A near real-time flood detection algorithm giving a synoptic overview of the extent of flooding in both urban and rural areas, and capable of working during night-time and day-time even if cloud was present, could be a useful tool for operational flood relief management. The paper describes an automatic algorithm using high-resolution synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellite data that builds on existing approaches, including the use of image segmentation techniques prior to object classification to cope with the very large number of pixels in these scenes. Flood detection in urban areas is guided by the flood extent derived in adjacent rural areas. The algorithm assumes that high-resolution topographic height data are available for at least the urban areas of the scene, in order that a SAR simulator may be used to estimate areas of radar shadow and layover. The algorithm proved capable of detecting flooding in rural areas using TerraSAR-X with good accuracy, classifying 89% of flooded pixels correctly, with an associated false positive rate of 6%. Of the urban water pixels visible to TerraSAR-X, 75% were correctly detected, with a false positive rate of 24%. If all urban water pixels were considered, including those in shadow and layover regions, these figures fell to 57% and 18%, respectively.

Full-waveform laser scanning data acquired with a Riegl LMS-Q560 instrument were used to classify an orange orchard into orange trees, grass and ground using waveform parameters alone. Gaussian decomposition was performed on this data capture from the National Airborne Field Experiment in November 2006 using a custom peak-detection procedure and a trust-region-reflective algorithm for fitting Gauss functions. Calibration was carried out using waveforms returned from a road surface, and the backscattering coefficient γ was derived for every waveform peak. The processed data were then analysed according to the number of returns detected within each waveform and classified into three classes based on pulse width and γ. For single-peak waveforms the scatterplot of γ versus pulse width was used to distinguish between ground, grass and orange trees. In the case of multiple returns, the relationship between first (or first plus middle) and last return γ values was used to separate ground from other targets. Refinement of this classification, and further sub-classification into grass and orange trees was performed using the γ versus pulse width scatterplots of last returns. In all cases the separation was carried out using a decision tree with empirical relationships between the waveform parameters. Ground points were successfully separated from orange tree points. The most difficult class to separate and verify was grass, but those points in general corresponded well with the grass areas identified in the aerial photography. The overall accuracy reached 91%, using photography and relative elevation as ground truth. The overall accuracy for two classes, orange tree and combined class of grass and ground, yielded 95%. Finally, the backscattering coefficient γ of single-peak waveforms was also used to derive reflectance values of the three classes. The reflectance of the orange tree class (0.31) and ground class (0.60) are consistent with published values at the wavelength of the Riegl scanner (1550nm). The grass class reflectance (0.46) falls in between the other two classes as might be expected, as this class has a mixture of the contributions of both vegetation and ground reflectance properties