John Hall wrote:
I would assume that it's the famous Radcliffe Observatory site, which I
believe has a record going back as far as 1815.

Just found this link back to the original debate about Oxford sunshine
totals. though not sure if this is the Ratcliffe Observatoary site

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....d72d9b00ddd6a7

Steve J, BWS

In article .com,
"Steve J, BWS" writes:

John Hall wrote:
I would assume that it's the famous Radcliffe Observatory site, which I
believe has a record going back as far as 1815.

Just found this link back to the original debate about Oxford sunshine
totals. though not sure if this is the Ratcliffe Observatoary site

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....m/thread/63e15
03728c09fdb/add72d9b00ddd6a7?lnk=st&q=Oxford+sunshine&rnum=1&h l=en#add7
2d9b00ddd6a7

Thanks. Reading through that thread, it seems that the nominally
"Oxford" site is actually Brize Norton. That's very odd, since Brize
Norton seems to be something of the order of 10 miles west of Oxford. It
may be that the Radcliffe data isn't available on a day to day basis,
but only monthly, which would explain why Brize Norton is used instead,
but why can't they label it correctly?
--
John Hall

"The covers of this book are too far apart."
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)

In message , John Hall
writes
In article .com,
"Steve J, BWS" writes:
Incidentally, where is the Oxford site? I presume this is not Benson -
equally of notorious fame:-))

I would assume that it's the famous Radcliffe Observatory site, which I
believe has a record going back as far as 1815.

Is this the station with the longest continuous record? If not, then
which station would it be?
--
Paul Hyett (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

In article ,
Paul Hyett writes:
In message , John Hall
writes
In article .com,
"Steve J, BWS" writes:
Incidentally, where is the Oxford site? I presume this is not Benson -
equally of notorious fame:-))

I would assume that it's the famous Radcliffe Observatory site, which I
believe has a record going back as far as 1815.


My assumption was subsequently shown to be wrong.

Is this the station with the longest continuous record? If not, then
which station would it be?

I think it is Radcliffe.
--
John Hall

"The covers of this book are too far apart."
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)

The figures quoted on Ceefax are not to be relied on. Temperature , pressure
and wind are generally OK. But at weekends and during silent hours weather
info is not always correct. As far as I know, the readings for Oxford are
those for Benson airfield. (Hence the low minima on many nights). Though of
course, Brize Norton Met. is open all hours, so those figures could be used.
If you look at other reports at weekends, you will notice that there is
obviously no human input. There are times when it is obviously raining, but
reports say otherwise.

Eric Belton


"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Steve J, BWS" writes:

John Hall wrote:
I would assume that it's the famous Radcliffe Observatory site, which
I
believe has a record going back as far as 1815.

Just found this link back to the original debate about Oxford sunshine
totals. though not sure if this is the Ratcliffe Observatoary site

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....m/thread/63e15
03728c09fdb/add72d9b00ddd6a7?lnk=st&q=Oxford+sunshine&rnum=1&h l=en#add7
2d9b00ddd6a7

Thanks. Reading through that thread, it seems that the nominally
"Oxford" site is actually Brize Norton. That's very odd, since Brize
Norton seems to be something of the order of 10 miles west of Oxford. It
may be that the Radcliffe data isn't available on a day to day basis,
but only monthly, which would explain why Brize Norton is used instead,
but why can't they label it correctly?
--
John Hall

"The covers of this book are too far apart."
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)