I was at the Brogdale national fruit collection establishment on Sunday and
came across the weather station when walking around - I assume this is where
the 38.5C temperature was recorded on the 10th of August 2003.

There is a very tall Leyland hedge (at least 6m) to the S of the station
which was casting shade on the Campbell-Stokes recorder at about 3PM despite
it being on the top of a 3m brick pillar.

The location of the instruments seems unduly sheltered for an official
station and any sunshine records from this site are certainly not currently
valid.

I think other contributors to this group have reservations about the station
and I can see why that should be the case.


Alan
St Albans

"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...
I was at the Brogdale national fruit collection establishment on Sunday and
came across the weather station when walking around - I assume this is
where the 38.5C temperature was recorded on the 10th of August 2003.

There is a very tall Leyland hedge (at least 6m) to the S of the station
which was casting shade on the Campbell-Stokes recorder at about 3PM
despite it being on the top of a 3m brick pillar.

Was the hedge formed from unreliable 1970's cars?

The location of the instruments seems unduly sheltered for an official
station and any sunshine records from this site are certainly not
currently valid.

I think other contributors to this group have reservations about the
station and I can see why that should be the case.

What is the current position on this reading?
I'm never quite sure as like you I am aware of various 'reservations'
as regards it's validity.

OK, just done a quick check.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/...mes/index.html

This suggests that the Met Office have accepted this as the
definitive all time UK maximum temperature.

If the MO have accepted this, then why the continual 'mutterings'
about it?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

"Col" wrote in message
...

"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...
I was at the Brogdale national fruit collection establishment on Sunday
and came across the weather station when walking around - I assume this is
where the 38.5C temperature was recorded on the 10th of August 2003.

There is a very tall Leyland hedge (at least 6m) to the S of the station
which was casting shade on the Campbell-Stokes recorder at about 3PM
despite it being on the top of a 3m brick pillar.

Was the hedge formed from unreliable 1970's cars?

The location of the instruments seems unduly sheltered for an official
station and any sunshine records from this site are certainly not
currently valid.

I think other contributors to this group have reservations about the
station and I can see why that should be the case.

What is the current position on this reading?
I'm never quite sure as like you I am aware of various 'reservations'
as regards it's validity.

OK, just done a quick check.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/...mes/index.html

This suggests that the Met Office have accepted this as the
definitive all time UK maximum temperature.

If the MO have accepted this, then why the continual 'mutterings'
about it?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

I think the instruments are too close to the hedge to be able to give a
reliable 'official' temperature but If anyone who knows more about this than
I do can refute this then I will be happy to be corrected.

It's not the only station with problems; the Solent MRSC station also is
poorly sited as was clearly demonstrated by some photos of the site posted
on a website some time ago.

Alan

In article ,
Col writes:

What is the current position on this reading?
I'm never quite sure as like you I am aware of various 'reservations'
as regards it's validity.

OK, just done a quick check.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/...mes/index.html

This suggests that the Met Office have accepted this as the
definitive all time UK maximum temperature.

If the MO have accepted this, then why the continual 'mutterings'
about it?

Two contributors to this newsgroup, Philip Eden and Stephen Burt,
published an article in "Weather" in 2004 which, among other things,
gave their reasons why the Brogdale reading should not be accepted. I
think this is the relevant article:

"The August 2003 heatwave in the United Kingdom. Part 2 - The hottest
sites", Stephen Burt, Philip Eden
Volume 59, Issue 9 , Pages239 - 246

As far as I can make out, it's available online via "Weather's" new
publishers, Wiley, but downloading it would cost $29.95. It might be
possible to get a photocopy from the RMS more cheaply.
--
John Hall
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin"
attributed to Sir Josiah Stamp,
a former director of the Bank of England

Are there not 'official' requirements for the sighting of instruments?
Peter J

"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...


"Col" wrote in message
...

"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...
I was at the Brogdale national fruit collection establishment on Sunday
and came across the weather station when walking around - I assume this
is where the 38.5C temperature was recorded on the 10th of August 2003.

There is a very tall Leyland hedge (at least 6m) to the S of the station
which was casting shade on the Campbell-Stokes recorder at about 3PM
despite it being on the top of a 3m brick pillar.

Was the hedge formed from unreliable 1970's cars?

The location of the instruments seems unduly sheltered for an official
station and any sunshine records from this site are certainly not
currently valid.

I think other contributors to this group have reservations about the
station and I can see why that should be the case.

What is the current position on this reading?
I'm never quite sure as like you I am aware of various 'reservations'
as regards it's validity.

OK, just done a quick check.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/...mes/index.html

This suggests that the Met Office have accepted this as the
definitive all time UK maximum temperature.

If the MO have accepted this, then why the continual 'mutterings'
about it?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

I think the instruments are too close to the hedge to be able to give a
reliable 'official' temperature but If anyone who knows more about this
than I do can refute this then I will be happy to be corrected.

It's not the only station with problems; the Solent MRSC station also is
poorly sited as was clearly demonstrated by some photos of the site posted
on a website some time ago.

Alan

"Peter" wrote in message
...
Are there not 'official' requirements for the sighting of instruments?

Yes there are, and for this reading to be logged on the Met Office site
as an 'official record' surely implies that such requirements were met
for this site.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On 28 Jan, 20:38, John Hall wrote:
In article ,

Â*Col writes:

What is the current position on this reading?
I'm never quite sure as like you I am aware of various 'reservations'
as regards it's validity.

OK, just done a quick check.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/...mes/index.html

This suggests that the Met Office have accepted this as the
definitive all time UK maximum temperature.

If the MO have accepted this, then why the continual 'mutterings'
about it?

Two contributors to this newsgroup, Philip Eden and Stephen Burt,
published an article in "Weather" in 2004 which, among other things,
gave their reasons why the Brogdale reading should not be accepted. I
think this is the relevant article:

"The August 2003 heatwave in the United Kingdom. Part 2 - The hottest
sites", Stephen Burt, Philip Eden
Volume 59, Issue 9 , Pages239 - 246

As far as I can make out, it's available online via "Weather's" new
publishers, Wiley, but downloading it would cost $29.95. It might be
possible to get a photocopy from the RMS more cheaply.
--

The full article is too long to post in full here, but here is an
extract. Full details of the three independent climatological and
statistical tests, with maps etc, were given in our article, copies of
which can also be obtained through the free loan service operated by
the National Meteorological Library in Exeter. I probably have a
couple of spare reprints somewhere, too.

As for acceptance/non-acceptance by UKMO of statistical extremes -
that certainly *does not* imply any particular status! There are
numerous examples of records previously accepted having since been
corrected, and others of extremes not accepted at the time having
since been quoted as records. Anyway, here's the relevant part of the
summary:

" Faversham, Kent
This site reported a maximum of 38.5ï‚°C on 10 August 2003, the highest
maximum at any of the 650 climatological sites used in the preparation
of this series of papers. The value stands 0.4 degC above the next-
highest value reported from any other station (see Table 1 in Part 1
of this article), a surprisingly large difference in view of the
convergence of all other maximum temperature extremes – the next ten
highest values below the 38.1ï‚°C reported from Kew, Royal Botanic
Gardens in western London are separated by only 0.7 degC. That the
highest temperatures were recorded in west and north-west London is
not surprising as the already hot south to south-easterly flow was
warmed further as it travelled inland from the Channel coast and
crossed the extensive urban fabric of London. The Faversham value
therefore appeared anomalous in view of its location only 10-15 km
from the north Kent coast and less than 40 km from the windward coast
(where the day’s maximum at Dover was ‘only’ 31C). ‘The Faversham
Maximum’ was therefore scrutinised closely during the course of the
preparation of this paper. After consideration of the site and
instruments, the validity of the Faversham reading was tested by three
independent analyses. The first of these examined the distribution of
maximum temperatures reported from a number of local stations within
30 km of Faversham; the second and third considered temperatures
recorded at Faversham in comparison with other sites during previous
hot spells. In the opinion of the authors, the Faversham reading
appears to be approximately 2 degC higher than would be expected in
the locality and it is not therefore considered to be representative."

[Details of the three tests here]

"Conclusions
The results of three separate and independent analyses clearly
demonstrate that the maximum reading of 38.5ºC obtained at Faversham
on 10 August 2003 is anomalous (approximately 2 degC too high) and
cannot be easily accounted for meteorologically, climatologically, or
statistically. The authors believe that other reasons must be sought
to explain it*, and that ‘The Faversham Maximum’ cannot be regarded as
sufficiently beyond doubt to justify its continued claim to the UK
national temperature record."

Footnote - particularly relevant to the original topic raised:
" * As stated above, the Met Office inspector concluded there appeared
no reason to doubt the observer/s or the thermometer itself. Possible
reasons for the high value could include the state of repair of the
Stevenson screen, the ‘weedy’ state of the meteorological enclosure or
heat transfer from non-natural surfaces in the vicinity of the
enclosure. The site is also open to the general public and
interference from visitors unknown has not been ruled out. Most
likely, however, appears to be the sheltering effect of the tall hedge
to the south and east of the enclosure evident in Figs. 2 and 3. It
would be interesting to ascertain whether this hedge has been allowed
to grow appreciably taller in recent years, possibly accounting for
the increased frequency of high maximum temperatures at this site when
compared with other local stations since it re-opened in 1997, as
outlined in Analysis 2. "

--
Stephen Burt
Stratfield Mortimer, Berkshire