Walekum alsalam dear Abdul aziz, first really I appreciate your reply, and of course you are welcome to discuss in this issue, this website is created to share our ides and knowledge and it is honor me to know new researchers through out the world

my regards

thanks

Dear abdul aziz i am very appreciate you help

thanks again with my best regards

Hi Hayder,

Just as a starting point, I would begin with required resolution in the imagery, which will lead you ultimately to a combination of sensor resolution, optical FOV, and distance from the target. Based on the allowable combinations of those three, you can decide on different possible camera and platform combinations and then select the one that most fits also your endurance/range requirements...

For example, if a target resolution of 1x1m per pixel is sufficient, you may find that you can cover the whole area in a single high-resolution (25megapixel) frame from high altitude and only spend seconds to a few minutes of flight time to get up there (of cause there might be also regulatory limitations on the max altitude possible). On the other hand, if you require much better resolution and/or angles other than nadir (e.g. if trying to measure vertical extensions etc..), then you may want to elect to fly low (in order to achieve more oblique angles) and think more in terms of best flight paths for overlapping frames. In this case, you might even find that a fixed wing platform may be a better and cheaper choice...

So, overall, it will always be a compromise oriented on your main task.

I hope that helps.

Stefan

Thank you so much dear Stefan