-
Hi All, sailing all year round in the mediterránea, I'm comparing both ECMWF and Arome. ECMWF for the short and mid range forecasts and Arome for short passage 12-24h with this more precise forecast model 1.3km but only 24-36h window and bearing in mind the specificities when closer to the coasts. I used to sail in Ireland too for many years and both forecast models seem to be the most reliable too.
-
Hi, @Korina
My most used weather model in Canary Islands (NW Africa - Spain) is ECMWF.
Best Wishes 😊🌤️
-
East Med, I use ECMWF mostly. In springtime however all the models are less reliable, so I'm usually on the Compare Feature :)
-
The ECMWF seems to be the most accurate for my locale, but having the ability to compare the different models gives me more overall confidence in any given forecast. and, they are just that - forecasts, not guarantees.
-
I mostly use ECMWF for kitesurfing/sailing, METEOBLUE for snowborading/trekking and GFS for motorcycling! :)
-
ECMWF for sailing in seas around Europe (Greece, Croatia, Baltics)
-
I use ECMWF because it's very reliable, but i also use ICON-D2 when i need more input. ICON has high resolution which makes for a nice comparison between the two. Unfortunately, D2 only has a 1.5 day forecast.
-
It depends by the area: might be MBLUE more reliable than ECMWF or the other way around
-
The most accurate model for me in Japan has been the ECMWF for daily weather and GFS for the movement of Tropical Systems.
-
I usually use ECMWF models in Taiwan.
-
I use in northern Germany ECMWF.
-
I mostly compare ECMWF,, ICON and GFS and take "average" of forecast. Overall GFS seems to give more extreme numbers (max/min temperatures, precipitations etc.). From the point of view of the resulting success, it is different, and comparing forecasts is therefore a perfect opportunity to get a more accurate idea for the given moment. Mostly used location - Czech republic, Přerov,. Thanks for your work! Pavel
-
In the Med, I use a combination of ECMWF and ICON-EU
-
I prefer ECMWF and Meteoblue as well, but ICON-EU can be a good choice too. There are 4 models available in our region.
-
@Korina We use the NAM model for exact severe WX impacts in middle USA. NAM is forecasting those saddened popup storms..hail..correctly for Denver USA. for off shore Wx..the GFS is good for the CARIBBEAN.
-
I'm using ICON-EU.
-
The answer is it's a tie! ECMWF gives me a general idea of what to expect the furthest in advance. On the day of activity, I used to rely on NAM for a more precise, localized prediction, but lately HRRR often seems to be the winner of the two. I often compare all three to look for consensus, much as your article described. GFS is typically very inaccurate for me and I haven't figured out how to incorporate ICON yet. I live in Florida, USA. Windy is the best, thank you!
-
ECMWF is my preferred model. It is consistently the most accurate on the wind farms where I work across the United States. I also like the fact that it offers the ability to view wind forecast for different altitudes. It's a great option for assessing the future forecast and it works well when compared to NAM to get a short-term view of the weather.
-
I use the wind and radar models in conjunction with each other the most. Windy is the best, hands down, weather app/website I have encountered. I use it for work and personal life daily.
-
In France, I mostly use Arôme for short term forecast and ECMWF or GFS for longer dated ones.
Windy Community | Powered by excellent
NodeBB