On 25/02/2016 15:57, Ken Cook wrote:
On Thursday, 25 February 2016 15:31:31 UTC, Desperate Dan wrote:
MetO climate sites, including Copley, report through WOW. The are subject to regular MetO site visits and instrument checks. They are also run by dedicated observers. Our data is hardly suspect and probably more accurate than many MetO AWS systems! We have very high standards.

You're a Met O climate site and subject to WMO standards, administered by the Met Office and recorded on their Metadata database. When I said "all" we're suspect I wasn't aware that clime sites reported through WOW so I apologise for getting that wrong. I'm not trying to denigrate WOW observers in any way and I agree that many are very knowledgable and have high standards. However, if I look at a WOW observation I have no way of knowing which type of instrumentation is being used, when the instruments were last calibrated, what the calibration tolerances were, what the site exposure is et cetera, et cetera.

I agree with most of what you say and it's a bugbear for us as well. Just pointing out that MetO climate sites report to WOW at 09Z, albeit by a separate web address. Our obs then appear on the WOW site.
Thanks for the apology,
Best wishes
Ken


Following my earlier comment on this thread I had a look at the WOW
Homepage to see just how things were @1629h. By and large the range of
temperature readings looks reasonable to my amateur eye although Lyneham
at 0.0C and Lothersdale (N.Yorks) at 11.9C look odd. It is in summer
that poorly shielded temperature sensors often give wildly inaccurate
readings. I suspect that some of these AWS owners are unaware of these
errors. Perhaps they should join USW? ..then again

--
George in Swanston, Edinburgh, 580'asl
www.swanstonweather.co.uk
www.eppingweather.co.uk
www.winter1947.co.uk