![]() |
Precipitation in Thames Estuary area during the February 1991 cold spell
After requesting MetO rainfall cards for several stations for February 1991 I've been surprised how much the precipitation varied over quite a small area.
There was 23mm - 27mm over a wide area though some stations seem to have recorded far less. Which brings me to a question. Is it a case of stations missing out or is it down to the skills of the observer in recording snow? How meticulous was the Met Office's quality control in 1991? Were volunteers trained? The rainfall card for City of London Cemetery also does not agree with the digitised data I was sent last year. Here is a link to the excel spreadsheet http://1drv.ms/18ymJMm |
Precipitation in Thames Estuary area during the February 1991 cold spell
In message ,
Scott W writes After requesting MetO rainfall cards for several stations for February 1991 I've been surprised how much the precipitation varied over quite a small area. There was 23mm - 27mm over a wide area though some stations seem to have recorded far less. Which brings me to a question. Is it a case of stations missing out or is it down to the skills of the observer in recording snow? How meticulous was the Met Office's quality control in 1991? Were volunteers trained? snip Just one thought, that when it's drifting snow it must be very difficult. In fact one wonders if it's possible in extreme conditions to get a meaningful figure at all using a rainguage. -- I'm not paid to implement the recognition of irony. (Taken, with the author's permission, from a LiveJournal post) |
Precipitation in Thames Estuary area during the February 1991cold spell
On 29/01/2015 14:38, John Hall wrote:
In message , Scott W writes After requesting MetO rainfall cards for several stations for February 1991 I've been surprised how much the precipitation varied over quite a small area. There was 23mm - 27mm over a wide area though some stations seem to have recorded far less. Which brings me to a question. Is it a case of stations missing out or is it down to the skills of the observer in recording snow? How meticulous was the Met Office's quality control in 1991? Were volunteers trained? snip Just one thought, that when it's drifting snow it must be very difficult. In fact one wonders if it's possible in extreme conditions to get a meaningful figure at all using a rainguage. I think that training was done for volunteers but it relied on them be open to it. I think it's still done but I'm not sure. As far as variability is concerned, there are many factors that affect this. Even over a small area there can be quite large differences. It depends on convective v dynamic precipitation, the exact exposure of the gauge etc. I remember observing at Kew Observatory in the late 60s. It had snowed and the snow was quite deep. However, when I did the normal measurement from the raingauge, there was barely anything in it. If I remember correctly I used the (empirical) fact that 10cm of undrifted and new snow equates to about 10 mm of rain. This was confirmed by some other experimental gauges we had. I think the snow had had just been blown over the gauge by the strong winds. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 WeatherBanter.co.uk