On 28/11/11 09:58, Norman wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 06:44:08 +0000
Phil wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...-for-amateurs-
as-Met-Office-releases-data.html

Not sure what 'data' this is referring to. Perhaps we may get hourly
synops on the web :-)

I haven't the foggiest idea.

Dissemination of real-time observational data is limited by
international treaty so, whatever the government rule, it may make sod
all difference.

Forecast data have always been available for free, assuming you have
the right equipment and tools. Even before the internet, all you needed
was some wireless equipment and, say, a radio-fax. The problem the Met
Office has always had is that they had to give away their forecasts and
so private companies could re-distribute the same product, claim it as
their own, perhaps with some so-called "added value" and collect the
cash. Some "added-value" products even contained errors like
mis-labelled isobars or depressions that had originated in CFO.

Graham, that is about as far from the truth as it could be. While there may be
one or two 'fly-by-night' operators who behave like you say, the vast majority
of private sector operators are highly professional organisations and
individuals who generate their own products. They exist because they provide a
good service to their clients.

Although I misguidedly used the word "always," I was referring to past
events. The last sentence refers to the time of radio-fax machines but
the company involved was no fly-by-night. I'm glad to hear that things
have improved.



To get archive data for free, these companies used college students
and graduates who "needed the data for research." One of these
characters, who'd been working in the Office for six months, was found
to be working for a commercial competitor of the Office. What followed
was a tightening of rules on who could or could not get free data,
much to the distress of true researchers.

Again, this is far from the truth. Private sector companies and individuals
(myself included) pay a lot of money for archived data.

You seem to be darned close to calling me a liar here. I'm sure you
didn't intend to do so but that's how it appears to me. I stick to what
I said. This event happened as did the consequences.

In this case, I don't see how you were confused about the tense that I
was writing in but it seems you were. As you are writing about the
current situation and I was writing about the past, I don't see a real
need for disagreement.


I thought that the days when the private sector was seen by the meteorological
"establishment" as some sort of sub-culture were long gone but it seems that
the "old school" has not completely disappeared.

On several occasions the Met Office has pointed clients in my direction because
they are no longer active in the field in which I specialise. We have moved on
a very long way in the past 10-15 years and the private sector is now very
firmly a part of the legitimate meteorological establishment and is generally
seen as such by all concerned.


I'm glad to hear that things have moved on in the past 10-15 years.


--
Graham Davis, Bracknell, Berks. E-mail: change boy to man
Teach evolution, not creationism: http://evolutionnotcreationism.org.uk/