<?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[850 Potential]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Could we have potential wet bulb temperature as an optional (premium?) layer (primarily 850hPa)?</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/topic/43387/850-potential</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 04:48:01 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://community.windy.com/topic/43387.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2026 15:21:02 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to 850 Potential on Mon, 26 Jan 2026 19:44:48 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/weatherman10" aria-label="Profile: WeatherMan10">@<bdi>WeatherMan10</bdi></a><br />
The request is about wet bulb <strong><strong>potential</strong></strong> temperature not same as wet bulb temperature.<br />
See <a href="https://charts.ecmwf.int/products/medium-simulated-wbpt?base_time=202601261200&amp;expver=0001&amp;projection=opencharts_europe&amp;valid_time=202601261200" rel="nofollow ugc">more about it</a></p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/post/224007</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.windy.com/post/224007</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[idefix37]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2026 19:44:48 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to 850 Potential on Tue, 27 Jan 2026 07:01:25 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">deleted.</p>
]]></description><link>https://community.windy.com/post/224006</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.windy.com/post/224006</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[WeatherMan10]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2026 07:01:25 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>