Met Office as useful as a chocolate fireguard

[Loggy]

Excellent stuff, all very interesting!

So why is a storm with a certain low pressure just a storm in the UK, and yet if you had an identical storm with the same pressure in (say the US) called a Hurricane? Also what is the difference between a Cyclone and an anti Cyclone and which is stronger?

 

[austin]

Excellent stuff, all very interesting!

So why is a storm with a certain low pressure just a storm in the UK, and yet if you had an identical storm with the same pressure in (say the US) called a Hurricane? Also what is the difference between a Cyclone and an anti Cyclone and which is stronger?

Good question and arguably they are the same phenomenon but tropical Hurricanes are significantly more intense than anything we could get in northern or southern latitudes and also have their origins in atmospheric conditions that could only occur over a warm tropical sea. Atmospheric pressure in a hurricane will be as low as 900 mb or even lower. In an Atlantic storm it would be unusual if it was less than 980. So they would never be the same but called different things.

A tropical storm becomes a hurricane when it meets certain criteria mainly around wind speed and we have a Mr Beaufort to blame for the phrase "hurricane force" winds which are simply winds above 70mph and nothing to do with hurricanes - hence my Michael fish observation.




Sent from my iPhone with a smile

 

[austin]

I do think you should have mentioned the causal effect on precipitation from the latitudinal position of the ITCZ and in particular the importance of the Jet Stream on North Atlantic pressure systems which, in the main but not exclusively, control the weather patterns over the British Isles. To illustrate this point, I am attaching herewith the Jet Stream plot for today, 14 Aug 2014




One final thought - how come James Stagg could predict a window in the Atlantic low on 5-6th June 1944 with the barest minimum of information and scientific instrumentation and yet the Met Office nowadays with all the development in meteorology can't tell what the weather was yesterday, let alone this afternoon???

I could have done but the ITCZ is the cause of the trade winds deserts, and the doldrums and while these no doubt influence our weather I don't believe they are significant factors. The jet stream most certainly is a major determinant affecting the formation and more importantly the tracking of Atlantic lows and high pressure systems. But it's really complicated and I don't believe the met office has it properly modelled yet.

I could also mention the Bergeron process and its importance in rain formation, I ought to have mentioned Boyles Law too and loads of other stuff I have forgotten about meteorology. I am also not going to get into a dick swinging contest over weather forecasting as I know I have forgotten most of it in the past 30+ years.

As for Mr Stagg, I don't know the detail but would suggest some well deserved luck played its part. And I stand by what I said that weather forecasts are accurate most of the time. Oh, and looking out a window is a now cast not a forecast. Anyone can do a now cast.


Sent from my iPhone with a smile

 

[nigelphoto]

As for Mr Stagg, I don't know the detail but would suggest some well deserved luck played its part.

Sent from my iPhone with a smile

James Stagg and his team forecast a 24hr break in the Atlantic Low sitting over the Channel during the first week in June 1944 on the one moon/tide period for the next four weeks suitable for Operation Overlord ( D-Day landings ) to go ahead. They used the tried and tested surface barometric pressure and weather balloon method and if they had been wrong the French would be speaking a lot more German than they do now - or perhaps Russian as they would have probably got to Calais sooner or later. But that's all history now, and we are dealing with geography or meteorology or a loada codswallop

 

[nigelphoto]

Today, right now, forecast for my area on the Met Office website is <5% likelihood of precipitation - what's it doing? Peeing it down; like I said, why don't they stick their heads out the window instead of where they have got them?

PS I don't like riding in the rain!

 

[Dee Dub]

If they had said 0% they would have been wrong, but they said <5%, so they were right. Perhaps it's your misunderstanding of probabilities that is wrong?

 

[Dee Dub]

P.S. I do realise I'm being a sm@®t @®$e! Sorry!

 

[austin]

Today, right now, forecast for my area on the Met Office website is <5% likelihood of precipitation - what's it doing? Peeing it down; like I said, why don't they stick their heads out the window instead of where they have got them?

PS I don't like riding in the rain!

But if they did stick their head out their window it probably won't be raining where they are. In fact it would be a >95% probability that it wouldn't be raining where they are. Which would probably then prove that the weather forecast was accurate.

The forecast for my region also says <5% chance of rain and out my window it's fine. Is my weather forecast wrong as well because I am not getting the rain they forecast. I might be a farmer or Gardner desperate for that elusive 5% shower.


Sent from my iPhone with a smile

 

[austin]

Today, right now, forecast for my area on the Met Office website is <5% likelihood of precipitation - what's it doing? Peeing it down; like I said, why don't they stick their heads out the window instead of where they have got them?

PS I don't like riding in the rain!

But if they did stick their head out their window it probably won't be raining where they are. In fact it would be a >95% probability that it wouldn't be raining where they are. Which would probably then prove that the weather forecast was accurate.

The forecast for my region also says <5% chance of rain and out my window it's fine. Is my weather forecast wrong as well because I am not getting the rain they forecast. I might be a farmer or Gardner desperate for that elusive 5% shower.


Sent from my iPhone with a smile