I have just heard Philip Avery (Radio 4) tell us that for tomorrow in the whole of the eastern half of Britain temperatures "in the teens should just about cover it". It would, wouldn't it, being October? That's not a forecast, barely even a climatological statement, and is of no use to anyone whatsoever. I think Radio 4 should either give up weather forecasts entirely or do them properly. This would involve allowing at least twice the current 90 seconds and would give the presenters some chance. We would then find out which of them really are any good. Better still would be to have the forecast banged out on a keyboard in Exeter, sent up the wires and read out by an announcer as it was many years ago. We would at last be treated like grown-ups and with a much enhanced level of forecast accuracy compared with those days. Unfortunately the presentation seems to have an inverse relationship with the forecasting skill.

Tudor Hughes, somewhere south of London, below 1000 ft AMSL.

"Tudor Hughes" wrote in message
...

I have just heard Philip Avery (Radio 4) tell us that for tomorrow in the
whole of the eastern half of Britain temperatures "in the teens should just
about cover it". It would, wouldn't it, being October? That's not a
forecast, barely even a climatological statement, and is of no use to anyone
whatsoever. I think Radio 4 should either give up weather forecasts
entirely or do them properly. This would involve allowing at least twice
the current 90 seconds and would give the presenters some chance. We would
then find out which of them really are any good. Better still would be to
have the forecast banged out on a keyboard in Exeter, sent up the wires and
read out by an announcer as it was many years ago. We would at last be
treated like grown-ups and with a much enhanced level of forecast accuracy
compared with those days. Unfortunately the presentation seems to have an
inverse relationship with the forecasting skill.

=================================

Aha don't get me going on the bloomin radio 4 forecasts.
When I was at London Weather Centre the five to the hour forecasts used to
be the business.
4-5 minutes long they went through region by region giving weather,
temperature, wind and hazards (like ice etc). Now you are lucky if wind gets
a mention at all, temperatures are for bleedin cities, like they will give
you the SW forecast and then give the temperature for Cardiff FHS. Whole
areas of the country are swept under the carpet and I heard a forecast the
other day and Scotland was practically missed off altogether - hopeless. The
presentation is pathetic to be honest. There used to be a golden rule for
radio say in order; WHERE you are forecasting for first, then the time
period and then the weather, detailing at the very least temperature, wind
and weather. Now it is all over the place and many listeners I'm sure miss
their bit as I do often. And then at the last minute they are given less
than a minute for the whole country just to make way for some stupid
trailer. It's not a service any more, it's a joke. Not the Met. peoples
fault, I lay all the blame on the BBC.
=======================
Tudor Hughes, somewhere south of London, below 1000 ft AMSL.
=======================

Are you taking the **** or something Tudor? :-)
Perhaps I ought to put this all in a digest and send to the BBC, I would,
but what good would it do, you know the answer to that one :-(

http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm
Will Hand (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl)
---------------------------------------------

On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
Tudor Hughes wrote:

I have just heard Philip Avery (Radio 4) tell us that for tomorrow in
the whole of the eastern half of Britain temperatures "in the teens
should just about cover it". It would, wouldn't it, being October?
That's not a forecast, barely even a climatological statement, and is
of no use to anyone whatsoever. I think Radio 4 should either give
up weather forecasts entirely or do them properly. This would
involve allowing at least twice the current 90 seconds and would give
the presenters some chance. We would then find out which of them
really are any good. Better still would be to have the forecast
banged out on a keyboard in Exeter, sent up the wires and read out by
an announcer as it was many years ago. We would at last be treated
like grown-ups and with a much enhanced level of forecast accuracy
compared with those days. Unfortunately the presentation seems to
have an inverse relationship with the forecasting skill.

Tudor Hughes, somewhere south of London, below 1000 ft AMSL.

Totally agree. I sometimes listen to the forecasts and haven't got a
clue what's happening. Then I wonder how the general public are
supposed to cope.

I see the rain in southern England the past day or so, which was moving
from west to east, was still shown on TV forecasts as drifting from
east to west - being blown along by the surface winds, of course. I
pity the poor forecasters that have to stand in front of such garbage
and pretend nothing is wrong with it. I wonder what ignoramuses set
up that system.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks.
What children say about marriage etc. -
Q. How would you make a marriage work?
A. "Tell your wife that she looks pretty, even if she looks like a
truck" - Ricky, age 10.

"Graham P Davis" wrote in message
news:20121010201348.2411762a@home-1...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
Tudor Hughes wrote:

I have just heard Philip Avery (Radio 4) tell us that for tomorrow in
the whole of the eastern half of Britain temperatures "in the teens
should just about cover it". It would, wouldn't it, being October?
That's not a forecast, barely even a climatological statement, and is
of no use to anyone whatsoever. I think Radio 4 should either give
up weather forecasts entirely or do them properly. This would
involve allowing at least twice the current 90 seconds and would give
the presenters some chance. We would then find out which of them
really are any good. Better still would be to have the forecast
banged out on a keyboard in Exeter, sent up the wires and read out by
an announcer as it was many years ago. We would at last be treated
like grown-ups and with a much enhanced level of forecast accuracy
compared with those days. Unfortunately the presentation seems to
have an inverse relationship with the forecasting skill.

Tudor Hughes, somewhere south of London, below 1000 ft AMSL.

Totally agree. I sometimes listen to the forecasts and haven't got a
clue what's happening. Then I wonder how the general public are
supposed to cope.

I see the rain in southern England the past day or so, which was moving
from west to east, was still shown on TV forecasts as drifting from
east to west - being blown along by the surface winds, of course. I
pity the poor forecasters that have to stand in front of such garbage
and pretend nothing is wrong with it. I wonder what ignoramuses set
up that system.

Yes the TV graphics are hopeless aren't they. I remember when they were
previewed at the Met Office for staff. I was told then in no uncertain terms
not to be too critical as it was "early days". My fears came true though.
The system (Metra?) came from New Zealand I think and was bought by the BBC
to replace the old magnetic system. When it first came out there was no way
of showing thunder and lightning and then we had all those complaints that
Britain had turned into a desert with all those gaudy browns and yellows and
you remember the questions in parliament over Scotland being fore-shortened?
Again we were instructed to be "positive" about it. The presenters have to
work hard to try and make the system do what they want, it shouldn't be like
that. My pet hate is not showing radar actuals but showing model forecasts
pretending they are actuals. I suspect showing radar actuals is very
difficult and hence not done often.

Yet another thing "off my chest", plenty more to come still though ......

Will
--

On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:25:07 +0100
"Dartmoor Will" wrote:

My pet hate is not showing radar actuals but showing model forecasts
pretending they are actuals. I suspect showing radar actuals is very
difficult and hence not done often.

Can't say I've noticed that. Mind you, it probably hasn't happened
recently because the radar animation would have shown the rain moving
in one direction and then the forecast animation would have shown it
moving back again. ;-)

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks.
What children say about marriage etc. -
Q. How would you make a marriage work?
A. "Tell your wife that she looks pretty, even if she looks like a
truck" - Ricky, age 10.

"Dartmoor Will" wrote in
news
Yet another thing "off my chest", plenty more to come still though.

And a very good reason not to bother with the newsgroup any more. Cheerio
folks.

Richard

On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 20:02:52 UTC+1, wrote:
"Tudor Hughes" wrote in message ... I have just heard Philip Avery (Radio 4) tell us that for tomorrow in the whole of the eastern half of Britain temperatures "in the teens should just about cover it". It would, wouldn't it, being October? That's not a forecast, barely even a climatological statement, and is of no use to anyone whatsoever. I think Radio 4 should either give up weather forecasts entirely or do them properly. This would involve allowing at least twice the current 90 seconds and would give the presenters some chance. We would then find out which of them really are any good.. Better still would be to have the forecast banged out on a keyboard in Exeter, sent up the wires and read out by an announcer as it was many years ago. We would at last be treated like grown-ups and with a much enhanced level of forecast accuracy compared with those days. Unfortunately the presentation seems to have an inverse relationship with the forecasting skill. ================================= Aha don't get me going on the bloomin radio 4 forecasts. When I was at London Weather Centre the five to the hour forecasts used to be the business. 4-5 minutes long they went through region by region giving weather, temperature, wind and hazards (like ice etc). Now you are lucky if wind gets a mention at all, temperatures are for bleedin cities, like they will give you the SW forecast and then give the temperature for Cardiff FHS. Whole areas of the country are swept under the carpet and I heard a forecast the other day and Scotland was practically missed off altogether - hopeless. The presentation is pathetic to be honest. There used to be a golden rule for radio say in order; WHERE you are forecasting for first, then the time period and then the weather, detailing at the very least temperature, wind and weather. Now it is all over the place and many listeners I'm sure miss their bit as I do often. And then at the last minute they are given less than a minute for the whole country just to make way for some stupid trailer. It's not a service any more, it's a joke. Not the Met. peoples fault, I lay all the blame on the BBC. ======================= Tudor Hughes, somewhere south of London, below 1000 ft AMSL. ======================= Are you taking the **** or something Tudor? :-) Perhaps I ought to put this all in a digest and send to the BBC, I would, but what good would it do, you know the answer to that one :-( http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm Will Hand (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl) ---------------------------------------------

Phew! And I thought it was just me, what with Graham's contribution as well. I certainly agree with him on Regional Bewilderment and I often get "lost". It's not as if either of us are scatterbrained.
You are right that the fault is with the BBC. Radio 4, for all its virtues, is obsessed with News and Current Affairs and weather forecasts are seen as an intrusion into this sacred, self-important and ever-expanding world. The PM programme could easily be shortened by 5 minutes. (25 would be better). After all, The World at One has been arbitrarily extended by 15 minutes, so programme schedules are not cast in stone.
The only tiny criticism one could make of the Met Office is that they should tell the BBC that weather forecasts take a lot of skill and knowledge to produce and they should not be marginalised as entertainment. To which the BBC may well reply that as they paid for them they can do what they like with them. But if that's their attitude they are failing by their own standards, let alone those of the Met Office.
As for TV forecasts, I just can't watch them - just too silly. I'm sure the graphics appeal to the techie tendency within the media but it's as if they have their new Steinway but can only play Chopsticks, this being all the public could bear.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
.100...
"Dartmoor Will" wrote in
news
Yet another thing "off my chest", plenty more to come still though.

And a very good reason not to bother with the newsgroup any more. Cheerio
folks.

Well goodbye then.
The group can well do without your constant carping and moaning about Will.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:15:50 AM UTC+1, Col wrote:
"Richard Dixon" wrote in message

.100...

"Dartmoor Will" wrote in

news



Yet another thing "off my chest", plenty more to come still though.



And a very good reason not to bother with the newsgroup any more. Cheerio

folks.



Well goodbye then.

The group can well do without your constant carping and moaning about Will.

--

Col



Bolton, Lancashire

160m asl

There's always someone for some people to get annoyed about. When people say they are leaving, they never do. People who just *leave* actually leave and move on. I doubt this one can. Personally, Will's "revelations" have got me interested. A newsgroup has to have something more than weather reports to spice things up! But really; that's two posts in two days from me and as many would agree; that's too many. Back to lurking!

"Tudor Hughes" wrote in message
...
The only tiny criticism one could make of the Met Office is that they
should tell the BBC that weather forecasts take a lot of skill and
knowledge to produce and they should not be marginalised as entertainment.
To which the BBC may well reply that as they paid for them they can do
what they like with them. But if that's their attitude they are failing
by their own standards, let alone those of the Met Office.

==============================

The trouble is though Tudor is that the MetO *want* the BBC contract as the
MetO is now run as a business (and expected to make profits) since it became
a trading fund in 1996. I'll explain why trying to be both a business and a
public service has caused all sorts of problems (not just with the BBC) in
due course when the time comes right.

http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm
Will Hand (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl)
---------------------------------------------