On the TV and radio forcasts this morning much publicity was given to
the heavy rainfall in Cumbria yesterday. It was stated several times
that the rainfall "yesterday" may be a new daily record for June. They
may have been referring in advance to the 24-hour period ending at
0900z today or they may have been referring to some other period,
perhaps the 24 hours ending at 1800z yesterday. Surely, though, when
considering such a record what matters is the maximum fall during any
24-hour period rather than the 24 hours ending at some arbitrarily
chosen hour. For example, if 100 mm falls on a given day between 0000z
and 1800z, equally distributed throughout the period, this would give
two 0900z-0900z days with 50 mm each which would be trumped by another
day with a fall of 60 mm spread over a single 0900z-0900z day. Clearly,
the 100 mm fall in 18 hours would be the more significant event but it
would be lost in the 0900-0900z reporting convention.

Just one of many ways in which statistics can give misleading
information to the unwary.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
twitter: @TideswellWeathr

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 20:26:01 UTC+1, Norman Lynagh wrote:
On the TV and radio forcasts this morning much publicity was given to
the heavy rainfall in Cumbria yesterday. It was stated several times
that the rainfall "yesterday" may be a new daily record for June. They
may have been referring in advance to the 24-hour period ending at
0900z today or they may have been referring to some other period,
perhaps the 24 hours ending at 1800z yesterday. Surely, though, when
considering such a record what matters is the maximum fall during any
24-hour period rather than the 24 hours ending at some arbitrarily
chosen hour. For example, if 100 mm falls on a given day between 0000z
and 1800z, equally distributed throughout the period, this would give
two 0900z-0900z days with 50 mm each which would be trumped by another
day with a fall of 60 mm spread over a single 0900z-0900z day. Clearly,
the 100 mm fall in 18 hours would be the more significant event but it
would be lost in the 0900-0900z reporting convention.

Just one of many ways in which statistics can give misleading
information to the unwary.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
twitter: @TideswellWeathr

I seem to remember seeing 150mm tweeted from the Met Office or was it the BBC for Honiston Pass. Is there an AWS up there or was this the farm at Seathwaite?

Keith (Southend)

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 20:26:01 UTC+1, Norman Lynagh wrote:
On the TV and radio forcasts this morning much publicity was given to
the heavy rainfall in Cumbria yesterday. It was stated several times
that the rainfall "yesterday" may be a new daily record for June. They
may have been referring in advance to the 24-hour period ending at
0900z today or they may have been referring to some other period,
perhaps the 24 hours ending at 1800z yesterday. Surely, though, when
considering such a record what matters is the maximum fall during any
24-hour period rather than the 24 hours ending at some arbitrarily
chosen hour. For example, if 100 mm falls on a given day between 0000z
and 1800z, equally distributed throughout the period, this would give
two 0900z-0900z days with 50 mm each which would be trumped by another
day with a fall of 60 mm spread over a single 0900z-0900z day. Clearly,
the 100 mm fall in 18 hours would be the more significant event but it
would be lost in the 0900-0900z reporting convention.

Just one of many ways in which statistics can give misleading
information to the unwary.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
twitter: @TideswellWeathr

I saw on Twitter 150mm mentioned at Honiston Pass from the BBC on the 28th.

Keith (Southend)

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 20:26:01 UTC+1, Norman Lynagh wrote:
On the TV and radio forcasts this morning much publicity was given to
the heavy rainfall in Cumbria yesterday. It was stated several times
that the rainfall "yesterday" may be a new daily record for June. They
may have been referring in advance to the 24-hour period ending at
0900z today or they may have been referring to some other period,
perhaps the 24 hours ending at 1800z yesterday. Surely, though, when
considering such a record what matters is the maximum fall during any
24-hour period rather than the 24 hours ending at some arbitrarily
chosen hour. For example, if 100 mm falls on a given day between 0000z
and 1800z, equally distributed throughout the period, this would give
two 0900z-0900z days with 50 mm each which would be trumped by another
day with a fall of 60 mm spread over a single 0900z-0900z day. Clearly,
the 100 mm fall in 18 hours would be the more significant event but it
would be lost in the 0900-0900z reporting convention.

Just one of many ways in which statistics can give misleading
information to the unwary.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
https://peakdistrictweather.org
twitter: @TideswellWeathr

They were referring to the period ending at 10.00 am yesterday.
Automatic weather stations could record all weather measurements from midnight to midnight but I do not think it will happen as it is tradition to record from 9 am to 9 am GMT.

Nicholas
Meir Heath, Stoke-On-Trent 250 metres above sea level.

Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

A quick web search reveals a site run by a den of sceptics that tries to demolish the record, even hilariously by discrediting the time period, stating that UK daily rainfall should be read at 09h not 10h - forgetting about summer time. However, in amongst such drivel they have unearthed a previous record at Bruton (Sexeys Sch) Somerset of June 28 1917. I had an idea that this had been rejected - otherwise the MO would not have said what they said about the new record this week.

Here's the URL - it really is awesomely annoying..but does show a photo of the site....
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...ut-to-be-fake/

Julian

On 30/06/2020 22:43, Julian Mayes wrote:
Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

A quick web search reveals a site run by a den of sceptics that tries to demolish the record, even hilariously by discrediting the time period, stating that UK daily rainfall should be read at 09h not 10h - forgetting about summer time. However, in amongst such drivel they have unearthed a previous record at Bruton (Sexeys Sch) Somerset of June 28 1917. I had an idea that this had been rejected - otherwise the MO would not have said what they said about the new record this week.

Here's the URL - it really is awesomely annoying..but does show a photo of the site....
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...ut-to-be-fake/


Although to be fair the bit about the time of recording the daily
rainfall came in the comments section, not the actual website.

That said, the whole thing does read like a conspiracy theorist site.
Always something underhand going on, everything's lies, covering up the
'truth'....


--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 22:43:10 UTC+1, Julian Mayes wrote:
Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

Hi, All,
This reminds me of a cross section map we learnt in geography back in the 1960s(wish I could find it now). It showed height against rainfall from the west coast of northern England to the east coast, about 100 miles if I recall correctly.
The area around Honister was the wettest in England and the east coast around Teesmouth one of the driest.
Copley managed just trace when Honister recorded that massive total on Monday, that could be around 80 miles, I think.
Long live the rain shadow!
Ken
Copley
Teesdale

On Wednesday, 1 July 2020 09:02:12 UTC+1, Ken Cook wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 22:43:10 UTC+1, Julian Mayes wrote:
Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

Hi, All,
This reminds me of a cross section map we learnt in geography back in the 1960s(wish I could find it now). It showed height against rainfall from the west coast of northern England to the east coast, about 100 miles if I recall correctly.

Found it! Principles of physical geography FJ Monkhouse p456 Fig 184.Workington to Middlesbrough, Composite relief and rainfall profile.
It goes right past my back door, well Barnard Castle (no comments about the type size, please!)
90 miles apparently, I wasn't far out.

Ken
Copley
nr Barney
Teesdale

On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 9:02:12 AM UTC+1, Ken Cook wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 22:43:10 UTC+1, Julian Mayes wrote:
Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

Hi, All,
This reminds me of a cross section map we learnt in geography back in the 1960s(wish I could find it now). It showed height against rainfall from the west coast of northern England to the east coast, about 100 miles if I recall correctly.
The area around Honister was the wettest in England and the east coast around Teesmouth one of the driest.
Copley managed just trace when Honister recorded that massive total on Monday, that could be around 80 miles, I think.
Long live the rain shadow!
Ken
Copley
Teesdale

We have a bit of a reverse rain shadow in Cornwall. (Well it's not a rain shadow clearly!)

The driest parts are near sea level exposed to the west, Like Scilly, Lizard, parts of the north coast.

At sea level it's sheltered south coast bays like Mount's Bay & Falmouth which are wettest.

The hills are big enough to generate rainfall, of various types (orographic & convectional) which has a habit of drifting off the south coast. On top of which the convergence line which forms down the spine of Cornwall so frequently often affects south coast bays.

Penzance, sheltered from the west and near sea level, is wetter than places like Porthcurno, or even the Lizard plateau, which is well away form the spine.

The EA have been very helpful in providing me with a number of nearby longterm rainfall records.

Graham
Penzance

On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 9:35:59 AM UTC+1, Ken Cook wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 July 2020 09:02:12 UTC+1, Ken Cook wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 22:43:10 UTC+1, Julian Mayes wrote:
Nicholas is correct - it was the 24h to 0900 UTC yesterday, the 29th. It is the EA gauge at Honister and the total was 212.8mm.

https://www.itv.com/news/border/2020...-day-on-record

Hi, All,
This reminds me of a cross section map we learnt in geography back in the 1960s(wish I could find it now). It showed height against rainfall from the west coast of northern England to the east coast, about 100 miles if I recall correctly.

Found it! Principles of physical geography FJ Monkhouse p456 Fig 184.Workington to Middlesbrough, Composite relief and rainfall profile.
It goes right past my back door, well Barnard Castle (no comments about the type size, please!)
90 miles apparently, I wasn't far out.

Ken
Copley
nr Barney
Teesdale

It's funny you should mention that book, reminds me of my geography days!

Graham
Penzance