Best posts made by pavbin

@korina
Thanks Korina for your reply. I would expect they do provide reliable data, this is the Canadian governmental weather agency! :)
Thanks for developing Windy, it is a great tool!
Cheers

@idefix37 Good article, thanks. And thanks for getting back to me quickly. Cheers

People leaving in Canada have to rely on either European or US global models on Windy. Environment Canada provides their own forecasts and it would make sense to add them to the available list for Canada. These forecasts are free I understand. spotwx.com uses them as inputs so it should be possible for Windy as well I hope.
I believe you can find them here : https://weather.gc.ca/mainmenu/modelling_menu_e.html
Thanks a lot

@idefix37
Thanks for your comment. Yes I can see the orography and model resolutions as being a limitation indeed.

I still think that if I clicked on a map at 5000m for example I would like Windy to give me on all its views (basic, meteogram, Airgram) the conditions at this elevation that can be found using the Airgram view. Right now the basic view displays the elevation of the picked location (in my example it would show 5000m on the right hand side), but as you suggested, it may display forecast values of lower elevation (your point on the Sounding graph).

As far as I can tell, the Sounding tool matches the data from Meteogram and Airgram, so the data is there. (However I don't know how the Wind Gusts are handled and if they are available within the data provided by these models at any elevation).

At the end I can still get the information I want, but I think it could be made simpler, and furthermore more consistent. I would expect the different views/modes (basic, airgram, etc) to provide consistent information, but this is not the case currently. Well, at least not for these higher elevations, I haven't really investigated yet for lower mountains.

So I think the case is still open and could be added to the backlog... :)
Thanks again

@korina
HI Korina,
Sorry for my slow reply, I was away.
Actually Mapy.cz. I switch to this app when you mentioned that we should do so.
Thank you!
pav

@filip_k
Thanks a lot for getting back to me. I will follow-up with them. I thought you guys were part of the same team now that the apps were merging. Thanks again.
P

Hi,

I really like Windy, I've been using it for a while but I believe there are inconsistencies with how some information is presented. It is confusing and not user friendly. Let me explain:

I am currently providing daily forecasts for a group doing an expedition on Mt Logan in Yukon (almost 6,000m). Models available are : ECMWF, GFS, ICON, METEOBLUE, NAM.

You can see Mt Logan forecasts here:
https://www.windy.com/60.568/-140.406?60.530,-140.236,10,m:fl5acg8

For example, when you look at the forecasts at the summit (5959m), using the Basic or Meteogram views, each forecast (except METEOBLUE) shows temperatures in the -10C/-15C range:

Only METEOBLUE seems to provide the elevation corrected forecast showing temperatures in the -25C/-30C range:

I am currently using the Airgram to have more details on how high the clouds are and the expected temperatures and wind speed at the elevation I need, and you can see for example that at 470hPa, roughly the pressure at the summit elevation, the temperatures are in the -30C range. You can also get this information using the map temperature and wind layers and increasing the elevation with the cursor to the desired pressure/elevation.

So I have to juggle with lots of stuff to try prepare the best forecast I can.

There may be a good reason for doing this but why not presenting the information in the Basic and Meteogram views consistently with the Airgram information (or Map layers). This is my main point, to be clear.

Furthermore, because of this, I also don't know if the Windgust data that is only displayed on the Basic and Meteog. views is ok or completely wrong and if I should only stick with the Airgram wind data...

While Meteoblue seems to be providing ok temperatures with elevation change, it lacks the Meteogram and Airgram displays presenting the cloud cover at different elevation. And its windgust data seems always under by quite a bit compared to ECMWF's wind forecasts using the Airgram. So I don't really trust either.

This post is a bit longer than I intended, I appologize, but I hope it will explain clearly what my problems are. It currently makes my life harder and I am not super confident with the information I am providing.

Thank you!