That many who are very protective and non critical of UKMO's ludicrous warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff comes from a Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for Piers is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political Correctness.

Lawrence13 wrote:
That many who are very protective and non critical of UKMO's ludicrous warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff comes from a Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for Piers is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political Correctness.
------------------------------
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual forecast
for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was marginal, it did
snow where and when they said it would but to quote what I said
yesterday on here :-"I think they don't really need to act as concerned
as they are though, because surely even if they get the regions and
amounts wrong nowhere is going to see disruption for long? It isn't
really going to be that cold in subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.
Dave, S.Essex
(Mind you my step was a bit slippy with the slush on it when I went out
to look just now )

"Dave Cornwell" wrote in message
...
Lawrence13 wrote:
That many who are very protective and non critical of UKMO's ludicrous
warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff comes from a
Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for Piers
is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political Correctness.
------------------------------
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual forecast
for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was marginal, it did snow
where and when they said it would but to quote what I said yesterday on
here :-"I think they don't really need to act as concerned as they are
though, because surely even if they get the regions and amounts wrong
nowhere is going to see disruption for long? It isn't really going to be
that cold in subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.
Dave, S.Essex
(Mind you my step was a bit slippy with the slush on it when I went out to
look just now )

I think the point that both of you are missing is that the Met Offie has to
warn of the worst case, not what you personally will experience. For me in
Dorset, those warnings of snow were ridiculous since all we got was heavy
rain, but where the snow did fall it would only take one jack-knived lorry
to block a major trunk road and cause chaos.

But then we always were a nation of whinging poms, so I don't expect
anything I write will change that :-(

Cheers, Alastair.

In article ,
Dave Cornwell writes:
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual
forecast for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was
marginal, it did snow where and when they said it would but to
quote what I said yesterday on here :-"I think they don't really
need to act as concerned as they are though, because surely even
if they get the regions and amounts wrong nowhere is going to see
disruption for long? It isn't really going to be that cold in
subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.

I suspect it's partly a legacy of the October 1987 Great Storm, when
their failure to forecast its severity led to a tremendous amount of
criticism in the media. They probably feel that it's safer to err on the
side of too many warnings than too few. And nowadays they may have a
worry that they could even be sued if they fail to forecast a hazard.

To be fair, the wording of the warning did emphasis that any "serious"
snow would be very patchy. It was clearly a case where it was very
marginal. But I think a lot of the people only look at the maps and
never read the accompanying text.
--
John Hall

"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."
Oscar Wilde

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:44:11 +0000
John Hall wrote:

In article ,
Dave Cornwell writes:
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual
forecast for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was
marginal, it did snow where and when they said it would but to
quote what I said yesterday on here :-"I think they don't really
need to act as concerned as they are though, because surely even
if they get the regions and amounts wrong nowhere is going to see
disruption for long? It isn't really going to be that cold in
subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.

I suspect it's partly a legacy of the October 1987 Great Storm, when
their failure to forecast its severity led to a tremendous amount of
criticism in the media. They probably feel that it's safer to err on
the side of too many warnings than too few. And nowadays they may
have a worry that they could even be sued if they fail to forecast a
hazard.

Erring on the side of too many warnings might be something that happens
subconsciously but there's no point in aiming for it. In the marking
process, a warning of something that doesn't happen is as bad as
missing a warning. Overdoing warnings is something that would hit you
in your pay-packet so why would you do it?


To be fair, the wording of the warning did emphasis that any "serious"
snow would be very patchy. It was clearly a case where it was very
marginal. But I think a lot of the people only look at the maps and
never read the accompanying text.

Here's the text from yesterday's midday warning; as I recall, not a
lot different from earlier ones. I don't see much sign of
"snowmageddon."


Issued at: 1148 on Sun 10 Feb 2013

Valid from: 0600 on Sun 10 Feb 2013

Valid to: 0700 on Mon 11 Feb 2013

Rain is expected to gradually turn to sleet and snow as it spreads eastwards during Sunday. Settling snow will be mostly limited to the south Pennines at first, but is likely to become rather more widespread by evening. Even then, cover is likely to be variable, with some places seeing very little, others 2-4 cm and with the potential for 10 cm or more over parts of the south Pennines and 5 to 10 cm for Kent, and more locally over the Midlands and Essex.

Overnight into Monday morning, there is a risk of an area of snow moving westwards across parts of the south Midlands, east and southeast Wales and southern England, with a few cm in places, particularly over higher ground. This warning is updated to cater for this risk.

The public should be aware of the risk of disruption, particularly to
travel.




--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks.
Feeling stressed and frustrated? Try a short session of contemplative
meditation. Or kick a ballboy. (https://twitter.com/GreySkyThinking)

On Monday, February 11, 2013 10:44:11 AM UTC, John Hall wrote:
In article ,

Dave Cornwell writes:

The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual

forecast for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was

marginal, it did snow where and when they said it would but to

quote what I said yesterday on here :-"I think they don't really

need to act as concerned as they are though, because surely even

if they get the regions and amounts wrong nowhere is going to see

disruption for long? It isn't really going to be that cold in

subsequent days is it? "

To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.



I suspect it's partly a legacy of the October 1987 Great Storm, when

their failure to forecast its severity led to a tremendous amount of

criticism in the media. They probably feel that it's safer to err on the

side of too many warnings than too few. And nowadays they may have a

worry that they could even be sued if they fail to forecast a hazard.



To be fair, the wording of the warning did emphasis that any "serious"

snow would be very patchy. It was clearly a case where it was very

marginal. But I think a lot of the people only look at the maps and

never read the accompanying text.

--

John Hall



"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."

Oscar Wilde

Exactly right, IMO.

There were the usual rampers about this (or was it just ramper, on here?) who talked about widespread snow and the MetO being worried about a snowy February, but I think they can be..........safely ignored. *)) February from now on does not look particularly snowy and in the great scheme of things, is unlikely to be viewed as particularly snowy. The nutbar who talked about "blizzardy", I just shake my head at and giggle. He's right to talk up Corbyn's forecasts. It's an excellent way of portaying Piers as the idiot that he is.

On 11/02/2013 00:47, Dave Cornwell wrote:
Lawrence13 wrote:
That many who are very protective and non critical of UKMO's
ludicrous warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff
comes from a Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for
Piers is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political
Correctness.
------------------------------
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual forecast
for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was marginal, it did

I think painting the entire country yellow over the weekend was
alarmist. There was a reasonable case for painting the higher ground
yellow but not for anywhere with predicted ambient above 4C.

snow where and when they said it would but to quote what I said
yesterday on here :-"I think they don't really need to act as concerned
as they are though, because surely even if they get the regions and
amounts wrong nowhere is going to see disruption for long? It isn't
really going to be that cold in subsequent days is it? "

To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.

There is an irony that from a traffic congestion point of view that fast
snowfall at almost exactly freezing point to form slush is pretty much
the worst case. The problem stems from drivers being too close and too
fast followed by stationary and in large clumps of bent metal.

Dave, S.Essex
(Mind you my step was a bit slippy with the slush on it when I went out
to look just now )

Even the local radio traffic warnings were in on the act yesterday.
Conditions over the M62 were not great, but they were more or less what
you might expect for the time of year and well within the envelope for
driving safely over the Pennines. It gets serious up there when you get
down to a ploughed single lane weaving between abandoned cars.

I have driven it in in those conditions once and wheel nuts on a front
wheel started to come loose from all the vibration driving on pack ice.
We caught up the snow plough which seemed to leave 1" pitch undulations
in the ice it left behind. Not recommended...

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Alastair McDonald wrote:
"Dave Cornwell" wrote in message
...
Lawrence13 wrote:
That many who are very protective and non critical of UKMO's ludicrous
warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff comes from a
Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for Piers
is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political Correctness.
------------------------------
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual forecast
for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was marginal, it did snow
where and when they said it would but to quote what I said yesterday on
here :-"I think they don't really need to act as concerned as they are
though, because surely even if they get the regions and amounts wrong
nowhere is going to see disruption for long? It isn't really going to be
that cold in subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.
Dave, S.Essex
(Mind you my step was a bit slippy with the slush on it when I went out to
look just now )

I think the point that both of you are missing is that the Met Offie has to
warn of the worst case, not what you personally will experience. For me in
Dorset, those warnings of snow were ridiculous since all we got was heavy
rain, but where the snow did fall it would only take one jack-knived lorry
to block a major trunk road and cause chaos.

But then we always were a nation of whinging poms, so I don't expect
anything I write will change that :-(

Cheers, Alastair.


-------------------------------
I'm not missing the point, I get that - it seems you a are. The problem
is people only see what they want to. Like you with my post. There was
not a hint of whinging. I made a lot of effort to point out how good the
forecast part of the warning was.
It is the generalised custard warnings and banging on about travel
disruption which didn't happen and wasn't going to happen, at least not
to the extent of justifying it.You will find that there are lots of jack
knifed lorries every day on dry roads and it it causes the same problems
but no warning every day for that is there? We are concerned that when
we do get a severe spell the non weather enthusiast public will take it
with a pinch of what will be on the roads.
Dave

On Feb 11, 2:37*pm, Dave Cornwell wrote:
Alastair McDonald wrote:
"Dave Cornwell" wrote in message
...
Lawrence13 wrote:
That many *who are very protective *and *non critical of UKMO's ludicrous
warning codswallop are less forgiving if the same same stuff comes from a
Mr Corbyn. It's as if they are caught in No Man's Land.

Me? I think they are both way OTT; the only redeeming feature for Piers
is that he isn't handicapped by H&S madness and Political Correctness..
------------------------------
The thing I don't get is why ruin what was an excellent actual forecast
for most with warnings that are exaggerated. It was marginal, it did snow
where and when they said it would but to quote what I said yesterday on
here :-"I think they don't really need to act as concerned as they are
though, because surely even if they get the regions and amounts wrong
nowhere is going to see disruption for long? It isn't really going to be
that cold in subsequent days is it? "
To me it is the warnings that are always the weak point.
Dave, S.Essex
(Mind you my step was a bit slippy with the slush on it when I went out to
look just now )

I think the point that both of you are missing is that the Met Offie has to
warn of the worst case, not what you personally will experience. For me in
Dorset, those warnings of snow were ridiculous since all we got was heavy
rain, but where the snow did fall it would only take one jack-knived lorry
to block a major trunk road and cause chaos.

But then we always were a nation of whinging poms, so I don't expect
anything I write will change that :-(

Cheers, Alastair.

-------------------------------
I'm not missing the point, I get that - it seems you a are. The problem
is people only see what they want to. Like you with my post. There was
not a hint of whinging. I made a lot of effort to point out how good the
forecast part of the warning was.
It is the generalised custard warnings and banging on about travel
disruption which didn't happen and wasn't going to happen, at least not
to the extent of justifying it.You will find that there are lots of jack
knifed lorries every day on dry roads and it it causes the same problems
but no warning every day for that is there? We are concerned that when
we do get a severe spell the non weather enthusiast public will take it
with a pinch of what will be on the roads.
Dave

There was certainly some travel disruption in and around Oxford this
morning due to jack-knifed lorries. One in particular closing the
northbound A34 at the busy Peartree interchange for several hours.
This is a major route between the Midlands and the south coast ports,
and the effects would have been even worse were it not for the local
schools being on half term. Also some buses were unable to serve local
rural routes this morning, including here in Charlbury.
On another point, the 'Be aware' custard warning for snow does not
imply as much widespread disruption as you appear to think. It
specifically says 'only localised travel disruption. Problems mostly
confined to usual prone areas. Journeys through affected areas may
take longer than normal'. Its a low impact warning.


Dick Lovett

In a defence of the MO (Devils Advocate really), I think they feel obliged to get their warnings out in advance of some of the (ahem!) less professional forecasting outfits; because if they do not, the media will be on their backs criticising that fact as well, and emphasising the size of their budget.