other atmospheric phenomena. |
| 3 | Use SCR hyperspectral bands to synthesise reference satellite data based on reference satellite RSR functions. |
| 4 | Compare synthesised SCR data to reference satellite data on a per-band basis to determine differences in gain and bias, ensuring geodetic/spatial registration between the datasets. |
| 5 | Examine the resulting differences with reference satellites to re-calibrate SCR response for product generation, including modifications of ground algorithm parameters. This process continues regularly throughout the system's lifetime. |
| 6 | Repeat as needed to ensure SCR generates well-calibrated TOA data during the entire mission life to account for sensor variation over time. |
| Step | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 | Retrieve synthesised multispectral data from the SCR spectral synthesis |
| 2 | Develop gain and bias coefficients for each client band, using RSR function for client system |
| 3 | New gain and bias parameters are made available for client data processing |
| 4 | Client TOA radiance products are generated with SCR bias parameters applied or appended. |
| Parameter | Typical Hyperspectral Instrument | SCR Hyperspectral Instrument |
|---|---|---|
| Spectral Range | Must cover atmospheric windows and spectral regions of interest relevant for the application. | Must cover spectral range of reference and client instruments. |
| Spectral Sampling Interval (SSI) and Resolution, Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) | Must be small enough to discern spectral features of interest. | Spectral sampling and resolution must be several times finer than RSR (FWHM and shape) being simulated. Must be tailored to achieve small TOA spectral radiance emulation errors (refer to [17]). |
| Spatial Sampling (Ground Sampling Distance) and Resolution | Spatial resolution sized for material classification and relatively high Modulation Transfer Function (MTF)@Nyquist is desired to decrease spectral mixing. | Less important than typical. Can be coarse. Spatial resolution tailored for area coverage and can be increased to improve SNR. May have limited use of RadCalNet sites if spatial resolution becomes too large. |
| Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) | High SNR required to maintain high dimensionality for spectral classification. | Less important than typical systems because multiple samples can be averaged to increase the SNR and reduce the uncertainty in cross-calibration. |
| Swath/Revisit | Application dependent, but larger is preferred. | Decreased swath minimises the impact of the bidirectional reflectancedistribution function (BRDF) and uses smaller Focal Plane Arrays (FPA). Larger swath increases cross-calibration opportunities. |
| Radiometry | Important for atmospheric correction. | Stability is critical |
| Category | Parameter | SpecificationT: ThresholdG: Goal |
|---|---|---|
| Spatial | Swath at nadir | >64 km |
| Spatial sampling (across and along track at nadir) GSD | 100-120 m | |
| MTF@Nyquist | 0.1-0.35 | |
| Field of view (FOV) | >5.68 deg | |
| Geometric accuracy | <a few km | |
| Spectral | Spectral range | T: 400-2400 nmG: 350-2400 nm |
| Spectral sampling interval | T: <5 (400-900 nm) <10 (900-2500 nm)G: <3 (400-900 nm)<6 (900-2500 nm) | |
| Spectral resolution, Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) – (Sl) | 1-2x Sampling interval nm | |
| Spectral calibration accuracy | 0.1xFWHM nm | |
| Radiometric | Radiometric accuracy (SI) | |
| Pre-flight | T: <3 % | |
| On-orbit | G: <5 % | |
| Transfer Calibration Uncertainty (TCU) Reference to SCR | <1 % (after n collects) | |
| Radiometric stability | T: 0.2 % over 7 daysG: 0.2 % over 30 days | |
| SNR | >~20 - 30 Sample number dependent e.g. greater than 100 independent samples | |
| Polarisation sensitivity | T: 5 %G: 3 % | |
| Exposure time range | <1.0 to >0.9 ms times the inverse of line or frame rate | |
| Exposure time accuracy | T: 0.2 %G: 0.1 % | |
| Linearity (over 90% of dynamic range) | T: 0.5 %G: 0.3 % | |
| Lsat (saturation radiance) | Defined in Section 3.3 as 1.15 times the radiance of a 100% Lambertian target at a 10-km altitude and 0˚ solar zenith angle | |
| Orbit | Altitude | 645 km |
| Inclination angle | 97.75 deg | |
| Nadir equatorial repeat time | 48 days | |
| Orbital equatorial crossing time | 10:20 AM |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).