Cloud bases layer sometimes missing large chunks of coverage
-
@petergaultney
Where there are no clouds, there is no cloud base...
So nothing is missing on your cloud base layer.
-
@idefix37 I don't mean to be rude, but it seems clear to me that you didn't look at my screenshots. Taking a look just at the mobile app:
Look east and south of Memphis. There are obvious missing squares in that cloud front.
Look south of Lexington. There are obvious missing squares in the south east of KY.
Look at the A in South Carolina. Clearly missing data, not a lack of clouds.
Same thing with northern Florida. Also near New Orleans and out over the Gulf of Mexico.
In all of these places, there aren't "no clouds". There are definitely clouds, and for some reason the data isn't displaying them.
-
-
@petergaultney
Cloud bases map, depicts the parameter "ceiling".
It gives the height above the level of the model orography,
of the base of the lowest cloud layer
covering more than 50% of the sky (more than 4 oktas).
https://confluence.ecmwf.int//display/FCST/43r1+new+parameters%3A+CeilingSo, in areas with cloud cover less than 50%,
cloud base (ceiling) is not depicted. -
@gkikas-lgpz That's helpful context.
It would be ideal for me if this view could show the bases of the clouds rather than the okta-related ceilings. If I have OVC at 700 at Enterprise, there's no way I'm going flying over over Ozark even if it's technically SCT, because those same clouds are likely sitting near 700 anyway.
I'm sure for others this is perfect for them. I wonder how much effort would be involved in making Cloud bases display bases while adding a new Ceilings display with these block-by-block estimates of the cloud coverage. Personally, even splitting those into two separate overlays would work - cloud bases and cloud coverage are two separately interesting things.
-
The issue still exists, as of December 2021. It appears way too often, and it's somewhat annoying as proper visualisation of cloud base is extremely important for flight preparation...
I don't believe cloud base value suddenly cuts along a straight line...
So is this going to be improved, or we have to live with it?
I don't know if it makes any difference, but tried with different graphic acceleration settings, under Chrome, no changes...
Any answer for even a slight improvement is appreciated!
-
@deszkrobert Hello, layer Cloud base has a 50% threshold for displaying clouds. It is the lowest cloud layer that exceeds 50% of the sky coverage. The full description can be found at https://confluence.ecmwf.int/display/FCST/43r1+new+parameters%3A+Ceiling.
-
@korina just to be clear, the 50% threshold explains the appearance, but the choice to hide the full cloud bases data in that way is very un-ideal for pilots. Just because it's technically scattered instead of broken doesn't suddenly make it safe for me to plan an VFR flight at that altitude.
I understand it probably doesn't make sense to change an existing visualisation just for pilots, but a new visualization option would be extremely helpful - it's probably the main thing that Windy can't really help a pilot with at this point in time.
-
@petergaultney We will consider it.
-
@Korina It's been almost a year since last post. Are you still considering this?
I'd say this is a rather big limitation in Windy right now as the cloud base map is not very helpful when planning VFR flights. 49% coverage and cloud base at 500ft is a big deal and I want to be able to see this. Please add a slider or setting where we can choose ourselves which cloud coverage percentage should be visible.
Thanks
-
@Diddi-Oskarsson We cannot tell an approximate timeline of implementation at the moment.
-
@Korina Hello, I would like to second Diddi's proposition.
I talked to some fellow pilots (helicopter pilots in Canada), and we are all a bit puzzled by this missing chunks. Maybe a tick box to turn off and on the 50% threshold ? -
@Jeremm Cloud base is one of the parameters from ECMWF-HRES model that windy just imports and displays. No tweaking is done and thus no threshold can be changed. See parameter description for more info
