High Resolution Commercial Remote Sensing Satellites and Spatial Information Systems

By Lawrence W. Fritz, President International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ISPRS)

The ownership and operation of remote sensing satellites by the private sector has long been encouraged by many governments with only marginal success. However, the development of high resolution satellites and the authorization to own and operate them with virtually no restrictions has stimulated an unprecedented competition by large aerospace companies to create a new geospatial infrastructure aimed at markets never before considered. As many as ten different proposed Earth observing satellite systems having spatial resolutions of 0.8 to 5 meters in the panchromatic band and of 3.3 to 20 meters in three to ten or more multispectral bands are stimulating great interest, curiosity and conjecture by the geospatial community. The outstanding quality of imagery promised by these companies is due to technological advancements in computers, sensors, processing and communications which can be mainly attributed to advanced digital imaging technology developed for military and intelligence organizations during the cold war era. The global and repetitive nature of satellite remote sensing systems opens unlimited opportunities for new products derivable from imagery to abound. Civil satellite remote sensing systems to date have been of value for global, regional and national resource programs to serve primarily long-term government activities. The new commercial remote sensing satellites are being designed to serve temporal and local government needs also and many new commercial activity needs, such as news, farming, shipping, real estate, etc. Repetitive, temporal information will be possible due to the multitude of high resolution satellites having high agility (pointing) and high revisit capability over areas of consumer interest. The geospatial processing and distribution infrastructure must change to accommodate digital imagery and rapid product generation and delivery. Numerous issues that must be considered include: imposition of government limitations on the availability of images from the high resolution systems; possibilities for industry self-regulation; changes and variance in copyright legislation; pricing equity and competition with government programs; data and information quality; education and training; and more. Is the geospatial community prepared to meet these opportunities and challenges?

Introduction

Is the public really ready for near-real-time high resolution imagery? Is the photogrammetric- remote sensing- geospatial information community ready for near-real-time high resolution imagery? Or are these this new commercial ventures by large aerospace companies dreams built upon well meaning but unrealistic visions of vast markets of geo-information craving consumers? In the very near future we hope to get a glimpse of some of the realities which will help clarify and perhaps answer some of these questions.

To begin, let’s review the activities and events which have steered the commercial Earth observation satellite industry to its current state. Then we will explore some of the issues which should influence the industry and spatial information marketplace. And then we can look more closely at these questions and summarize with an outlook of where the "information from imagery" community appears to be headed.

History

Ever since the first space photograph of the Earth was transmitted by Explorer-6 in August of 1959, humanity has recognized that imagery of Earth from space could provide benefits never before attainable. Remote sensing from space began in April 1960 with the USA launch of the Television and Infrared Observational Satellite (TIROS-1) as an experimental weather satellite. The USA military launched its first Earth observation satellite, Discoverer, in August 1960. During the 1960’s various remote sensing satellites were launched for weather, intelligence and lunar landing programs by the USA and the Soviet Union. In 1972 the first civil satellite designed specifically to collect data of the Earth’s surface and resources was the Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS-1, which was later renamed Landsat-1). Throughout the 1970’s extensive research programs demonstrated a multitude of "public good" uses for Landsat imagery and the potential opportunity for a commercial market began to evolve. However, differing responsibilities and management agendas at the USA government agencies of NASA, NOAA, DOD, USDA, and USGS plagued the Landsat program from its inception. As a result, an extensive review was conducted of both military and civilian space policies. The ensuing policies and legislation gave operational responsibilities for civil land, ocean, and weather satellite systems to NOAA with a goal of eventually turning them over to the private sector (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1980; White House, 1979).

"A crisis ensued (National Research Council, 1985). The major players in this crisis included: a burgeoning community of Landsat data users, among them the news media, who wanted inexpensive, publicly accessible data; an increasingly vociferous industrial sector concerned about pending international competition and who believed privatization would preserve America's niche in commercial Earth observations; and a federal establishment disinclined to commercialize all land, ocean, and weather satellite data systems." (Lauer, Morain, Salomonson, 1997).

In 1984, the Land Remote-Sensing Commercialization Act was enacted (U.S. Congress, 1984) which authorized NOAA to solicit commercial bids to manage the existing Landsats and to build and operate future systems with government subsidies. This led to a 1985 contract with EOSAT Corporation to operate and manage Landsat. "It is interesting that the most compelling arguments made to the U.S. Congress for Landsat commercialization focused on data and program continuity--not spectral analyses and fine-resolution, time-sequential data. …

Government policies designed to transfer the Landsat program from the public to the private sector were seriously flawed. These policies did not result in market growth, were more costly to the USA Government than if the system had been federally operated, did not significantly reduce operating costs, and significantly inhibited applications of the data (Lauer, 1990). Nevertheless, the program continued to provide a flow of high-quality, well-calibrated, synoptic imagery of the Earth." (Lauer, Morain, Salomonson, 1997).

In 1986 France launched the SPOT-1 satellite. The French space agency, CNES, planned the SPOT program as a government developed, commercially operated system, and set up SPOT Image, S.A., to operate it and to develop a marketing strategy (R. A. Williamson, 1997). Since then, both the Landsat and SPOT programs have successfully developed a global market for medium resolution Earth observation data.

In October 1992, the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act (U.S. Congress, 1992) was signed into law. This law reversed the 1984 decision to commercialize the Landsat system and recognized the scientific, national security, economic, and social utility of ‘land remote sensing from space’ (Sheffner, 1994). In addition, this Act authorized the US Dept. of Commerce to license private sector parties to operate private remote sensing space systems. As a result of subsequent government/industry leader discussions, the Clinton Administration issued in March 1994 the "US Policy on Foreign Access to Remote Sensing Space Capabilities." The stated goal of the policy is to support and enhance US industrial competitiveness while at the same time protecting US national security and foreign policy interests (White House, March, 1994). The policy does not set a limit on spatial resolution.

The 1992 and 1994 decisions resulted in the emergence of several private sector ventures with goals to design, develop and operate high resolution and medium resolution1 Earth observing satellites. These competitive ventures were initiated using private investment funding rather than depend on government supports and subsidies. Several companies set forth public promotions of their proposed systems and began dialogue with potential partners. They and others engaged in public discussion forums such as was held here in Australia during the March 1994 ISPRS/PORSEC/ARSC combined conferences in Melbourne. And, as with many ventures, not all were successful and some are defunct or still in the proposed stage. A brief summary of the 12 commercial ventures to-date is presented in Table 1 with their proposed launches presented in Table 2.

Current Status

A summary of the current activity on new commercial remote sensing satellites is:

Systems Launched - On 23 Dec 97, "EarlyBird-1" was launched on a Start 1 rocket in Svobodny, Russia. After five days in orbit its communication power failed and it has been inoperable since then. On 22 January 98, "EROS-A" was launched by West Indian Space, Ltd. but failed to achieve orbit.

High Resolution Systems Under Construction - "Ikonos-1 & -2" by Space Imaging; "QuickBird-1 & -2" by EarthWatch Inc.; "OrbView-3 & -4" by ORBIMAGE; "EROS-B1" by West Indian Space.

Medium Resolution Systems in Design - "M10" by Resource 21; "GEROS" by GER Corp.; "XSTAR" by Matra Marconi.

Systems Proposed - ‘untitled’ by GDE; "CIBSAT" by Eastman Kodak Co.

Tables 3 through 10 provide details on the salient characteristics of the seven systems which are currently under construction or design.

In addition to these commercial ventures the governments of USA (Landsat), France (SPOT). India (IRS) and Russia (Sovinformsputnik2) are routinely launching and operating satellites and selling optical imagery for public consumption. Similarly, a Canadian government venture provides microwave imagery through its industrial partner, RadarSat Corp.

Issue 1 - Restrictions and Legislative Actions

The Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Space adopted by the United Nations on 3 December 1986 (UN/OOSA, 1994) has proven to be an insightful, judicious and even inspirational document for guiding the impending commercialization of remote sensing. Its comprehensive coverage has minimized the extent of legal issues regarding Earth observation, including open skies for high resolution systems. These Principles were adopted through the efforts of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) as part of the progression of formulating international rules to enhance opportunities for international cooperation in space. Table 11 gives a very brief synopsis of the 15 Principles embodied in the Resolution.

These principles were formulated and established when governments were the sole operators of remote sensing satellites and most nations had 10 to 50 meter resolution restrictions for civil Earth observation satellites. But with the absence of resolution limits in the US legislation for commercial systems, "the genie is out of the bottle!" What was once the privileged domain of a few defense and intelligence agencies is now available for civil and commercial applications. This is an awesome paradigm shift, and with it conveys a significant level of responsibility. Not only will commercial high resolution systems be useful now for a much larger international community for defense purposes, but also they will be applicable to a myriad of uses in both public and private markets, many of which were never envisioned heretofore. The advent of commercial satellite operations, which have to meet a ‘bottom line’ for imagery sales revenue, will soon test the UN principles. Surely the initial volume of customers will be government agencies. Will the governments provide funding for purchase of commercial imagery for scientific community needs? How will the private sector address the needs of the international scientific community, especially for ‘global good’ programs such as IGOS3? Will imagery from government research programs and from declassified defense imagery archives compete with commercial imagery sales? How will quality assurance of imagery products be provided? How can unlawful uses be deterred? What are or should be the roles of government and industry in the acquisition and dissemination of imagery from space?

These questions are being addressed by both sectors - government and private. When the US government authorized private sector entities to build and operate commercial high resolution satellites, it did so with very few restrictions, such as shutter control for national security instances; and limitations on technology export for national technological and economic competitiveness, as well as for national security and honoring international obligations4. The private sector ventures have each conducted market evaluations and made prognostications to identify the spatial, spectral and temporal characteristics that they believe are needed to produce commercially viable satellite systems. As a result the private high resolution systems have selected the 0.8-1.0 meter of panchromatic and 3.3 to 4.0 meter multispectral resolutions, in one and four bands, respectively as the most likely combination currently needed to build and satisfy a base consumer market.

The Landsat and SPOT systems have both been supportive of the needs of the scientific community, especially by providing free or low-cost imagery for academic investigations. But both of these systems are strongly government subsidized (over 90%) because their prime objectives are for ‘public good’ activities. Imagery products from commercial remote sensing systems are by definition commodities to be sold for a profit. This is an issue area which could become contentious if government and commercial remote sensing systems overlap in common spectral and spatial characteristics and sell imagery at vastly different prices. It is generally accepted that ten meters is the largest scale needed by international ‘public good’ programs for monitoring the health of the Earth. Currently this is not an issue as the planned commercial ventures are either high resolution and highly pointable; or medium resolution, high revisit multi-satellite constellations. However, some high resolution government systems, such as Cartosat (India) and Helios (France) potentially could become commercially competitive. In general, small scale synoptic images (>10 meter resolution) are needed for global scientific purposes, whereas large scale images (<5 meter resolution) which are available promptly upon request offer the most lucrative opportunities for new commercial applications. Should a resolution-related threshold be proposed to separate domains of operation between government and commercial remote sensing? Should governments subsidize purchases of imagery for scientific studies? For global archives?

Governments have traditionally supported the development of standards and specifications for imagery data because they have been the predominant consumer, e.g. mapping, weather, environmental protection, resource inventories, emergency management, defense, etc. The marketplace for the emerging commercial geo-spatial information community is expected to significantly exceed the government marketplace. Fortunately, the Open GIS Consortium (Buehler and McKee, 1996) has been established to develop interoperability specifications through industry leadership in collaboration with governments and academic institutions. Perhaps one of its future roles should include serving as the consumer ombudsman to help provide quality assurance of imagery-derived products.

The availability of high resolution imagery brings opportunities for improving world security, the environment and the quality of life for all humanity. If objectively applied, it can be an effective deterrent to international acts of aggression. However, it also brings opportunities for the negative elements of humanity to aid and abet criminal activities and for commercial espionage, on a global, regional and local scale. It is the intention of most new commercial systems to authorize consumers of their imagery and imagery products for single use, single purpose purchases. However, as with any commodity, it is very difficult to identify and/or control the use of a product. The UN Principles place the international legal responsibility on the government of the image providers for the control of their activities. Will new national and local legislation be needed to regulate unlawful use of space derived imagery?

Issue 2 - Technical Challenges

The technical data provided in Tables 3-10 show that the image processing, image exploitation and value adding industry will be receiving images with some characteristics for which currently they have limited or no capability to use properly. Is the international data user industry (which includes government agencies and academic laboratories) prepared to ingest and use 11 bit images? Highly oblique images? In- and cross-track stereo imagery? Has this data user community considered what means to use for validating the spectral and spatial qualities of the images they purchase? How much training and education are needed to convert these data users to all-digital processing? What kind of archive/retrieval technology will be needed to store the petabytes of image data?

All of these questions provoke the need for technical awareness and can challenge the technical and innovative skills of the current international photogrammetric and remote sensing community. Through the years, photogrammetric specialists have refined traditional film-based image processing and exploitation to provide accurate spatial information, primarily for mapping. Since the advent of Landsat and through years of technical transfer and technical cooperation programs, a scientific push subsidized by government has built a highly respected international remote sensing community capable of digitally exploiting the spectral benefits from Landsat and SPOT imagery, primarily for Earth resource uses. Now a whole new set of market ‘niches’ can emerge. The complementary spatial and spectral strengths of these disciplines combined with temporal values of near-real-time high resolution imagery will enable the generation of innumerable information products, all of which can be very useful as well as profitable.

Who is going to subsidize the growth and education of this most important data user community? Government programs have expended billions of dollars developing the technological know-how for digital space remote sensing data systems and to a lesser extent for programs dedicated to advancing the digital technology for exploitation of data into information from their imagery. The new commercial remote sensing companies are each expending hundreds of millions of dollars to build and operate their satellite and image processing systems. To a lesser extent, they are building, acquiring or partnering for value-added exploitation capabilities and they each have user training programs. Unfortunately, the companies are not expending enough on informing sufficient segments of the international data user community of how they plan to operate and if they have research and technical needs, e.g. algorithmic, workstation, calibration, faster automated processing, etc. Some of this limited flow of communication is due to industry competition, some is due to a limited awareness by the aerospace industry of this first line of data users, and some, to a lesser extent, is due to technical export control issues.

There is a vast international community of specialists who daily process, extract and value-add data to create useful information, but who are not involved or aware of the significant impact this major technological paradigm shift will have on their future. Many of them can contribute to building new algorithms and streamlining data processing flows and other parts of the infrastructure supporting their disciplines and their industry. It is in their interest because it is their future! To create this awareness and to stimulate preparedness requires the photogrammetric, remote sensing and GIS community members to do what they do so well. That is, to talk to one another through conferences and national societies and other public forums about how the industry can evolve and very importantly, to invite and urge the commercial industry to participate. Let us all not kid ourselves, commercial digital space remote sensing is here to stay, in one form or another. For it to flourish requires both industry and first line data users to collaborate as it is in both their best interests. Neither group should put its head in the sand waiting for tomorrow.

Issue 3 - Competition and Ownership

How will the infrastructure for the data users to collaborate with the commercial remote sensing industry evolve? The choices could be: (a) to rely on the suppliers (space remote sensing companies) to generate image products which replicate images/products common to that of the data user industry; (b) for the data user companies to acquire the needed resources to process/value add to the imagery; (c) for the image acquisition and data user companies to combine capabilities through alliances, corporate mergers, etc.; or (d) a combination of these or other choices.

Without some more inertia to collaborate by both the image supplying industry and the community of data users, the product lines from and market for high resolution imagery could be limited to a selected set of industry partners or picture buyers. Fortunately, there has been some recent activity in the value added industry to consolidate needed skills and technologies as evidenced, for example, by the recent mergers of the photogrammetric operations of GDE and Leica into LH Systems, LLC and of Carl Zeiss and Intergraph Corporation or by the merger of five aerial acquisition and spatial analysis firms into the EarthData International group. Mergers such as these show recognition that sufficient resources are necessary to transition from a film based industry to an all-digital information processing industry. It should be expected that many of the hardware, software, developers and service providers will merge and align with the large satellite remote sensing companies as the industry matures. The need for modernizing to all-digital value-added processes coupled with competitive positioning for large government out-source programs and international market opportunities will accelerate these mergers.

One of the questions that has been asked continually since 1994 has been, how many commercial space remote sensing companies can the market support? This question is prompted by skepticism formed by a lack of knowledge of the impending shift to all-digital processes by the imagery based industry. This shift is precipitated by near-real-time imaging, very fast processing and distribution, and unlimited product types which can be created by end to end digital flows. When we look at Issue 4 - The Market, we will find the answer will likely be that many satellite systems will be needed. Either the space satellite competition will expand as new market niches evolve, or the existing companies will need to field multiple satellite constellations, or will need to develop innovative multi-purpose satellites, e.g. dial-a-band, dial-a-resolution, dial-a-field of view, etc.

It is expected that high resolution satellites will infringe significantly into the aircraft imagery business. The 0.8 to 1.0 meter imagery that will be collected by the initial commercial satellites overlaps with approximately 50% of the aircraft imagery market. Digital satellite imagery has the advantage over aerial film imaging because of high revisit capability and because 11 bit digital images provide the ability to enhance images acquired under low-level lighting conditions. The very high resolution imagery (<0.5m.) will most likely continue to be acquired by aerial surveys using new aerial digital imaging cameras such as those currently under development in Germany, Japan and USA. Consequently, there is strong potential for aerospace and digital aerial imaging industries to build collaborative alliances to provide end to end capabilities.

Another frequently asked question is "How much will commercial satellite images cost?" In general, the companies have finessed direct responses to this as they are concentrating on getting their satellites fielded and trying to have an edge over their competitors. Market forces will define cost. The cost factors as with any commodity can be based on quantity, product type, acquisition to delivery time, product form, availability, etc. with a variety of distributor arrangements and discounts. Some companies plan to sell the image outright while others will retain copyright ownership and license the image for specific purpose use. West Indian Space is selling satellite footprints, including tasking and imagery rights to ground stations. Imagery costs will be competitive with aerial imagery on a unit area basis, but digital imagery scenes do not need to be restricted to a fixed format or size. Some issues such as image database ownership and copyright of Earth observation data are a subject of international debate and as yet are unresolved.

It is conceivable (See Table 2.) that as many as 24 commercial remote sensing satellites could be operational by the end of 2003. Does the satellite operator and ground station industry need to form an international consortium to address operational issues? These issues could include needs: for self-regulation such as orbital allocations; to enhance data quality and collaborative competition; to enhance UN Principles; to address government proposals; to address international crises in a timely, coordinated manner; to avoid data transmission bandwidth infringements; etc. The ISPRS, which is a UN sanctioned non-governmental organization, is offering to provide a base and forum for meaningful discussions on these issues.

Issue 4 - Market Development

The strategic goal for the Earth imaging industry is to provide spatial information for a sophisticated consumer market which does not care to know that the information they are using came from images. Although the traditional markets for Earth observation imagery have been weather prediction and monitoring, as well as some surveying and mapping, the future market is for spatially attributed temporal information. A market niche in the transportation sector for real-time navigation has already been spawned for use of dynamic map displays generated from satellite imagery data combined with GPS and inertial referencing systems. Another very promising market sector is precision farming which uses timely repetitive imagery. The many other promising niche and spin-off markets envisioned for spatial information systems include, but are surely not limited to:

• disaster monitoring and assessment services;
• emergency services;
• tracking hazardous activities;
• fire and hazards detection;
• disease detection (agricultural);
• disease monitoring (agricultural & human);
• real estate appraisal, taxation and permitting;
• city and urban planning;
• financial and insurance services;
• retail marketing;
• facilities placement;
• facilities monitoring;
• peacekeeping and treaty monitoring;
• law enforcement;
• news services;
• environmental protection;
• global monitoring;
• resource assessment (natural & renewable);
• resource monitoring (natural & renewable);
• archaeological & architectural site preservation;
• cadastral survey and land registration;
• trends analysis & prediction services;
• navigation safety;
• utilities management;
• reconnaissance, detection and surveillance;
• demographics;
• tourism and recreation;
• entertainment.

Properly integrated, and without unfair sales competition from new government imaging program developments, the new commercial ventures have the opportunity to rapidly exceed current industry assessments which project the year 2000 applications market value to range from $3 to $8 US billion. The expectations are that, like time, spatial information is a common dimension to all activities and therefore it will become ubiquitous and needed to satisfy an information craving society. However, the issue is how can this marketplace evolve?

The news industry may provide the most revealing insights into how rapidly the public will be educated on the benefits of satellite imaging. It already has shown that the public craves for frequent weather satellite images updates. A good indicator will be the receptiveness of the public for the use of near-real-time high resolution images of daily news events on international, regional, national and local scales. How rapidly the commercial industry grows is dependent on how reliable and credible its claims are. Certainly quality of product will be dependent on timeliness of product and valid feature/attribute identification and position. These are controllable activities for sustaining growth. Less controllable are launch and communication failures which can dampen enthusiasm of investment firms and thus stifle rapid growth.

Conclusions

The potential for major impacts of high resolution satellite imagery on all aspects of human activity surfaces many issues. The primary objective of the photogrammetric and remote sensing community has always been to develop applications which can provide efficiencies and advancements which ultimately improve the quality of life. It is from digital technological advancements in this relatively small community of disciplines from which GIS applications were spawned. Now these remote sensing disciplines have matured and the opportunity to task and apply digital high resolution imagery from space to address local activities on Earth can provide impacts which are potentially awesome. The speed of growth of the ‘information from imagery’ marketplace is dependent on how well the commercial space ventures and the underlying disciplines alert, inform and stimulate the public and private sectors of the benefits from use of near-real-time imaging systems.

It is not in the interest of, nor is it the time for, the traditional photogrammetric and remote sensing community to sit and watch. The benefits and applications which all of us in this community have been aware must be brought to public attention. This is our responsibility. We should not be questioning whether commercial high resolution imaging will survive, but rather how commercial high resolution imagery will flourish. We must focus attention on the resolution of issues such as equitable international availability, balancing pricing for scientific vs. commercial use, avoiding government competition with commercial systems, deterring unlawful uses, maintaining quality of products, avoiding over regulation, preparing for new data types and geometries, improving and enhancing automated processes, training and educating in all-digital data processes, improving commercial and community communications and collaborations, providing a forum for addressing industry issues, informing and educating consumers, etc.

We are in the genesis of a major paradigm shift of our unified professions. Let us pull together to promote expanded use of space remote sensing and all-digital processes to ensure a healthy and prosperous future for photogrammetry and remote sensing and the ‘information from imagery’ community we represent.

Acknowledgements

The author is pleased to thank all of the companies involved in these commercial ventures for their cooperation in providing technical and related information about their systems under development.

References

The opinions expressed in this article are those solely of the author and shall not be regarded as any official standpoint of the Lockheed Martin Corporation.

Lawrence W. Fritz, ISPRS President, Lockheed Martin Corporation, 14833 Lake Terrace, Rockville, MD 20853-3632, U.S.A., Fax: +1-301-460-0021, E-mail: Lawrence.W.Fritz@LMCo.com, or: LWFritz@erols.com

Venture	Primary Companies	Status
WorldView	WorldView Imaging Corp.	Merged with Ball Co. to form EarthWatch Co.
Eyeglass	GDE, Itek, Orbital Sciences	Disbanded to go separate ways
Space Imaging	Lockheed Martin, E-Systems	Ikonos-1 launch April 1999
Greensense	Howteq Div. of Denel Group	Greensat placed on hold in Nov 1994
EarthWatch	Ball Aerospace Corp.	1997 EarlyBird failed; QuickBird launch 1999
ORBIMAGE	Orbital Sciences Corp.	OrbView-3 launch 1999
untitled	GDE	Placed on hold in 1997
Resource 21	Boeing, GDE	M10-A & -B launch 2001
West Indian Space	Israeli Aircraft Ind., Core SW	Jan 98 EROS-A failed; EROS-B1 launch 2001
GEROS	GER Corp.	GEROS-1 & 2 launch 2001
CIBSAT	Eastman Kodak Co.	CIBSAT placed on hold in 1997
XSTAR	Matra-Marconi Space	XSTAR-A launch 2001

Table 1. Chronology of Commercial Space Remote Sensing Ventures since 1993.

Table 2. Proposed Commercial Launches.

TBA = To be announced

Table 3. High Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - General Information.

Table 4. High Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Orbit Information.

Corporation "System"	EarthWatch "QuickBird"		Orbital Sciences "OrbView" 3 4		Space Imaging "IKONOS"		West Indian Space "EROS" A B
Mode	Pan MS		Pan & MS HS		Pan MS		Pan	Pan & MS
Resolution (GSD)	.82 m	3.28 m	1 & 4m	8 m	.82 m	3.28 m	.1.5 m	.82 & 3.3 m
Spectral Bandwidths (µm)	.45-.90	.45-.52 .52-.60 .63-.69 .76-.89	.45-.9& .45-.52 .52-.60 .63-.70 .76-.90	200 bands .45-2.50 80 bands 3.0-5.0	.45-.90	.45-.52 .52-.60 .63-.69 .76-.90	.50-.90	.52-.90 4 bands TBA
Swathwidth @ nadir	22 km		8 km	8 km	11 km		13.5 km 16 km
Nominal Scene size	484 km2 +		64 km2 +		121 km2 +		182 km2+ 256 km2+
Field of View	1.26°		1°		.93°		1.8° 1.9°
Stereo	In & crosstrack		In & crosstrack		In & crosstrack		In-track
Pointing Agility - - in track - cross track	±38° ±30°		±45° ±45°		±45° ±45°		±45° ±45°
Sensor position	GPS		GPS		GPS		GPS
Sensor attitude	Star Trackers		2 Star Trackers		2 Star Trackers		No Star Trackers
Accuracy (sxy, sz): with GCP's = w/o GCP's =	Horiz Vert 2 m 3 m 23 m 17 m		Horiz Vert 1:10,000 products 1:50,000 products		Horiz Vert 2 m 3 m 12 m 10 m		Horz Vert Hor Vert 6m 4m 2m 3m 800 m 50 m

Table 5. High Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Sensor Information.

Corporation "System"	EarthWatch "QuickBird"		Orbital Sciences "OrbView-3"		Space Imaging "IKONOS"		West Indian Space "EROS-B"
Scenes (max)	100/orbit +		317 to 634/day		process 600/day		300/orbit
On board recording	~137 GB		32Gb = 250 -1,000 scenes (1m - 2m)		64 Gb		40 Gb
Delivery time from Acquisition to User	15 min- 48 hr		15 min - 24 hr		24 hr - 48 hr		15 min - 24 hr
Ground Station Sites	Colorado, Japan, Italy, Alaska, Norway		Regional Affiliates		Denver, Alaska, Japan + Regional Affiliates		Israel & ~15 Satellite Operating Partners

Table 6. High Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Communications/Processing Information.

Corporation "System"	Resource 21 "M10"	GEROS "GEROS I - VI"		Matra Marconi "XSTAR"
Partners	Agrium US Boeing Company Farmland Industries GDE Systems Inst. of Tech. Developmt	Geophysical & Environmental Research Corp. (GER) SpaceVest, Inc.		Matra Marconi Space
On-Orbit date	2000 - 2 satellites 2001 - 2 satellites	GEROS I & II - Jun & Dec 2000 GEROS III & IV - 2001 GEROS V & VI - 2002		XSTAR-A - 2001 XSTAR-B - 2002
Imager Type	"M10" Pushbroom	Pushbroom	Pushbroom	Pushbroom
Weight (Mass)	1190 lb.	< 50 kg	< 50 kg	TBA
Mode	Multispectral	Panchromatic	Multispectral	SuperSpectral
Quantization (Pixel size)	12 bit	TBA	TBA	>8 bit
Data Size	TBA	180 MB	2 GB	TBA

TBA = To be announced

Table 7. Medium Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - General Information.

Corporation "System"	Resource 21 "M10"	GEROS "GEROS I - VI"		Matra Marconi "XSTAR"
Altitude (km)	743 km	~ 650 km		710 km
Inclination (deg)	98.6° Sun synchronous	TBA, Sun synchronous		TBA
Repeat Cycle	TBA	24 day/satellite		TBA
Revisit Cycle	Twice weekly on-nadir Twice daily off-nadir	Pan - 30 day/satellite	MS - 4 day/satellite	4 days-week (2 sats)
Period (rev/day)	TBA	~ 16		TBA
Constellation Phasing	Four coplanar satellites 0°, 77.14°, 180°, 257.14°	Initially:2 satellites 180° apart, then: 4 satellites 90° apart, full constellation: 6 satellites 60° apart		2 satellites phasing TBA

Table 8. Medium Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Orbit Information.

Corporation "System"	Resource 21 "M10"			GEROS "GEROS I - VI"		Matra Marconi "XSTAR"
Mode	Multispectral			Pan	MS	SuperSpectral
Resolution	10 m	20 m	100 m +	TBA	10 m	20 m
Spectral Bandwidths (µm)	.45-.52 .53-.59 .63-.69 .76-.90	1.55-1.68	1.23-1.53	TBA	TBA VNIR & TIR	.4-1.0 >10 bands
Swath (km)	205			TBA	TBA	320
Scene Size	1 km2 to 4,200 km2 +			TBA	TBA	TBA
Field of View	15.9°			TBA	TBA	TBA
Stereo	In-track & cross-track			In-track & cross-track		No
Agility - in track - cross track	Mainly Nadir ±30° ±40°			N/A	N/A	Yes Mainly Nadir
Position	GPS			GPS		GPS
Attitude	Star Trackers			Star Trackers		TBA
Accuracy with GCP's w/o GCP's	Horizontal: 5 m absolute, 1 m relative 30 m			Horizontal: 3 m 25 m		~3-5 m

Table 9. Medium Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Sensor Information.

Corporation "System"	Resource 21 "Resource 21"	GEROS "GEROS I - VI"	Matra Marconi "XSTAR"
Scenes (max)	TBA	2,000 to 22,000 per day	Millions/week
On board recording	176 Gb each satellite	Yes TBA	TBA
Delivery time from Acquisition to User	minutes to days	24 hr. subscriber products 96 hr. special products	24 to 48 hr.
Ground Station Sites	3 stations in Northern Hemisphere	Alaska & Sweden	USA & Sweden

Table 10. Medium Resolution Commercial Earth Observing Satellites - Communications/Processing Information.

Remote Sensing activities of a State shall:

1. (definitions)
2. be for the benefit and in the interest of all nations
3. be conducted in accord with international law
4. be conducted with respect for sovereignties and rights of sensed States
5. promote international cooperation in an equitable manner
6. encourage establishment of regional agreements for data collection and processing where feasible
7. make available technical assistance to interested States on mutually agreed terms
8. *the UN shall promote international cooperation, including technical assistance and coordination
9. inform UN Secretary General of and about its space programs
10. promote protection of Earth environment and inform States affected
11. promote protection from natural disasters and inform States likely to be affected
12. make data accessible to sensed States on non-discriminatory basis and on reasonable cost terms
13. consult with sensed States for mutual opportunities
14. be responsible and adhere to international law
15. resolve disputes from application of these principles through established procedures

Table 11. Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space. *Principle VIII relates to UN activities and not a State activity.