Difference between Azspec and Caligeo processed Hawk data

[benj]

Split off from ticket #113.

Hawk data processed with Azspec and Caligeo shows a gap between the two, particularly at the short-wave end of the spectrum. Over land the two are very close at the longer-wave end, over water Caligeo is consistently higher than Azspec (though the gap is larger at the short-wave end). Azspec data looks more plausible but Hawk needs calibrating to check which (if either) is correct.

Over water:

Over land:

[benj]

Azspec and Caligeo processed data over water

[benj]

Azspec and caligeo processed data over land

[mggr]

Note FODIS data also show this difference (#133)

[benj]

Difference between azspec and caligeo from GB08/12 152a/2009 line 5 (fixed)

[benj]

Problem seems to have gone away. May have been fixed by a number of different changes to azspec, azgcorr or Caligeo, so we don't know which one was wrong.

Graphs now match pretty well (see below). Small remaining difference is likely to be due to the fact that the two programs don't do the geolocation exactly the same, the difference is even smaller if the same graph is produced using the level 1 files.