In message
Gianna Stefani wrote:

Col wrote:
"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...


It is always worthwhile for anyone interested in observing and recording
the weather.


Indeed. As long as you recognise the limitations of the site/equipment
and are aware that ultimately your data may only be comparable to
itself and not surrounding sites.

Col

I agree entirely. I do compare my data with the local official site (a
few km away) and there is usually no significant difference (now that I
have solved my little barometer problem!).
For wind direction I admit to cheating slightly - I use the wind vane
atop a nearby lighthouse as a guide (-:


I think, remembering the location of the original comment, that you need to
remember that Leicester is basically situated in a hollow. The only way out
of Leicester that doesn't involve climbing is to follow the quite narrow Soar
valley northwards. This means that we avoid many of the extremes of weather
and especially of wind.

Yes, we had quite a squall yesterday when the CF went through, and judging by
the movement of the trees across the road from me, at least Force 7
Beaufort (I don't have an anenometer). Where I live is about 1Km from the
valley botton, on the western slope at about 70m asl.

In particular I note that my temperature readings are gemerally a little
above what might be expected. My mean for 2004 was 11.15C, perhaps half a
degree above neighbouring stations with a more rural location. At this time
of year my minima are generaly higher than those recorded a couple of miles
further from the city centre on clear calm nights.

Local microclimate can be hugely important, so a simple comparison of
readings with nearby official stations can be instructive, but discrepanies
do not necessarily indicate shortcomings in your instruments.

Martin


--
Created on the Iyonix PC - the world's fastest RISC OS computer.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.dixon4/