@andrew2213 said in Aviation Winds Aloft on Airgram:

...Still don’t understand why there is wind info given for the surface and then 2000/3000 ft MSL etc in areas where the elevation of the ground is like 5000 or 10000MSL etc in like Colorado or mountainous areas.

I would love to hear a good explanation for this question. I live in Colorado, and there are wind barbs on the airgram at hPa corresponding to an approximate elevation of several hundred feet beneath the dirt I'm standing on. Also, I wonder about that sam issue as related to the map display, when you can set altitude based on pressure. Just skip the 850-1000 hPa range?

P.S. I think when I finally have all this sorted out well enough, I'm going to post a very thorough "explainer" with a bunch of screenshots so nobody gets as confused as me again (⊙.☉)7

Well, seeing as I'm in continental US...

#3 HRRR is my vote

@Gkikas-LGPZ said in Aviation Winds Aloft on Airgram:

@TChilli
.... Aspen, CO has a 10.000 ft elevation (roughly 700 hPa)
In the airgram the "fictionary" winds at lower levels are those given by the model
as the pressure levels are terrain following...

Thanks for that! I actually looked at those images in the other thread before, but something you said made it click this time ...I think.
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, the isobaric surfaces are technically actually contiguous, but they are highly compressed at higher altitudes (functionally, to the point of being at the same plane, relatively speaking). As such, any barbs below your altitude on the airgram are still modeled, but can be ignored if they’re below x hPa (700 hPa in your example). [edit to insert for clarification: ok, not actually “ignored” completely, because they are functionally the surface winds at 700 hPa, but below that they are all pretty much the same direction & strength, so ignoring the bottom bit is fine].
However, if I’m also understanding atmospheric pressure systems and the way they move, to be technically most accurate you can’t truly just say “Ignore everything below 700 hPa” and be done. This is because as pressure systems move, they also lower/raise the regional atmospheric pressure a bit, such that a really accurate statement would be more like, “Today, in a low pressure system, everything below 690 hPa can be ignored on the airgram.” Though, that sort of precision is largely superfluous and there is better information to be gleaned from understanding pressure systems and their movement. Additionally, if you want accurate surface wind speeds, the easiest thing to do is look at sounding. Let me know if I really missed the mark on that stuff. Otherwise, I think I finally got it :D.
Thanks!

@Gkikas-LGPZ said in Aviation Winds Aloft on Airgram:

@TChilli
"Surface" is a map of wind (or temperature) at model's lowest atmospheric layer.
Over the ocean (or open sea) it is the same with MSL.
In complex terrain it may differ a lot from reality.

...

Are those images from a book [in English or translated] that discusses specifics of weather models? If so, what’s the title/author?
If not, do you have recommendations for other resources you might be able to offer?
I’m serious about my plans to write up an “explainer” post for other people who might benefit from an “idiot’s guide” to Windy’s graphical displays, and I want to make sure I’m being accurate (but don’t want to pester you with every little question). Thanks!

@Gkikas-LGPZ
Good deal. Glad to hear it. Thanks for the explanation. One more question, and I think I’ve got Windy sorted out...
It appears as though the above is also true of the colorized map view of wind speeds, with two exceptions:

1. “Surface” is actually a map of surface wind speeds (and not wind speeds at MSL)
2. “100 m / 330 ft” is a map of wind speeds 100 m above surface (AGL).
   After those two, the local wind speeds are mapped based on the ‘fictional’ predicted speeds based on the models up to the hPa corresponding to the altitude at that location. That is to say, for Aspen, after “surface” and “100 m,” the locally displayed wind speed color shouldn’t change very much until 700 hPa (allowing for some variance within model).
   Is that the gist of the map, as well?
   If so, I’ll just go ahead now and say “thanks again for the help!” :)

@Gkikas-LGPZ said in Aviation Winds Aloft on Airgram:

@TChilli
.... Aspen, CO has a 10.000 ft elevation (roughly 700 hPa)
In the airgram the "fictionary" winds at lower levels are those given by the model
as the pressure levels are terrain following...

Thanks for that! I actually looked at those images in the other thread before, but something you said made it click this time ...I think.
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, the isobaric surfaces are technically actually contiguous, but they are highly compressed at higher altitudes (functionally, to the point of being at the same plane, relatively speaking). As such, any barbs below your altitude on the airgram are still modeled, but can be ignored if they’re below x hPa (700 hPa in your example). [edit to insert for clarification: ok, not actually “ignored” completely, because they are functionally the surface winds at 700 hPa, but below that they are all pretty much the same direction & strength, so ignoring the bottom bit is fine].
However, if I’m also understanding atmospheric pressure systems and the way they move, to be technically most accurate you can’t truly just say “Ignore everything below 700 hPa” and be done. This is because as pressure systems move, they also lower/raise the regional atmospheric pressure a bit, such that a really accurate statement would be more like, “Today, in a low pressure system, everything below 690 hPa can be ignored on the airgram.” Though, that sort of precision is largely superfluous and there is better information to be gleaned from understanding pressure systems and their movement. Additionally, if you want accurate surface wind speeds, the easiest thing to do is look at sounding. Let me know if I really missed the mark on that stuff. Otherwise, I think I finally got it :D.
Thanks!

@andrew2213 said in Aviation Winds Aloft on Airgram:

...Still don’t understand why there is wind info given for the surface and then 2000/3000 ft MSL etc in areas where the elevation of the ground is like 5000 or 10000MSL etc in like Colorado or mountainous areas.

I would love to hear a good explanation for this question. I live in Colorado, and there are wind barbs on the airgram at hPa corresponding to an approximate elevation of several hundred feet beneath the dirt I'm standing on. Also, I wonder about that sam issue as related to the map display, when you can set altitude based on pressure. Just skip the 850-1000 hPa range?

P.S. I think when I finally have all this sorted out well enough, I'm going to post a very thorough "explainer" with a bunch of screenshots so nobody gets as confused as me again (⊙.☉)7

Yeah, I was just a bit confused by the use of past tense in your previous post, so I decided to post a second error message just in case.
...not that I’m complaining. See how well it’d go if I had to post to forums in almost any other language. Hint: results would be embarrassing.

Like I said, if the error is present after the next update, I will post at that time.

Just got the error message below for the same problem today. I’ll check for updates and see if it’s fixed and/or send an error report in the next version update. Thanks

{
"runningMs": 50224,
"type": "user",
"module": "inAppPurchase error: [object Object]",
"line": null,
"col": null,
"url": "http://localhost:8080/#/donate?2019-03-16-03,40.769,-104.705,5",
"script": null,
"ver": "18.2.3",
"target": "mobile",
"latestBcast": "bcast: rqstOpen donate (5426ms. ago)
bcast: pluginOpened donate (5055ms. ago)
bcast: pluginClosed hp-weather (5008ms. ago)
bcast: pluginClosed patch (4921ms. ago)
bcast: pluginClosed pois (4921ms. ago)
",
"sessionName": "us-TChilli",
"sessionCounter": 22,
"lang": "en",
"retina": true,
"size": "375x667",
"glParticles": false,
"platform": "ios",
"errorID": ""
}

This is more FYI, to help out the Dev’s.
The last several times I opened Windy, there has been a pop-up asking for donations with 1-time donation amount options and subscription amount options. I’d be more than happy to donate, but the buttons don’t work. The button blinks (registering that I tapped on it) but that’s it. Error message is below.

iPhone 6s
iOS 12.1.4
Windy v. 18.2.3

{
"runningMs": 12953,
"type": "user",
"module": "inAppPurchase error: [object Object]",
"line": null,
"col": null,
"url": "http://localhost:8080/#/donate?2019-03-11-21,40.769,-104.705,5",
"script": null,
"ver": "18.2.3",
"target": "mobile",
"latestBcast": "store: hpShown (7212ms. ago)
bcast: rqstOpen donate (7080ms. ago)
bcast: pluginOpened donate (6619ms. ago)
bcast: pluginClosed hp-weather (6608ms. ago)
bcast: pluginClosed patch (6576ms. ago)
",
"sessionName": "us-TChilli",
"sessionCounter": 20,
"lang": "en",
"retina": true,
"size": "375x667",
"glParticles": false,
"platform": "ios",
"errorID": ""
}

Well, seeing as I'm in continental US...

#3 HRRR is my vote

@dispatchdog said in Winds aloft and clear air turbulence:

Would it be possible to add the winds aloft forecast and clear air turbulence? Another thought would to have an overlay of aeronautical charts as an option.

Have you checked out XC skies? That site specializes in soaring forecasts, including winds aloft, updraft velocity, buoyancy to shear ratio, CAPE, etc. I use it a lot and love it.
Downsides: obviously, it may or may not be what you're looking for; doesn't help you if you really wanted all that in Windy; subscription needed to use all available forecast features (though you can check it out for a month or so for free).

url for clicky above: https://www.xcskies.com/