Hello there!
I realized there are several HDF missing files for MOD13Q1 products (6.1 version) in 2001 year, such as 2001.01.01 and 2001.03.06 folders.
https://e4ftl01.cr.usgs.gov/MOLT/MOD13Q1.061/2001.01.01/
https://e4ftl01.cr.usgs.gov/MOLT/MOD13Q1.061/2001.03.06/
Could you please check it?
Thanks in advance.
Julio Esquerdo
MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
-
julio.esquerdo
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2022 12:29 pm America/New_York
-
LP DAAC - dgolon
- User Services
- Posts: 229
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:00 am America/New_York
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Contact:
Re: MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
Hi @julio.esquerdo The MODIS team is currently working on historically processing the MODIS Version 6.1 data. These data will be available in the future. The LP DAAC will post a news announcement on our website and on the Earthdata Forum once the historical processing effort has been completed. Thank you.
Subscribe to the LP DAAC listserv by sending a blank email to lpdaac-join@lists.nasa.gov.
Sign up for the Landsat listserv to receive the most up to date information about Landsat data: https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOIGS/subscriber/new#tab1.
Sign up for the Landsat listserv to receive the most up to date information about Landsat data: https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOIGS/subscriber/new#tab1.
Re: MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
Hi all,
Now, on the website said that "MODIS Version 6 Forward Processing has been Discontinued". So, I started to update all my MODIS data to collection 6.1, but I realize that still there are some dates missing. The following dates are not found on the https://e4ftl01.cr.usgs.gov/ for MOD13Q1.061
"2001.01.17"
"2001.02.18"
"2001.04.07"
"2001.05.09"
"2001.06.10"
"2001.12.19"
"2002.01.01"
"2002.02.02"
"2002.03.06"
Any notice about that, are there some problems with that specific dates?
Now, on the website said that "MODIS Version 6 Forward Processing has been Discontinued". So, I started to update all my MODIS data to collection 6.1, but I realize that still there are some dates missing. The following dates are not found on the https://e4ftl01.cr.usgs.gov/ for MOD13Q1.061
"2001.01.17"
"2001.02.18"
"2001.04.07"
"2001.05.09"
"2001.06.10"
"2001.12.19"
"2002.01.01"
"2002.02.02"
"2002.03.06"
Any notice about that, are there some problems with that specific dates?
-
LP DAAC - dgolon
- User Services
- Posts: 229
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:00 am America/New_York
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Contact:
Re: MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
Hello @frzambra we are currently working on historically processing the data. We expect these files to be available once that effort is completed. We will post a news announcement (https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/news/) and send out a listserv message once the effort has been completed.
Subscribe to the LP DAAC listserv by sending a blank email to lpdaac-join@lists.nasa.gov.
Sign up for the Landsat listserv to receive the most up to date information about Landsat data: https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOIGS/subscriber/new#tab1.
Sign up for the Landsat listserv to receive the most up to date information about Landsat data: https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOIGS/subscriber/new#tab1.
-
julio.esquerdo
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2022 12:29 pm America/New_York
Re: MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
Hello,
As the 2001 images of MOD13Q1 V.061 are not available yet, is it possible to use V.006 of these dates instead to fill the missing period? Should I expect some problem using V061 and v006 together?
Thanks.
As the 2001 images of MOD13Q1 V.061 are not available yet, is it possible to use V.006 of these dates instead to fill the missing period? Should I expect some problem using V061 and v006 together?
Thanks.
-
LP DAAC - lien
- User Services
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:51 am America/New_York
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: MOD13Q1 HDF missing files
Hi Julio,
Ideally,it is best to use the same version, however for now there really is no other choice. When there is coverage from both Versions for you area of interest you may want to make a comparison just to check if there is much difference. The algorithm changes made between the versions were not really supposed to affect upper level land data much at all. Sorry for the delay, we are still trying to get the data, but the data providers have not been very cooperative.
Thanks,
Brett
Ideally,it is best to use the same version, however for now there really is no other choice. When there is coverage from both Versions for you area of interest you may want to make a comparison just to check if there is much difference. The algorithm changes made between the versions were not really supposed to affect upper level land data much at all. Sorry for the delay, we are still trying to get the data, but the data providers have not been very cooperative.
Thanks,
Brett