On Sun, 26 May 2013 10:31:22 +0100
"Col" wrote:


"Freddie" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately and on a slight tangent, I did not get away with a
late evening reference to "drizzly showers" (meaning occasional
light drizzle in a warm sector) because I was informed that "
drizzle has no convective element".

Which is silly, because I'm pretty sure that the average viewer
thinks of showers as "rain that doesn't last long" rather than
considering any atmospheric processes involved.

Or how about a fragmenting front that is giving intermitent periods
of rain, something that most people would think of as showers.

'Showery rain' perhaps?

But if there is no convective element it's not showers. People on here
complain often enough about dumbing-down of the weather forecasts and
here you seem to be advocating it. As for 'drizzly showers', I vaguely
recall complaining here and perhaps to the Met Office over that
particular one.

Anyway, that's my hard-line, pedantic attitude but I see the 1956
'Weather Map' has a little sympathy for your point of view.

================================================== ====================
Occasional rain, etc = Not continuous. The periods of rain, etc., are
relatively short and occupy only a small fraction of the total time.
During the periods without rain the sky remains overcast or nearly so.
If clearances are expected the term 'showers' is used.

Intermittent rain, etc. = Not continuous over a considerable period,
but the rainy periods are of substantial duration and the sky remains
overcast during the intervals.
================================================== ====================

Note, however, the point that there must be breaks expected in the
cloud cover for 'showers' to be used. 'Drizzly showers' wouldn't get
past the censor.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks.
Free office softwa http://www.libreoffice.org/
Carlos Seixas, Sonata nº 1 - best version of this I've found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXox7vonfEg