Could we have more pressure levels ? Cloud cover for those levels ?
I'm working on a sounding plugin for paraglider pilots.
It would be a super useful tool for us - could probably become very popular.
I have a few questions:
- Would it be possible to get more data points for temperature and dew points (every 50hPa would be great from surface to 400hPa),
- Would it be possible to get the cloud cover percentage at every pressure level ?
It's not clear to me if the "airData" are available for all the models ?
Thanks for such a great product and for your help,
dataLoaderoffers the data we have. We do not have more levels.
@ivo too bad :(
I guess that models make use of more data points. Is the limitation due to your licensing.
i.e. could you get more data by paying more ? (that's only out of curiosity, I don't suggest that you do that)
What about my second point ?
I would like to add a "slice" of airgram to the side of the sounding.
@ivo any chance is airgram is constructed from
weathercode: "OVC,,CS,,,,,"available in the forecasts ?
If this is the case could you expand a bit on the format ?
I have found http://www.moratech.com/aviation/metaf-abbrev.html but it doesn't seem to cover everything.
It seems like the cloud cover is computed by the "meteogram" module.
Any chance to get access to that API or have the data exposed through the
@vicb We are quite busy developing other stuff.
@ivo The meteogram data that are part of API contain RH in levels. In a future we can extend API to release more data but now we are finishing some other projects.
@Ivo I ended up rendering a meteogram `` and picking into the
However it would be great to be able to retrieve the underlying data (which are now computed in
meteogram.render()) without having to render the canvas.
May be this could be done by extracting the computations out of
Happy to discuss more about that when you have more time.
I like the work you are doing with your skewt plugin.
However, I am curious in the methodology you are using to draw the dry-adiab lapse rate (DALR) line to obtain a cloud-base height.
My questioning is directed at how you are getting the DALR at the sfc level starting at a temperature that is a couple of degrees warmer (shifted to the right) than the sfc model temperature?
I use the sfc temp +3 degree for now as an approx - probably too much in the morning or when the cloud cover is important.
The surface temperature reported by the model does not seem to work better (I may want to give it an another try later).
Does it answer your question or is the question more about the temperature gradient ?