There is a mix of discussion between radar images and weather generally. I merged two threads yesterday when they were both regarding radar 
ICON is useless IME. Don’t know why it should be useless, because it is very short-range…
ECMWF is better than GFS and I find it broadly similar to the UKMO MSLP charts in terms of depicted wx and timing of the movement.
If like me, last week and at the weekend, you were looking at the forecasts for flying this week, the coming weekend or early next week, it was interesting to note that the GFS and ECWF models were completely different across much of Europe. Completely different ideas as to where the low would go or the fronts would be.
I would prefer having a look at sat24 just like i’m looking at metar because it’s an observation, and not as estimation based on a particular model. I like windy very much, but still it’s a forecast.
With Windy, which is the correct/ best feed to us ICON 7km or ECMWF 9kw etc, they all show different, cloud coverage seem totally different in particular.
Weather radar is surely all ground based radar, not satellite?
However most windy.com data is going to be large satellite derived.
I believe the satellite(s) are geostationary. They offer updates every minute.
Ibra – yes would account for the difference, but are each actually using different satellites and does the data come from weather sats in fixed orbit? I had assumed it is ground based radar?
Windy Satellite feed is EUMETSAT and Weather Radar feed is Met Office, it’s written on the top right of the screen !
Thinking of the UK, we have the Met Office, and throughout europe Meteox and Windy provide useful services as well as the other national met offices.
I find that at the same moment in time on the whole Meteox and Windy are identical, so I assume use the same feed, but are often out of line with the Met Office. I cant imagine that they have a different feed from the national weather office who probably closely guard the data.
I wonder if the differences are due to how the data is interpolated or some other reason? The differences I find can be quite substantial.
In terms of more sustained weather I find Windy remarkably accurate. On a recent trip there was a large but isolated block of weather that Windy indicated had a base of less then 500 feet and tops of 12,000 feet. I was tempted to go through it but had a little reservation from the passengers point a view of just how unpleasant the ride might be – I did look to go under and found the tops and the base were almost exactly as predicted. I thought that was quite impressive given their modelling.
There isn’t supposed to be a blind spot over the SE UK though
