<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Inaccurate data]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I was checking Windy for the cloud forecast, and I noticed that it is completely wrong. The map shows 0% cloud coverage even though we are completely cloud-covered. Is this a lack of data coming in or what? <img src="/assets/uploads/files/1762444981964-screenshot-2025-11-06-at-9.51.03-am-resized.png" alt="Screenshot 2025-11-06 at 9.51.03 AM.png" class=" img-fluid img-markdown" /></p>
<p dir="auto">What is going on?</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/topic/42484/inaccurate-data</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 01:58:44 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://community.windy.com/topic/42484.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:04:00 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Inaccurate data on Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:58:50 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/remyz" aria-label="Profile: RemyZ">@<bdi>RemyZ</bdi></a><br />
It's difficult to say which model is best. That is why Windy offers several models.<br />
I don't think GFS is the best model, firstly because it has a rather coarse resolution, and secondly because I find it very unstable (for forecasts up to 3 or 4 days or even longer).<br />
In your region, I would look at the European model, ECMWF, for long-term forecasts, and the high-resolution American model, HRRR, for short-term forecasts.</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/post/220889</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.windy.com/post/220889</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[idefix37]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:58:50 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Inaccurate data on Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:42:25 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/idefix37" aria-label="Profile: idefix37">@<bdi>idefix37</bdi></a> Good to know. The models are a mystery to me. It's challenging to know which one to pay attention to, as they yield such varied results—0% vs 80%. I usually use the GFS because I saw a tutorial that it was the most accurate.</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/post/220888</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.windy.com/post/220888</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[RemyZ]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:42:25 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Inaccurate data on Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:34:23 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/remyz" aria-label="Profile: RemyZ">@<bdi>RemyZ</bdi></a><br />
This is a wrong forecast by GFS model.<br />
If you check HRRR and even better ICON you see that this last one is forecasting 82% of cloud cover.</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/post/220887</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.windy.com/post/220887</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[idefix37]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:34:23 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>