AROME vs ECMWF IFS
AROME or ECMWF: is the high-resolution model better near the coast?
For the next day or two near the coast, a kilometre-scale model such as AROME can show things a global model cannot: land and sea breezes, wind funnelling round headlands, and showers. For the overall weather pattern and anything beyond two days, ECMWF is the stronger guide.
| AROME | ECMWF IFS | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Météo-France | ECMWF |
| Type | Regional model | Global model |
| Area | France, Channel, Biscay, western Mediterranean | Global |
| Grid size | about 1.3 km | about 9 km |
| Updates | 5 times a day | 4 times a day |
| Looks ahead | 2 days | 15 days |
| Data licence | Etalab Open Licence 2.0 | CC-BY-4.0 (open data) |
Choose AROME when
- You are coastal sailing within the next 48 hours.
- You want local wind effects.
- You are in the area it covers (France, Channel, Biscay, western Mediterranean).
Choose ECMWF IFS when
- You are looking beyond two days.
- You are offshore, away from land effects.
- You need coverage outside the high-resolution area.
On the water
Use ECMWF to decide whether to go and AROME to decide how the day will feel along the coast. Remember that fine grids look precise but can still be wrong in detail.
More: Resolution in km and nm
Figures come from the Ilma catalog and the providers' own pages. Forecast skill changes as models are upgraded, so this page describes what each model is built for, not a ranking.