Can someone provide the reasoning/advantages please with the change to the forecast parameter structure????
Where is the benefit of using symbols as opposed to the previous listing structure which had the "advanced feature" where I could tailor which elements I wanted access to?
DO NOT LIKE the new format........
Is this by any chance...... "vertical cross section" :)
Would Windy consider looking into developing a multi-panel display of available NWP models within the PC platform.
4 panel (as shown in image) or 2-panel would be appreciated.
If option is made available to manually select the NWP --- would be a bonus.
Thoughts?????!
This is what I am looking at now on my laptop for the same pinned icons before the UI change.....
So now I have to commit to memory which combination/pattern of colors each icon represents as a forecast field.
At least do us the courtesy of making the icons more distinguishable or recognisable to the weather field it is representing.
It is a very pretty but meaningless array of icons.
I reckon this is my final rant ..... you have served me well in the past Windy, onto new pastures.
Thanks, Ivo.
I did stumble across these shortcuts a little while ago and have found them very useful.
Is it possible to add an additional keyboard shortcut that alternates between the available computer models?
This would be super useful when making quick model comparisons of particular weather features.
Thanks.
@ivo and the team,
Amazing effort and a great addition to the Windy platform.
As this is still in beta (and appears very stable so far), could I add a pitch for a further addition to the satellite layer/windy platform?
Another website that I subscribe to offers model output which can be overlaid on top of satellite images. I find this feature very useful when verifying the model output (location of wind changes/fronts/cloudband etc) -- simple and easy.
See images below as an example...
Could you consider incorporating layer overlay functionality within the Windy platform....ie, base satellite image with an overlay option of the available model data (may need an opacity slider bar)?
This feature may also assist the hobby meteorologists within you community in identifying major weather systems like frontal features, upper level weather systems etc.
Otherwise, great work guy/girls.......top of the charts!
Sounds soooo exciting guys š
Ivo.... name a price, Iām happy to pay a subscription.
Your whole team deserve all the rewards - Windy is a global brand ..... congrats.
Another comment that I wanted to add.....
Again with VFR option, and in this case concerning Tstorms:
1/ The RH as a proxy for cloud may not always work for cellular convective situations. I have marked out specific regions where the EC model is indicating a line of TStorms on the Rain/Tstorm layer and the Cloud Top layer.....however the RH display in the Route slice only presents cloud below 6000ft. NB: this is consistent with the RH fields found within the area display when you ascend and descend through the available layers. The cloud top layer shows a distinct line of elevated cloud abv 50k ft and would be best avoided.
NOTE: I read in your comments that you will be attempting to add an IFR option for the upper level fields. Could you include a graphical feature OR a line along the bottom of the cross section highlighting "Cloud Top" values???
I would also support upper level isotach lines showing jet streams (80/120/160kt etc) and regions of significant vertical wind shear.
2/ A comment regarding the weather/rainfall along the cross section.....the users need to be aware that the rainfall towers/weather(in this case TS's) are for the previous 3hrs hours from the forecast time. I have highlighted this in top image. Just so the user is not critical of the model output when they see rain/weather at a distance point along the route following a weather system OR think that the weather system providing the precip is some x100km wide.
3/ The cloud base....I'm not a great fan of this field (cloud > SCT) when in the case of these tropical Tstorm situations (see above) the cloud base forecast is >8000-12000ft - which is not the case for this region. I like the addition of the DewPoint spread which as least gives an approximation potential cloud base (1-8 Oktas) -- DewPointSpreadx400ft - and again would be better suited to any VFR pilot.
AND finally.........I can see the benefit of "Relative Wind" vectors from a flight planning perspective. But I would also favour "Absolute Wind" vectors from a forecasting perspective. And the official forecasts are all in Real/Absolute wind directions which would make it easier to evaluate the Windy forecast against other official forecasts.
Thanks for the all the effort.........I look forward to utilising this feature.
@anthony10 ....I agree.
If the option is available, I would like an additional global model (JMA GSM) made accessible for the global community.
Have been a Windy user for a long, long time, and as of next week my subscription runs out (not to be renewed). I spent my $'s on MeteoBlue. Not as smooth as the previous version of Windy but there are many other nice model/display features available for subscribers. It costs a bit more than Windy but I am happy to pay and try for now in the hope that maybe Windy will sort this mess of a UI out in the not-too-distant future (or maybe they'll take a few more bruises for now and stick to their vision with this new UI).
Since the new interface upgrade - the Weather Picker is removed from the display window (PC) after opening the Location Forecast Meteogram panel.
My preference would be, if it is selected, to retain the Weather Picker flag at all times until deselected.
Regards
@stitch added images The four independent Windy panels would provide the freedom to setup each panel (like we all normally do now) but with the additional feature of adding variation across the four panels for easy side-by-side comparison.
0e90eb15-0c3c-4663-bc3c-6615bd31fb19-image.png
An additional concept - could the time (scroll bar) have the following options:
linked together at the same time for all panels, and
include a staggered time interval (optional) between each panel (say, 24hr interval) and then linked/locked with that set time interval retained for advancing along the time bar?
ea4b69f5-5f9a-4bcc-81e4-42b312f89b10-image.png
and here it comes.....now for my sulky face :-(
@Gkikas-LGPZ , @TomSlavkovsky ,
I would also like to add my support for the development and inclusion of a "cross-section" forecast into the Windy platform.
From an aviation forecasting perspective, this add-in would be greatly appreciated and would be supported from those in the aviation industry (both pilots and forecasters).
I don't believe the initial version should require the "icing/turb" display presented in the Ogimet GRAMET product. Just a simple cross section of the currently available model weather data (for instance, wind/temp/dew point/RH and cloud groups - possibly precip) between multi-points would be more than adequate to assist with flight planning and weather route monitoring.
Appreciate all the work and development currently going into this platform.
Hi @Korina,
Would the following concept make life easier for the IT development team (and increase the chance of implementing this concept)
The four independent Windy panels would provide the freedom to setup each panel (like we all normally do now) but with the additional feature of adding variation across the four panels for easy side-by-side comparison.
An additional concept - could the time (scroll bar) have the following options:
As you may tell......this is a feature I would REALLY like to see included on the platform.
Thanks :)
@Shimon-Avitan ...good question.
I did some investigation and trialled various cloud amounts for the available cloud groups (High/Medium/Low) and compared them to the Total Cloud %.
This is what I found:
High 99%, Med 0%, Low 0% => Clouds (Total) 29%
High 0% Med 95% Low 1% => Clouds (Total) 49%
High 0% Med 0% Low 99% => Clouds (Total) 99%
The % value associated with Total is dependent on which cloud layer grouping. Maybe think of it like this - how opaque is the cloud cover to objects like the sun/moon. Overcast high cloud like Cirrus can still allow some definition of the sun for surface observers. Whereas, an overcast sky of stratus or stratocumulus will have a greater level of opaqueness, or is more likely to make the sun indistiguishable to a surface observer.
The official definition from ECMWF didn't clear it up for me:
Total cloud cover is a single level field calculated from the cloud occurring at different model levels through the atmosphere. This parameter is the proportion of a grid box covered by cloud.
High cloud is a single level field calculated from cloud occurring on model levels with a pressure less than 0.45 times the surface pressure. The proportion of a grid box covered by cloud occurring in the high levels of the troposphere.
Would the developers consider adding a set of keyboard shortcut keys to toggle between the available NWP models?
Even something as simple as shift-left shift-right would be an improvement over having to mouse-over to achiieve a change.
Thx.
I woke up this morning........WHAT JUST HAPPENNED to the WINDY Platform. No, No, NO!!!!! Please revert to previous set-up. [And no mention or consultattion of change to its paying USERS]
Graphcast looks exciting and verification stats appear to support an increase in forecast accuracy out to 10 days in comparison to EC HRES. However, you might be a little disappointed with the current Graphcast resolution should Windy support implementing this model into the current model suite. Res EC HRES ~9km GRAPHCAST ~30km
HRES
Graphcast
What can I say - Brilliant!!! You guys continue to impress. A very handy feature......thanks!