Dear All,

I saw a brief snippet regarding the 1987 storm on BBC SE - all a bit
weather "lite" - but with Michael Fish blaming the lack of observations on
a French "strike".

I thought on the occasion what had happened was that 2 aircraft obs had
missed the data assimilation cut-off time. Glenn Shutts if you're reading
this, let me know !

Also, Bill Giles admitted that despite the fact that Michael Fish got all
the flak from the event, it was he who gave the final forecast some 6 hours
before havoc was wreaked. He seemed relatively unflustered when he said
he'd been deflecting the blame on to Fish for the past 20 years. Seems in
keeping with his alleged bullying from his time at London Weather
Centre...!

Richard

I often wonder what difference there would have been to the outcome of the
storm if Mr. Fish (or Mr. Giles) had given a warning of an impending violent
storm.

I always draw the same conclusion - absolutley none!

Paulus

paulus wrote:
I often wonder what difference there would have been to the outcome of the
storm if Mr. Fish (or Mr. Giles) had given a warning of an impending violent
storm.

I always draw the same conclusion - absolutley none!



I also like to keep in mind the fact that he was absolutely correct.
He said that there would be no hurricane, and there was no hurricane.

It is odd how in certain cultures, a man can be pilloried for being right.


--
Gianna

http://www.buchan-meteo.org.uk
* * * * * * *

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:40:40 +0100, Gianna wrote:

paulus wrote:
I often wonder what difference there would have been to the outcome of the
storm if Mr. Fish (or Mr. Giles) had given a warning of an impending violent
storm.

I always draw the same conclusion - absolutley none!

I also like to keep in mind the fact that he was absolutely correct.
He said that there would be no hurricane, and there was no hurricane.

It is odd how in certain cultures, a man can be pilloried for being right.

Technically he was right but technicalities aren't much use to the man
or woman in the street... at whom such forecasts are (or should be)
be aimed. There were hurricane force winds along the South Coast and
parts of the East Coast. I am talking mean wind speeds here, not just
gusts. The man or woman in the street cares not one jot if such winds
come from a tropical, sub tropical or temperate system.

And if wind speeds are converted from ten minute means to one minute
means (as used in the Atlantic Basin hurricane belt) "hurricane
force" winds were probably widespread along the South Coast and
reached or were close to category two hurricane *strength*.

Billl Giles'/ Michael Fish's forecast for the lay person, the average
TV viewer, was quite simply wrong, however hard the Met office tried
(and still try on their website) to disguise that fact. There were of
course good reasons for the error and my *only* criticism of them is
that they seem to persist in defending the forecast with
technicalities completely over the heads of the lay person at whom the
forecast was directed.

However, had the forecast been accurate, I doubt if it would have made
a significant difference to the outcome - in terms of loss of life
and injuries.

--
Dave

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 06:12:02 +0100, Dave Ludlow wrote:

However, had the forecast been accurate, I doubt if it would have made
a significant difference to the outcome - in terms of loss of life
and injuries.

Indeed, in fact it could have made matters worse as the "man or woman on
the street" paniced and tried to leave the South of England. It wouldn't
take many more on the road in really rather bad weather conditions for
things to get really nasty.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

Richard Dixon wrote:

Dear All,

I saw a brief snippet regarding the 1987 storm on BBC SE - all a bit
weather "lite" - but with Michael Fish blaming the lack of observations on
a French "strike".

I thought on the occasion what had happened was that 2 aircraft obs had
missed the data assimilation cut-off time. Glenn Shutts if you're reading
this, let me know !

Also, Bill Giles admitted that despite the fact that Michael Fish got all
the flak from the event, it was he who gave the final forecast some 6
hours before havoc was wreaked. He seemed relatively unflustered when he
said he'd been deflecting the blame on to Fish for the past 20 years.
Seems in keeping with his alleged bullying from his time at London Weather
Centre...!

Richard


There's a documentary on ITV on Tuesday 16th at 21:00 called "Night of the
Storm".

Unfortunately the programme description (in Digiguide) contains this little
gem - "With wind speeds almost double that of a hurricane".


--
Brian Wakem

"Brian Wakem" wrote in message
...

Unfortunately the programme description (in Digiguide) contains this
little
gem - "With wind speeds almost double that of a hurricane".


Perhaps Global Warming also effects weather that has already happened. An
event that was only a "hurricane" 20 years ago has now been whipped up into
a super cat. 10 hurricane by Global Warming.

Paulus

"Dave Ludlow" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:40:40 +0100, Gianna wrote:

paulus wrote:
I often wonder what difference there would have been to the outcome of
the
storm if Mr. Fish (or Mr. Giles) had given a warning of an impending
violent
storm.

I always draw the same conclusion - absolutley none!

I also like to keep in mind the fact that he was absolutely correct.
He said that there would be no hurricane, and there was no hurricane.

It is odd how in certain cultures, a man can be pilloried for being right.

Technically he was right but technicalities aren't much use to the man
or woman in the street... at whom such forecasts are (or should be)
be aimed. There were hurricane force winds along the South Coast and
parts of the East Coast. I am talking mean wind speeds here, not just
gusts. The man or woman in the street cares not one jot if such winds
come from a tropical, sub tropical or temperate system.

And if wind speeds are converted from ten minute means to one minute
means (as used in the Atlantic Basin hurricane belt) "hurricane
force" winds were probably widespread along the South Coast and
reached or were close to category two hurricane *strength*.

Billl Giles'/ Michael Fish's forecast for the lay person, the average
TV viewer, was quite simply wrong, however hard the Met office tried
(and still try on their website) to disguise that fact. There were of
course good reasons for the error and my *only* criticism of them is
that they seem to persist in defending the forecast with
technicalities completely over the heads of the lay person at whom the
forecast was directed.

However, had the forecast been accurate, I doubt if it would have made
a significant difference to the outcome - in terms of loss of life
and injuries.

--
Dave
-----------------------------------
Absolutely spot on David. It may just as well have been a hurricane. I
believe there was a gust of 123mph recorded near to us. It was the most
terrifying weather experience I have witnessed. In the early hours when I
awoke I looked out to see a metal dustbin flying down the road, mainly in
the air. There was a scene of devastation out the back with all of the fence
panels down and branches falling from trees. I was so concerned that I
brought my (then young) children downstairs through fear of our tall chimney
breaking and crashing through the roof of their dormer window. I ventured
outside at about 5.30 a.m because I could hear a strange banging which
turned out to be a broken drain pipe but I was unable to keep my balance as
I was almost blown off of my feet. The roof of my car was damaged by tiles
that had blown from my roof. When it subsided and I tried to drive to work
there were trees down everywhere, some on top of cars, another against a
house. It certainly was lucky it all happened in the early hours before the
rush hour kicked in.

Dave, S.Essex.

Brian Wakem wrote in
:

Unfortunately the programme description (in Digiguide) contains this
little gem - "With wind speeds almost double that of a hurricane".

Similarly in my aforementioned TV snippet it came back to the studio and
the presenter said to the awaiting weather forecaster: "But of course the
great unanswered question is: was it a hurricane?" - which Peter Cockroft
managed to explain away.

Of course they were quite right and it wasn't a hurricane: unfortunately
the forecast failed spectacularly - much as it did for the Paris storm on
December 26th 1999. For me, we still have a lot to learn in forecasting the
*really* severe events and I'm sure a lot of it comes down to sparsity of
observations when storms develop rapidly over the eastern Atlantic.

Richard

"paulus" wrote in
:

I often wonder what difference there would have been to the outcome of
the storm if Mr. Fish (or Mr. Giles) had given a warning of an
impending violent storm.

I always draw the same conclusion - absolutley none!

It's a very good point: the Burns Day Storm in 1990 was very well forecast,
but hit during the day, and many more people were killed than 1987.

Richard