Recover a few more 1074 nm files on 20240330

[mgalloy]

We can recover a few 1074 nm from 20240330 (there is only one good 1074 nm file right now).

@bberkeyU says:

Is it worth the effort to try and process 20240330.194110.39.ucomp.1074.l0.fts / 20240330.194330.43.ucomp.1074.l0.fts (I apologize; I forgot which was flat and which was the coronal data)? These should have reasonable 1074 data just shifted ~0.30nm to the red based on the wavoff change for the search. The sun was active that day, and the 20-minute baseline between the two measurements might be scientifically interesting to some people.

Processing this will require a hack to subtract 0.3 nm from the reported wavelengths before we do any fitting. Our line spacing in the recipe was 0.12nm, so we didn't tune to our nominal middle 3 wavelengths but instead 1074.52, 1074.64, and 1074.76 (not the expected 1074.58, 1074.7, and 1074.82), which will probably mess up the mean/median files.

We could make a repair routine to modify the reported wavelength in the headers for the appropriate files.

[bberkeyU]

From @detoma Even with the 0.30nm hack we will not have a point centered on the line, right?

I am not sure it is possible to properly process a file that does not have a tuning on the line center without major changes in the code. I will let Mike comment on that.

@bberkeyU The two files have a 0.06nm tuning difference with the peak falling between two of the tunings in 194110. The 0.06 is double our average wave offset correction applied during 2021/2022. It maybe hard to process this file. But this file does have coronal signal on a day with active sun where we only made one measurement so is it worth trying?

[detoma]

I close this and transfer info in the discussion