Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add LANDFIRE capability and remove vegetation choice #113

Open
jforthofer opened this issue Jun 28, 2016 · 8 comments
Open

Add LANDFIRE capability and remove vegetation choice #113

jforthofer opened this issue Jun 28, 2016 · 8 comments
Milestone

Comments

@jforthofer
Copy link

We should download the LANDFIRE datasets for CONUS and Alaska and use those in place of the current DEM files and vegetation choice. This shouldn't be hard to do and would eliminate the user having to make a choice for vegetation. This was recommended by a tester.

@jforthofer jforthofer added this to the 1.1.0 milestone Jun 28, 2016
@ksshannon
Copy link
Member

This isn't trivial.

@jforthofer
Copy link
Author

Why not...? Wouldn't we just load the entire dataset on the server? I guess we'd have to potentially add new WindNinja backend capability to fetch from this local dataset... is this what you're referring to?

@ksshannon
Copy link
Member

How would you extract the data?

@ksshannon
Copy link
Member

It's not trivial to do correctly. You have to write the extractor yourself. LCP driver doesn't yet support Create(), so you can't run gdalwarp and have it output an lcp. You could do a two step, gdalwarp -of VRT, then gdal_translate, I guess. Another option would be to make a local WCS service, but that isn't trivial either.

@jforthofer
Copy link
Author

OK. Is there an option of converting the LCP to something else stored on the server. Like storing each band as a GeoTIFF? Other ideas?

@ksshannon
Copy link
Member

You could warp to an 8 band tif, and modify windninja to assume that an LCP.

@jforthofer
Copy link
Author

OK, cool. Sounds like that might be the least effort?

@ksshannon
Copy link
Member

Probably.

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Jason Forthofer notifications@github.com
wrote:

OK, cool. Sounds like that might be the least effort?


You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#113 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAwVDUOvbjypbjW7WODWf-tVqSO_lhEcks5qQURtgaJpZM4JALXs
.

Kyle

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants