I really can't understand why so many people on here are having such a go at
the Met Office Forecasts. Surely it's in everyone's interests to provide
predicted weather that 'might' happen thus to save lives.

I would rather have this any day, rather than have another 1987 on our
hands.

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

JiM


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 08/01/2004

Won't be long before the general public take no notice of TV warnings.

--
Tom
Danbury, Essex (107m)

Read my WeatherBlog:
http://www.weatherblog.co.uk

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

JiM


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 08/01/2004



No , besides i havent said much today its my day off
ill let everyone else moan and attack our so called met office!

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:54:47 -0000, "JiM" @ wrote:

I really can't understand why so many people on here are having such a go at
the Met Office Forecasts. Surely it's in everyone's interests to provide
predicted weather that 'might' happen thus to save lives.

I would rather have this any day, rather than have another 1987 on our
hands.

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

JiM

Sounds like 'circle the wagons' Jim - not surprising when you consider
where many get their 'pay and rations' from

None Event

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

JiM


Agree totally with what you just posted Jim,
best regards,
Alan

--
Wirral, Merseyside. 53.2N 3.0W 40m amsl
http://www.wirralcam.com/

"JiM" @ wrote in message ...

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

Jim,

It was a poor forecast, from an organisation which is constantly using PR to
harp on about how much more accurate they are now than 50 years ago (which
is somewhat true) and how climate change is being well forecast by their
huge computers, not being able to forecast a storm track a few hours in
advance is pathetic and it will be a long time before the public forget this
one.

On a lighter note, I wonder whether any experts here feel that there is
justification for a higher resolution monitoring grid in the Atlantic now?.
I know QuikScat was supposed to assist in the collection of data from sparse
areas but is there justification to take this further?

Well done to the GFS which detected the change of track on Saturday 00z run.

A

justification for a higher resolution monitoring grid in the Atlantic
now?.
I know QuikScat was supposed to assist in the collection of data from
sparse
areas but is there justification to take this further?

Well done to the GFS which detected the change of track on Saturday 00z
run.

A



Andrew hats off to you for saying you got it wrong on your homepage
i expect the weatheroutlook to follow up on there homepage too

Will be a first for them!

On a lighter note, I wonder whether any experts here feel that there is
justification for a higher resolution monitoring grid in the Atlantic
now?.
I know QuikScat was supposed to assist in the collection of data from
sparse
areas but is there justification to take this further?

Well done to the GFS which detected the change of track on Saturday 00z
run.

Well done to you Andrew for a nice "after the event" post :-)

best regards,
Alan

--
Wirral, Merseyside. 53.2N 3.0W 40m amsl
http://www.wirralcam.com/

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:54:47 -0000, "JiM" @ wrote:

I really can't understand why so many people on here are having such a go at
the Met Office Forecasts. Surely it's in everyone's interests to provide
predicted weather that 'might' happen thus to save lives.

I would rather have this any day, rather than have another 1987 on our
hands.

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

It was a bad forecast. They are more than happy to stand up and pat
themselves on the back when things are correct. They are also happy
to let others know that they did a good job at such times.

Crying wolf with the general public is a bad idea it leads to people
ignoring warnings in the future.

--
Pete Lawrence
http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project

Peter,

BBC TV forecasters have admitted mistakes today. To call it wolf crying is
over harsh, besides if they'd kept quiet and a storm had struck what would
you be saying?

Peter

"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:54:47 -0000, "JiM" @ wrote:

I really can't understand why so many people on here are having such a go
at
the Met Office Forecasts. Surely it's in everyone's interests to provide
predicted weather that 'might' happen thus to save lives.

I would rather have this any day, rather than have another 1987 on our
hands.

We, of all people, considering the NG should be supporting the MO.

It was a bad forecast. They are more than happy to stand up and pat
themselves on the back when things are correct. They are also happy
to let others know that they did a good job at such times.

Crying wolf with the general public is a bad idea it leads to people
ignoring warnings in the future.

--
Pete Lawrence
http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project