The ARCHER system

Started by flyguy06, December 28, 2006, 06:21:33 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

flyguy06

Ok, if you guys have read my threads, you know I am not a big time ES guy so please dont thik this question is stupid. But what exactly is he ARCHER system? What does it do and can I get schooled up on it?

Hotel 179

There is a PowerPoint located on the National Web Site....

Semper vi
Stephen Pearce, Capt/CAP
FL 424
Pensacola, Florida

Eclipse

http://atg.cap.gov/downloads/FINAL%20VERSION%20ARCHER%20Technical%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

ARCHER: Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance

ARCHER contains an advanced hyperspectral imaging (HSI) system and a
panchromatic high-resolution imaging (HRI) camera. At a standard mission altitude of
2500 feet AGL and 100 knot groundspeed, the HIS system resolution is one square meter per pixel.

The HRI camera resolution is about 8 cm x 8 cm (3 in x 3 in) per pixel. ARCHER
also contains a global positioning system (GPS) and inertial navigation system (INS).
Together, these components provide aircraft location, altitude, pitch, yaw, and roll
so that each image pixel can be accurately positioned (geo-registered) on a virtual
map, in real time, during a mission.

ALGORITHMS
ARCHER executes three separate algorithms for target acquisition and identification.
• Spectral signature matching: ARCHER compares reflected electromagnetic radiation (EMR) against a library of spectral signatures to identify specifically targeted objects.

• Anomaly detection: ARCHER compares reflected EMR against a continuously
calculated background spectrum. Spectral anomalies are flagged as potential targets
for further evaluation.

• Change detection: Using reflected EMR,ARCHER executes a pixel-by-pixel
comparison of current ground conditions against ground conditions that were
obtained in a previous mission over the same area. Scene changes are identified:
new targets, departed targets, and moved targets are highlighted for evaluation.

https://tests.cap.af.mil/ops/archer_training/archer_hsi_tech/index.cfm

"That Others May Zoom"

flyguy06

Quote from: Eclipse on December 28, 2006, 03:14:54 PM
http://atg.cap.gov/downloads/FINAL%20VERSION%20ARCHER%20Technical%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

ARCHER: Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance

ARCHER contains an advanced hyperspectral imaging (HSI) system and a
panchromatic high-resolution imaging (HRI) camera. At a standard mission altitude of
2500 feet AGL and 100 knot groundspeed, the HIS system resolution is one square meter per pixel.

The HRI camera resolution is about 8 cm x 8 cm (3 in x 3 in) per pixel. ARCHER
also contains a global positioning system (GPS) and inertial navigation system (INS).
Together, these components provide aircraft location, altitude, pitch, yaw, and roll
so that each image pixel can be accurately positioned (geo-registered) on a virtual
map, in real time, during a mission.

ALGORITHMS
ARCHER executes three separate algorithms for target acquisition and identification.
• Spectral signature matching: ARCHER compares reflected electromagnetic radiation (EMR) against a library of spectral signatures to identify specifically targeted objects.

• Anomaly detection: ARCHER compares reflected EMR against a continuously
calculated background spectrum. Spectral anomalies are flagged as potential targets
for further evaluation.

• Change detection: Using reflected EMR,ARCHER executes a pixel-by-pixel
comparison of current ground conditions against ground conditions that were
obtained in a previous mission over the same area. Scene changes are identified:
new targets, departed targets, and moved targets are highlighted for evaluation.

https://tests.cap.af.mil/ops/archer_training/archer_hsi_tech/index.cfm

Hypo???? what? a panchromatic what? I have no idea what you just said.

A.Member

#4
Quote from: flyguy06 on December 28, 2006, 05:14:08 PM
Hypo???? what? a panchromatic what? I have no idea what you just said.
Don't worry about it.  Here's the condensed version: 
It's a waste of money and it you want to "school up" on it, it'll also be a waste of your time.  But, hey, it sounds kind of cool.

The problems with ARCHER are several fold:
1.  Very limited capability - great weather, daylight only
2.  Very expensive (that's our tax dollars at work by the way)
3.  Limited availability - which also means limited opportunity for training and maintaining proficiency

My opinion only, of course.  Certainly read through the materials and decide for yourself.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

bosshawk

FlyGuy06: take a look at the online ARCHER course on the National website: if you are not planning on becoming an ARCHER operator, don't bother spending a lot of time on it.  National runs a course at Maxwell for those who want to become operators: pilots are trained in each Region.  I have been in the aerial imagery business since the Cuban Missile Crisis(1962) and even I had a hard time figuring out what they were trying to do with the online course.

Basically, ARCHER has two sensors on it: a VNIR(Very Near Infrared) sensor and a digital optical camera(not a heck of a lot different from your hand-held digital camera, just bigger and more accurate).  The optimum altitude is 2500 ft above ground level.  A previous post told all about the resolution of the sensors: one meter square means, basically, that an object one meter in size, separated from another of the same size, by one meter, can be detected.  The previous post also was correct, and germaine, by saying that both sensors are daylight only and detect reflected light.  No night and no bad weather.

There is nothing out by CAP, that I know of, that describes how to deploy ARCHER in a search nor how to utilize it. 

Each region is supposed to have a GA-8 Airvan with the ARCHER sensor mounted: the one for Pacific Region is based at Van Nuys, Ca.  The number of pilots and sensor operators is VERY limited.

Hope that this helps and doesn't further confuse you.
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777

AlphaSigOU

Quote from: bosshawk on December 28, 2006, 06:46:13 PMEach region is supposed to have a GA-8 Airvan with the ARCHER sensor mounted: the one for Pacific Region is based at Van Nuys, Ca.  The number of pilots and sensor operators is VERY limited.

One of the Southwest Region's GA-8/ARCHER platforms is based at my squadron, at Addison Airport (ADS/KADS), Texas. The other one is in New Mexico.

To be even considered for ARCHER training, you have to successfully pass the pre-screening exam. This is what separates the men from the boys: it's probably one of the toughest exams I've taken. (I didn't pass.) Once you've passed, you are placed on a list; the closer you are to an ARCHER aircraft, the better your chances at selection for the course.

The course is four days of drinking from a fire hose either at Maxwell or at Mojave, California on CAP's dime. (What? CAP paying me?!?!?  ;D) 12-hour+ class days are not unusual, plus additional study time.  And not everyone passes.

We already have eight ARCHER operators (over several squadrons in the DFW area) and a few pilots qualified on the GA-8, which flies like a 152 on steroids. More will probably be trained once funding becomes available.
Lt Col Charles E. (Chuck) Corway, CAP
Gill Robb Wilson Award (#2901 - 2011)
Amelia Earhart Award (#1257 - 1982) - C/Major (retired)
Billy Mitchell Award (#2375 - 1981)
Administrative/Personnel/Professional Development Officer
Nellis Composite Squadron (PCR-NV-069)
KJ6GHO - NAR 45040

Major_Chuck

Personal Observation...please don't take as gospel.  I feel ARCHER is a lot of hype and we're not getting the bang for our buck.
Chuck Cranford
SGT, TNCO VA OCS
Virginia Army National Guard

flyguy06

Quote from: bosshawk on December 28, 2006, 06:46:13 PM
FlyGuy06: take a look at the online ARCHER course on the National website: if you are not planning on becoming an ARCHER operator, don't bother spending a lot of time on it.  National runs a course at Maxwell for those who want to become operators: pilots are trained in each Region.  I have been in the aerial imagery business since the Cuban Missile Crisis(1962) and even I had a hard time figuring out what they were trying to do with the online course.

Basically, ARCHER has two sensors on it: a VNIR(Very Near Infrared) sensor and a digital optical camera(not a heck of a lot different from your hand-held digital camera, just bigger and more accurate).  The optimum altitude is 2500 ft above ground level.  A previous post told all about the resolution of the sensors: one meter square means, basically, that an object one meter in size, separated from another of the same size, by one meter, can be detected.  The previous post also was correct, and germaine, by saying that both sensors are daylight only and detect reflected light.  No night and no bad weather.

There is nothing out by CAP, that I know of, that describes how to deploy ARCHER in a search nor how to utilize it. 

Each region is supposed to have a GA-8 Airvan with the ARCHER sensor mounted: the one for Pacific Region is based at Van Nuys, Ca.  The number of pilots and sensor operators is VERY limited.

Hope that this helps and doesn't further confuse you.

Thank you. That helped a lot. I understood that. so why do people say its a waste of time. Is it a system thats not being used much or do you think its going to go away eventually. I dont think we have a GA-8 in GA

Eclipse

There's one in each region, and a lot of FUD about how you get qual'ed in them, which is the core of the problem.

The initial requirments are just high enough that the GOBs and ROMEO's have effective control of them and don't want to let people in their club.

And the training for ARCHER, itself, is just complex enough to mean that the average member can't devote the time to doing it, plus the fact that you have to go away to the school.

Nice setup, some good potential, poor execution.

"That Others May Zoom"

bosshawk

FlyGuy06: do I think that it will eventually go away: NO.  There has been too much money and too much hype invested in the system for it to quietly slink away.  From my perspective, it isn't being used very much, if at all.  The fact that there are only a limited number of airplanes with sensors and that they are located in quite widely separated locations and have very strict requirements for pilots and sensor operators makes them hard to use on any timely basis.

In my job in CAWG, I have been approached by some of the AF folks to see if we can use the sensor along the Mexican border.  I don't know the answer to that until we do some investigating with our sponsors on the border.

Having worked at the highest levels in the US Govt imaging agencies, I have seen things go on that remind me of some of the stuff in ARCHER: develop and buy technology and then try to find a mission for it.  Thought that we had gotten past that sort of mind set years ago, but have seen it resurrected with ARCHER.

Stay tuned: this subject hasn't played out to its logical conclusion, YET>
Paul M. Reed
Col, USA(ret)
Former CAP Lt Col
Wilson #2777

ande.boyer

Quote from: bosshawk on December 28, 2006, 06:46:13 PM
National runs a course at Maxwell for those who want to become operators:

Not anymore.  Nat'l had a contract with the folks who do the imaging system to train operators but that expired at the end of FY06. I've asked repeatedly about it both at the wing and NHQ levels and no one seems to know what they're going to do next.

The "feeling" that others have expressed to me is that we'll begin training ARCHER operators the same way we're training people on the G1000 glass cockpits......send 1/very few guy(s) to get the official training then let him/them train others back home.  The obvious problem with that is to train someone else on such a complex system, you pretty much have to be an expert. Someone who is just qualified enough to use it does not an expert make.

For now, all I've been able to asertain is that new ARCHER operator training is on hold until further notice.

lordmonar

I have heard a lot of critisim of the ARCHER training...the high wash out rate and the initial training requirments.

My question is....is there anyone out there who is actually trained on this equipment and is it really all that complicated to operate?

I mean..I saw one of the systems a couple of weeks ago and it did not look that hard...It's basically just a lap top in the back of a plane.

You don't really have to an expert to be a training....IF your training resources are good.  Being too much of an expert is sometimes bad.  You don't have to give a college level physics corse on spectra theory to tell you people..."the ARCHER looks for specific colors".  You need to show them how to set up the equpment, maintain it and analyse the results.  A good cheat sheet may be all that you need and a phone number to the expert if you see something new.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Hoser

ARCHER is a technology still in it's infancy and as such, the biggest issue I can see with it is it's full potential is not totally understood, nor has it been unlocked. It will take a lot of utilization in all three algorithms and going over and over and over all the data we capture and playing with all the  settings to see what we can actually do with it. ARCHER shows, at least in my mind, the greatest potential for DR and EER missions as the signature match and change detect algorithms fit those types of mission profiles. Anomaly detction has utility as well and dovetails with DR missions. I am very interested in what the Colorado folks will have to say about it's utility after they finish with the blizzrd missions. I hope they disseminate their experiences to all us operators. Having been the operator in the Antlers OK mission where we assisted OK Highway Patrol and OK Wing in finding wreckage the anamoly detect worked well, but airplane wreckage looks an awful lot like "Jim- BillyBob's" junk pile, and even after taking signatures off known target airplane wreckage, signature match hit more than just our target material. The key to success in this mission was due to having an operator to evaluate data while another sortie was being flown. The image chip coordinates that had potential for ground evaulation were compared against known and charted coordinates and unaccounted for potential wreckage was evaluated by ground personnel. The advantage we had here was that we knew the location and the approximate dimensions of the debris field. Finding an airplane without that knowledge isn't a function of ARCHER, rather a function of good search planning. ARCHER can be used to find all the debris. I have yet to decide it's utility in SAR when there is potential life threat.
As to the class well it was four VERY long days. The system is easy to use, however, understanding how the software processes data, how the algorithms for determining if a pixel cluster meets target criteria work is of great importance as that guides to a great degree the settings used. The really difficult part is the "art" of ARCHER, knowing how to coax all the information out of the data that was collected and that takes time, practice and more practice.
Bottom line, in my mind, ARCHER's utility has yet to be totally understood and what missions it is best suited for remains to be seen. I would tell all the skeptics to wait and see what shakes out before you decide it's worth. I do know it is a worthwhile and useful technology considering all the agencies that have shown interest in it and want to know how to request it for missions.


Mark Anderson, Capt. CAP
ARCHER Operator
Missouri Wing

DNall

Quote from: Hoser on January 04, 2007, 09:06:05 PM
but airplane wreckage looks an awful lot like "Jim- BillyBob's" junk pile, and even after taking signatures off known target airplane wreckage, signature match hit more than just our target material.
I think I coulda told ya that w/o spending ~15mil there buddy. I actually got little against the tech - think it's a little too lab-centric & not enough field understanding - but, is that the best use of the money? Would putting FLIR on 385 planes all over the country (including training) for half that price have been a better investment? What about spending the other half (incl trng) on chem/bio/nuke/rad detection so we can shut down movement of such weapons over our borders, thru out ports, or around or trans routes. No really , I do like ARCHER just fine, it's something we have that few others do, but is it worth it versus the alternatives we could have (and SHOULD now) pursued instead? That's the chief complaint.

Hoser

You are missing my overall point, ARCHER is still so new that exactly what it can and can't do needs defining. Besides there are applications that FLIR won't work for, i.e. change detect for say earthquake damage assessment, or signature match to determine extent of contamination in an EER incident, or anomaly detect to find barrels of chemicals in a flooded area, and don't say the eye can do that as effectively, what if the barrel is barely submerged? ARCHER can't find it per se, but it can be found by  a skilled operator by context, i.e. a discrete shadow. This goes back to my comment that the hardest part of ARCHER is not the technogeek stuff, but the interpretation of the data and looking at it in the proper context, or if you will the clinical situation in which the data is gathered.  Part of the problem I think is the assumption has been made by I don't know who, or possibly even that ARCHER has been billed as the silver bullet for everything, and no effort has been made to dispel that misconception. FLIR is no more the silver bullet than ARCHER. Both technologies are equally useful and each has their own limitations. I am making these comments based on, one, the comments I have read here and two, what I know about ARCHER from being an operator.
That is my opinion, I could be wrong


Hoser