"Col" wrote in message
...

"Graham P Davis" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 19:05:15 +0100, Col wrote:

My point, which I should have made more explicit, was that saying
"weather front" instead of "front" takes an extra second or two, and
when that happens half a dozen times it starts to add up.

But what they should be saying is *warm* front & *cold* front. Best not
have too many of the occulded variety, or they really could run out of
time

I was taken aback a week or so ago when "occluded front" was used on a
forecast. Thought I might have imagined it at first but the forecaster
used it again.

Some kind of rouge forecaster accidentally let loose on the public
I would imagine. I'm sure such a mistake won't be made again.....

If the BBC object to the use of "cold" or "warm", then the presenters
should just use "front" on its own.

They should indeed. There is no such thing as a *weather* front.
It's a *weather* forecast, what other type of front do they think
people might imagine they are talking about?

I'm not defending the term but I understand it was introduced to convey the
idea that "weather" occurs on those lines on the charts. Trouble with warm
and cold is that it is sometimes warmer after a cold front goes through,
e.g. if it turns sunny in summer!

Will
--