Some Hawk bands are noisy to the point of uselessness. For example band 71 (1403nm), raw data from Nigg Bay line 3 (attached)

Also see over-water spectrum produced in level 3 image:

Spectrum cannot really be used for anything much - there is no means of quality controlling the data

Data issue occurs over more than one flight, possibly there are sensor problems with some Hawk bands. See eg. Latera band 71, similar to Nigg Bay:

If you plot Eagle and Hawk processed output on the same graph (see attachment) there's about a 30nm overlap for the spectral range, and the instruments don't seem to agree in this overlap. Even if the instruments don't give the same magnitude, the absorption features shown should align (and they don't). This suggests that the spectral calibration of one or both instruments may be out by up to 100nm, which appears to be the displacement needed to make the two graphs align.

Azspec-processed level 1b hawk data does not appear to be correct - it contains large anomalous spikes in some bands, seemingly correlated to very low data values. Eg from Nigg Bay line 3:

Compared to Caligeo spectrum from same pixel:

Could be underflowing, but would expect a much higher value for the spikes (~65k) in this case. Might still be underflowing and then changed by maths in azspec though.

Note extended from ticket #106, but separate to Hawk noise issue