@mcousin According to this post this feature will be added in a future update. I am really looking forward to it as well.
best regards
Peter
@mcousin According to this post this feature will be added in a future update. I am really looking forward to it as well.
best regards
Peter
@Suty Thank you for the quick rensponse. I tried it right now and I was able to replicate it. This time I tried it somewhere else and with a shorter route. And while doing so I found something new. While using my new shorter test-route it always occured when the route got longer than 100km. In the following picture the route is just above 100km and there are no clouds showing.
In the next picture the lenght of the route is shown as exactly 100km and the clouds are there.
But that seems to be not the whole story, because my original route was always significantly longer than 100km and had problems as well. When I increase the length of a similar shorter test-route, which has the same Problem at 100km, even more (to somewhere in the low 200km), the clouds appear again (did not capture a picture). It seems to me that they dissapear an come back several times when increasing the length of the route. Concerning the replication of the bug, I can't replicate it consistently. I don't know what the route really needs to look like to have this behaviour. I try one or two routes and then I usually get another one with this behaviour.
best regards
Peter
When I check the wind forecast on my phone I can only see about three days into the future, but on desktop way longer (see screenshots). Is this a bug, or what am I doing wrong?
I am using:
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@idefix37 Thanks for the hint. Did not think of tapping it, but now I know how it works.
best regards
Peter
When I use the distance and planning feature on my phone I can't scroll to the beginning or the end of the route. The position indicator on the 2D view is centered in the middle of the screen and the 2D view moves beneath it while scrolling, but only until its ends reach either the menu on the left or the end of the screen on the right side. On the example in the picture I scrolled as far to the end of the route as possible, but scrolling is over between the 14th and 15th waypoint. Everything behind that can't be reached. The position indicator on the map above moves in accordance to that only between these boundaries as well.
I am using:
best regards
Peter
Any updates on adding this feature?
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@idefix37 It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty The bug, where the bottom menu is cut off seems fixed now, thank you.
But the bug with the overlapping labels in the layers menu on mobile and desktop (german language) is still there. It seems that there is a problem with long words and their breaking into the next line. See the two pictures just above. Any updates on fixing that?
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
@Suty It seems fixed now, thank you.
best regards
Peter
I am not so sure about this. Yes, the phone screen is smaller, but even for the three available days I need to scroll and the screen is the same for e.g. meteogram view and there the long forecast is displayed without any issues (including wind). I just need to scroll there. It is kind of a bummer, that the length of the model combining wind forecast is so short on the app, espacially because the full length wind forecasts can all be viewed separately, by switching to e.g. basic data or meteogram view and selecting the different models, one after the other.
Regarding your point. I did not check your statement, but I would totally expect the displayed wind data to be only from the stated models and any added data from a different model to be clearly marked. Any other approach should be disregarded.
best regards
Peter