"Simon Cheesbiscuit" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 13:18:50 UTC+1,
wrote:
xmetman wrote:

On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 22:03:13 UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Monday, 5 October 2015 09:47:43 UTC+1,
wrote:
"xmetman" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 22:17:12 UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 18:07:30 UTC+1, xmetman wrote:
I've been analysing the occurrence of frost using the data in
the
daily Central England Temperature [CET] series from 1878 to
2015.
It
may not come as a surprise to some to learn that the first
frost
is
getting later and the last frost getting earlier. The first
frost
of
the autumn/winter at the start of the series in 1878 occurred
around
the 29th of October, but 137 years later this has now slipped
by
over
two weeks to the 13th of November. Likewise the last frost of
any
winter/spring has slipped back 11 days from the 16th of April
in
1878
to the 5th of April in 2014.

Charts etc

How is a frost defined in the daily CET? Is it that the
average
minimum at the 3 or 4 (correct?) stations used is below 0°C or
does
it
need just one station to be below 0°C? My guess is that it is
the
former and this would mean that the first CET frost of autumn
would
be
later than the first frost at any individual CET station. It
would
seem to be the explanation of why my own figures over 32 years
show
an
earlier first frost and a later last one than CET. The dates are
21
April and 4 November, both with a wide range. The standard
deviations
are 14 and 18 days respectively.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, NE Surrey, 557 ft, 169 m.

Yes Tudor its a composite temperature from a number of sites - I
forget
how many - so the best way of looking at a CET frost is as a
'general'
frost and not just a local one. I would prefer to use daily values
from a
'real' station with a very long record, the problem is they are
very
few
of them and places like Oxford charge for the data as do the Met
Office,
but I'll content myself with the CET and EWR series until one day
someone
see's what a nonsense it is to lock away the nations climate data.
======================

It is not locked away, but a small charge for processing is
reasonable.
Can you get a death certificate for your ancestor free of charge,
no,
but
it is available. Same thing. You are also using CET data
inappropriately
as Tudor has revealed.


I don't think that's fair. All xmetman was doing was
comparing
data
from the present with that of the past and showing that there has
been
a
change, unsurprisingly perhaps. The fact that this data is not
strictly
comparable with data from single station is neither here nor there -
it
is
consistent over the period of comparison. This comparison seems to
me
to
be quite valid, there being no intention to deceive or
sensationalise.


Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative
scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has
spent
some time doing a little research to show that since 1659 temperatures
in
Central England have risen, and along with this the times of the first
frost
which have gotten later, and conversely the last frost which are
occurring
earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite
temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank
Gordon
Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the
Met
Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I
came
up
against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way I
can
describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of it.


Instead of ad-hominem attacks why don't you respond scientifically to what
I
wrote?
I was actually trying to be helpful. To help you here is an illustrative
example:

Suppose we are looking at a week of 5 stations with the following min
temps:

day1 1 1 1 -1 -6
day2 2 2 4 3 0
day3 3 4 5 2 -1
day4 3 -1 3 4 5
day5 2 2 2 2 0
day6 0 2 1 3 4
day7 -1 -1 -2 -3 0

Averages are as follows:
-0.8
2.2
2.6
2.8
1.6
2.0
-1.4

These averages would be like CET values and give the first frost day as
day1
because of the outlier value of Station 5. .

Now look at the day of first frost at each station
Station 1 day 7
Station 2 day 4
Station 3 day 7
Station 4 day 1
Station 5 day 1

Average day of first frost is day 4. which better represents the area
covered by the stations.

This is a difference of three days (which may be significant depending on
what you are doing).

This is why it is important to get the method right, and why I was
critical.

Well it's true that both avergaing methods give different answers, but which
is better? I'm not sure I agree that the second method is better.

For example, you said that a difference of three days is significant. Well,
only one of the actual stations matches the 'first frost on day 4' result,
with the other 4 stations differing by +/- 3 days. So is day 4 really a good
representation? With the first method's result of day 1, at least this
actually matches two of the five stations, and is 3 days away from another.

I suppose this shows the difficulty in trying to understand certain aspects
of the weather from averages, and how different averaging methods can yield
different results! :-)
=============================

I said *may* be significant. If you are looking for events that may have
changed by a few days over a period of time then 3 days is very sig. OTOH if
a change of 100 days, then not.

I chose that example to illustrate the danger of outliers, the second method
mitigates against that in that it gives a kind of areal average which is
what the CET series is all about.

I could quite easily have chosen this less extreme example

day1 0 0 0 0 -1
day2 2 2 4 3 0
day3 3 4 5 2 1
day4 3 1 3 4 5
day5 2 2 2 2 0
day6 0 2 1 3 4
day7 -1 -1 -2 -3 0

with averages as follows

-0.2
2.2
3.0
3.1
1.6
2.0
-1.4

And 2nd method gives day of first frost as 29/5 = day 5.8 (round to 5 or 6
as preferred).

This result is closer for 4 stations than the first method.

I think you will find that the second method is more robust and is less
dependent on distribution of values within the station set.


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

Hi Tudor

Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has spent some time doing a little research to show that since 1659 temperatures in Central England have risen, and along with this the times of the first frost which have gotten later, and conversely the last frost which are occurring earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank Gordon Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the Met Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I came up against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way I can describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of it.

I spent most out of my outstation career trying to impress one SMetO after another, trying to jump (like many other assistants) the many academic hurdles that were put in your way, first it was highers or A levels, then it was an HNC, now for most jobs in the Met Office it's a degree minimum even if it's in Martian meteorology - having any kind of interest in the weather or meteorology counts for very little. As far as I know that's the way Will did it but he jumped ship into teaching and then research.

You worked for a time for the office in what must have been the golden years and must remember it well - there was always outstations and headquarters, and when you got to headquarters it was the scientists and the rest of us!

I suppose that's part of the reason why I have an aggressive attitude towards the Met Office, but after nearly 4 years away from it, I'm beginning to work that out of my system and see the Met Office for what it is, a bit of a corporate dinosaur that's lost its way, forgotten its past and can't remember who it's supposed to serve.

Not so much a weather service which is just secondary, more of just a "Trading Fund within the Department for Business" as the 'About us' on their website says.

Bruce.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignore him Bruce.
Will is just putting his pompous hat on.
He must be learning from Dawlish.

I have been in the Met world professionally for 40 years and I have met those, mainly mathematicians, who have n't a clue about how the atmosphere works in the real world. Have had to put them right, not that I know everything.

Computer scientists and mathematicians are needed of course, but seldom have they developed with an understanding of someone trained in meteorology/physics.

As regards presentation of data. How many times have I seen averages given without any reference to the variabilty about those averages.
Or trends given without any measure of significance.
This is from Met office people who should know better.
Sloppy or wot?

Len

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Len Wood" wrote in message
...


Hi Tudor

Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative
scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has
spent some time doing a little research to show that since 1659
temperatures in Central England have risen, and along with this the times
of the first frost which have gotten later, and conversely the last frost
which are occurring earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite
temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank Gordon
Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the Met
Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I came
up against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way I
can describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of
it.

I spent most out of my outstation career trying to impress one SMetO after
another, trying to jump (like many other assistants) the many academic
hurdles that were put in your way, first it was highers or A levels, then
it was an HNC, now for most jobs in the Met Office it's a degree minimum
even if it's in Martian meteorology - having any kind of interest in the
weather or meteorology counts for very little. As far as I know that's the
way Will did it but he jumped ship into teaching and then research.

You worked for a time for the office in what must have been the golden
years and must remember it well - there was always outstations and
headquarters, and when you got to headquarters it was the scientists and
the rest of us!

I suppose that's part of the reason why I have an aggressive attitude
towards the Met Office, but after nearly 4 years away from it, I'm
beginning to work that out of my system and see the Met Office for what it
is, a bit of a corporate dinosaur that's lost its way, forgotten its past
and can't remember who it's supposed to serve.

Not so much a weather service which is just secondary, more of just a
"Trading Fund within the Department for Business" as the 'About us' on
their website says.

Bruce.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignore him Bruce.
Will is just putting his pompous hat on.
He must be learning from Dawlish.

I have been in the Met world professionally for 40 years and I have met
those, mainly mathematicians, who have n't a clue about how the atmosphere
works in the real world. Have had to put them right, not that I know
everything.

Computer scientists and mathematicians are needed of course, but seldom have
they developed with an understanding of someone trained in
meteorology/physics.

As regards presentation of data. How many times have I seen averages given
without any reference to the variabilty about those averages.
Or trends given without any measure of significance.
This is from Met office people who should know better.
Sloppy or wot?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sloppy science is sloppy science wherever it comes from Len. I would make no
distinction.
Just for the record - yes my degree is a 2nd in Mathematics from Hull. But I
have A-level physics too. I taught meteorology to
assistants/forecasters/graduates and non-met admin staff. I taught both
theory and practice including observing. I have been an assistant (like
Bruce), a forecaster, local radio broadcaster (in London), lecturer,
research scientist (to peer reviewer level), people manager, Trade Union
official, workstation cluster manager (SUNs running UNIX), computer
programmer (mainly FORTRAN) and a general dogs body. So I reckon I am one of
those computer scientists and mathematicians who do know a little bit about
Met. Len. So stick that up your pipe and smoke it! :-)

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

On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 8:18:32 AM UTC+1, wrote:


Hi Tudor

Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative
scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has
spent some time doing a little research to show that since 1659
temperatures in Central England have risen, and along with this the times
of the first frost which have gotten later, and conversely the last frost
which are occurring earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite
temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank Gordon
Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the Met
Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I came
up against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way I
can describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of
it.

I spent most out of my outstation career trying to impress one SMetO after
another, trying to jump (like many other assistants) the many academic
hurdles that were put in your way, first it was highers or A levels, then
it was an HNC, now for most jobs in the Met Office it's a degree minimum
even if it's in Martian meteorology - having any kind of interest in the
weather or meteorology counts for very little. As far as I know that's the
way Will did it but he jumped ship into teaching and then research.

You worked for a time for the office in what must have been the golden
years and must remember it well - there was always outstations and
headquarters, and when you got to headquarters it was the scientists and
the rest of us!

I suppose that's part of the reason why I have an aggressive attitude
towards the Met Office, but after nearly 4 years away from it, I'm
beginning to work that out of my system and see the Met Office for what it
is, a bit of a corporate dinosaur that's lost its way, forgotten its past
and can't remember who it's supposed to serve.

Not so much a weather service which is just secondary, more of just a
"Trading Fund within the Department for Business" as the 'About us' on
their website says.

Bruce.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignore him Bruce.
Will is just putting his pompous hat on.
He must be learning from Dawlish.

I have been in the Met world professionally for 40 years and I have met
those, mainly mathematicians, who have n't a clue about how the atmosphere
works in the real world. Have had to put them right, not that I know
everything.

Computer scientists and mathematicians are needed of course, but seldom have
they developed with an understanding of someone trained in
meteorology/physics.

As regards presentation of data. How many times have I seen averages given
without any reference to the variabilty about those averages.
Or trends given without any measure of significance.
This is from Met office people who should know better.
Sloppy or wot?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sloppy science is sloppy science wherever it comes from Len. I would make no
distinction.
Just for the record - yes my degree is a 2nd in Mathematics from Hull. But I
have A-level physics too. I taught meteorology to
assistants/forecasters/graduates and non-met admin staff. I taught both
theory and practice including observing. I have been an assistant (like
Bruce), a forecaster, local radio broadcaster (in London), lecturer,
research scientist (to peer reviewer level), people manager, Trade Union
official, workstation cluster manager (SUNs running UNIX), computer
programmer (mainly FORTRAN) and a general dogs body. So I reckon I am one of
those computer scientists and mathematicians who do know a little bit about
Met. Len. So stick that up your pipe and smoke it! :-)

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

I was n't doubtimg your pedigree Will.
I was generalising about mathematicians from experience with meeting them.

There are some weather savvy ones out there I know.

Bruce's analysis does call into question whether you can use a broad brush average CET to show something as specific as frost occurence. But it is a first stab and not a bad one at that.
Spatial averages are used all the time in analysis of climate.
The most outrageeous one some will say, is the global mean temperature.

;-)

BTW I don't smoke. Least of all a pipe. Filthy habit.

So put that in your boussinesq and smoke it.
:-)

Len
Wembury
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Len Wood" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 8:18:32 AM UTC+1, wrote:


Hi Tudor

Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative
scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has
spent some time doing a little research to show that since 1659
temperatures in Central England have risen, and along with this the
times
of the first frost which have gotten later, and conversely the last
frost
which are occurring earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite
temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank
Gordon
Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the
Met
Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I
came
up against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way
I
can describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of
it.

I spent most out of my outstation career trying to impress one SMetO
after
another, trying to jump (like many other assistants) the many academic
hurdles that were put in your way, first it was highers or A levels,
then
it was an HNC, now for most jobs in the Met Office it's a degree
minimum
even if it's in Martian meteorology - having any kind of interest in
the
weather or meteorology counts for very little. As far as I know that's
the
way Will did it but he jumped ship into teaching and then research.

You worked for a time for the office in what must have been the golden
years and must remember it well - there was always outstations and
headquarters, and when you got to headquarters it was the scientists
and
the rest of us!

I suppose that's part of the reason why I have an aggressive attitude
towards the Met Office, but after nearly 4 years away from it, I'm
beginning to work that out of my system and see the Met Office for what
it
is, a bit of a corporate dinosaur that's lost its way, forgotten its
past
and can't remember who it's supposed to serve.

Not so much a weather service which is just secondary, more of just a
"Trading Fund within the Department for Business" as the 'About us' on
their website says.

Bruce.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignore him Bruce.
Will is just putting his pompous hat on.
He must be learning from Dawlish.

I have been in the Met world professionally for 40 years and I have met
those, mainly mathematicians, who have n't a clue about how the
atmosphere
works in the real world. Have had to put them right, not that I know
everything.

Computer scientists and mathematicians are needed of course, but seldom
have
they developed with an understanding of someone trained in
meteorology/physics.

As regards presentation of data. How many times have I seen averages
given
without any reference to the variabilty about those averages.
Or trends given without any measure of significance.
This is from Met office people who should know better.
Sloppy or wot?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sloppy science is sloppy science wherever it comes from Len. I would make
no
distinction.
Just for the record - yes my degree is a 2nd in Mathematics from Hull.
But I
have A-level physics too. I taught meteorology to
assistants/forecasters/graduates and non-met admin staff. I taught both
theory and practice including observing. I have been an assistant (like
Bruce), a forecaster, local radio broadcaster (in London), lecturer,
research scientist (to peer reviewer level), people manager, Trade Union
official, workstation cluster manager (SUNs running UNIX), computer
programmer (mainly FORTRAN) and a general dogs body. So I reckon I am one
of
those computer scientists and mathematicians who do know a little bit
about
Met. Len. So stick that up your pipe and smoke it! :-)


I was n't doubtimg your pedigree Will.
I was generalising about mathematicians from experience with meeting them.

There are some weather savvy ones out there I know.

Bruce's analysis does call into question whether you can use a broad brush
average CET to show something as specific as frost occurence. But it is a
first stab and not a bad one at that.
Spatial averages are used all the time in analysis of climate.
The most outrageeous one some will say, is the global mean temperature.

;-)

BTW I don't smoke. Least of all a pipe. Filthy habit.

So put that in your boussinesq and smoke it.
:-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


LOL. Yes don't get me started on global mean temperature :-)

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

On 7 Oct 2015 11:28:27 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Hi Bruce,

I had very similar frustrations as an Assistant in the Met Office in
the early/mid 1960s. I was very much a country hick and was well
outside of my comfort zone at the AXO interview boards at the Civil
Service in North Audley St in London. Although I had the requisite
qualifications I just couldn't relate to the grey suits and stiff
upper lips of the interview panels and I was unsuccessful 4 times.
Then, in 1967, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology put an advert in
"Weather" inviting applications from suitably qualified people to
train as Forecasters at their Training School in Melbourne. I had the
qualifications they were looking for so I applied. I had an interview
at Australia House in London and the atmosphere was so very different
from the AXO interviews. They were looking for enthusiasm and a
genuine interest in the subject and we had a chat rather than an
interview. The upshot of it was that I was offered a job and in July
1967 I flew out to Melbourne as a £10 POM. The training course lasted
9 months and I came out of it successfully and started my forecasting
career at Brisbane Airport in April 1968. The rest, as they say, is
history. I'm sure that I have ended up with a much more satisfying
career than if I had stayed in the Met Office.

When I joined the Met Office as a Scientific Assistant in 1962 at the
end of July, I had taken my A-levels but was waiting for the results.
After I heard that I'd got 3 passes (and one failu art) I applied
for promotion to AXO. I got an interview with the commissioners at
Savile Row in November. I'd only just sat down when they mentioned my
qualifications and expressed surprise that I'd only got A-levels as
they were only accepting people with degrees. This deflated me more
than somewhat. An older version of me would have told them exactly what
I thought of them dragging me down to London on false pretences.

About 18 months later, I applied for a bursary to study for a degree as
this seemed to be the only way I could get promoted. A while later, my
boss at 3-Group called to tell me that he'd been informed that I'd
failed to get that as it was only open to AXo's. He was almost as
annoyed as me about the Catch-22 situation and said he'd pursue it
further. Next I heard that I'd got another promotion board. This one
was a tad different in that after a few simple questions they asked, if
I got promoted, where I'd like to work and would I have any problems
with going on Weather Ships. Although I'd get sick on the IOW ferry, I
said "no trouble at all!" When I was next at work, I was asked how I'd
got on and I said, "I've got it!" Next I heard was that I had indeed
got the promotion and a posting to Met O 1 (the Marine Division). Never
did get on a Weather Ship although it was a near miss.


--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. [Retd meteorologist/programmer]
http://www.scarlet-jade.com/
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
Posted with Claws: http://www.claws-mail.org/

Graham P Davis wrote:

On 7 Oct 2015 11:28:27 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Hi Bruce,

I had very similar frustrations as an Assistant in the Met Office in
the early/mid 1960s. I was very much a country hick and was well
outside of my comfort zone at the AXO interview boards at the Civil
Service in North Audley St in London. Although I had the requisite
qualifications I just couldn't relate to the grey suits and stiff
upper lips of the interview panels and I was unsuccessful 4 times.
Then, in 1967, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology put an advert in
"Weather" inviting applications from suitably qualified people to
train as Forecasters at their Training School in Melbourne. I had the
qualifications they were looking for so I applied. I had an interview
at Australia House in London and the atmosphere was so very different
from the AXO interviews. They were looking for enthusiasm and a
genuine interest in the subject and we had a chat rather than an
interview. The upshot of it was that I was offered a job and in July
1967 I flew out to Melbourne as a £10 POM. The training course lasted
9 months and I came out of it successfully and started my forecasting
career at Brisbane Airport in April 1968. The rest, as they say, is
history. I'm sure that I have ended up with a much more satisfying
career than if I had stayed in the Met Office.

When I joined the Met Office as a Scientific Assistant in 1962 at the
end of July, I had taken my A-levels but was waiting for the results.
After I heard that I'd got 3 passes (and one failu art) I applied
for promotion to AXO. I got an interview with the commissioners at
Savile Row in November. I'd only just sat down when they mentioned my
qualifications and expressed surprise that I'd only got A-levels as
they were only accepting people with degrees. This deflated me more
than somewhat. An older version of me would have told them exactly what
I thought of them dragging me down to London on false pretences.

About 18 months later, I applied for a bursary to study for a degree as
this seemed to be the only way I could get promoted. A while later, my
boss at 3-Group called to tell me that he'd been informed that I'd
failed to get that as it was only open to AXo's. He was almost as
annoyed as me about the Catch-22 situation and said he'd pursue it
further. Next I heard that I'd got another promotion board. This one
was a tad different in that after a few simple questions they asked, if
I got promoted, where I'd like to work and would I have any problems
with going on Weather Ships. Although I'd get sick on the IOW ferry, I
said "no trouble at all!" When I was next at work, I was asked how I'd
got on and I said, "I've got it!" Next I heard was that I had indeed
got the promotion and a posting to Met O 1 (the Marine Division). Never
did get on a Weather Ship although it was a near miss.

The O-i-C posts on the Weather Ships were XO posts but they never could get
enough XO volunteers. It was therefore common practice for the posts to be
filled by AXOs before they went on the IFC. Similarly, young AXOs often filled
the Supervisor posts at upper air stations on land. These posts were nominally
SSA posts. I'm talking about the 1960s. Practices may have changed after that.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
http://peakdistrictweather.org

On 8 Oct 2015 11:28:31 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Graham P Davis wrote:

On 7 Oct 2015 11:28:27 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Hi Bruce,

I had very similar frustrations as an Assistant in the Met Office
in the early/mid 1960s. I was very much a country hick and was
well outside of my comfort zone at the AXO interview boards at
the Civil Service in North Audley St in London. Although I had
the requisite qualifications I just couldn't relate to the grey
suits and stiff upper lips of the interview panels and I was
unsuccessful 4 times. Then, in 1967, the Australian Bureau of
Meteorology put an advert in "Weather" inviting applications from
suitably qualified people to train as Forecasters at their
Training School in Melbourne. I had the qualifications they were
looking for so I applied. I had an interview at Australia House
in London and the atmosphere was so very different from the AXO
interviews. They were looking for enthusiasm and a genuine
interest in the subject and we had a chat rather than an
interview. The upshot of it was that I was offered a job and in
July 1967 I flew out to Melbourne as a £10 POM. The training
course lasted 9 months and I came out of it successfully and
started my forecasting career at Brisbane Airport in April 1968.
The rest, as they say, is history. I'm sure that I have ended up
with a much more satisfying career than if I had stayed in the
Met Office.

When I joined the Met Office as a Scientific Assistant in 1962 at
the end of July, I had taken my A-levels but was waiting for the
results. After I heard that I'd got 3 passes (and one failu art)
I applied for promotion to AXO. I got an interview with the
commissioners at Savile Row in November. I'd only just sat down
when they mentioned my qualifications and expressed surprise that
I'd only got A-levels as they were only accepting people with
degrees. This deflated me more than somewhat. An older version of
me would have told them exactly what I thought of them dragging me
down to London on false pretences.

About 18 months later, I applied for a bursary to study for a
degree as this seemed to be the only way I could get promoted. A
while later, my boss at 3-Group called to tell me that he'd been
informed that I'd failed to get that as it was only open to AXo's.
He was almost as annoyed as me about the Catch-22 situation and
said he'd pursue it further. Next I heard that I'd got another
promotion board. This one was a tad different in that after a few
simple questions they asked, if I got promoted, where I'd like to
work and would I have any problems with going on Weather Ships.
Although I'd get sick on the IOW ferry, I said "no trouble at all!"
When I was next at work, I was asked how I'd got on and I said,
"I've got it!" Next I heard was that I had indeed got the promotion
and a posting to Met O 1 (the Marine Division). Never did get on a
Weather Ship although it was a near miss.

The O-i-C posts on the Weather Ships were XO posts but they never
could get enough XO volunteers. It was therefore common practice for
the posts to be filled by AXOs before they went on the IFC.
Similarly, young AXOs often filled the Supervisor posts at upper air
stations on land. These posts were nominally SSA posts. I'm talking
about the 1960s. Practices may have changed after that.


I'm not sure the interviewers were aware that my job in Met O 1 would
not involve Weather Ships.

However, a "fam flight" was arranged for me some months after I'd been
posted whereby I'd go out on a ship bound for station Alpha, get
transferred by Breeches buoy to India, then return to UK on that ship.
If the weather was unsuitable, I'd have been on the full trip to Alpha.
Shortly before I was due to go, the chap I was working with fell ill
and so the trip was cancelled. Imagine my disappointment. ;-)

My stomach wasn't entirely spared as, next year, another fam flight was
arranged. This time it was in a Shackleton (10,000 nuts and bolts
flying in loose formation) to Greenland and back to see the ice north
of Iceland. At least the flight was only 11 hours instead of a few
weeks and I was only sick for half of it. Perhaps the "anti-honk" pills
finally kicked in after five hours.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. [Retd meteorologist/programmer]
http://www.scarlet-jade.com/
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
Posted with Claws: http://www.claws-mail.org/

Graham P Davis wrote:

On 8 Oct 2015 11:28:31 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Graham P Davis wrote:

On 7 Oct 2015 11:28:27 GMT
"Norman" wrote:

Hi Bruce,

I had very similar frustrations as an Assistant in the Met Office
in the early/mid 1960s. I was very much a country hick and was
well outside of my comfort zone at the AXO interview boards at
the Civil Service in North Audley St in London. Although I had
the requisite qualifications I just couldn't relate to the grey
suits and stiff upper lips of the interview panels and I was
unsuccessful 4 times. Then, in 1967, the Australian Bureau of
Meteorology put an advert in "Weather" inviting applications from
suitably qualified people to train as Forecasters at their
Training School in Melbourne. I had the qualifications they were
looking for so I applied. I had an interview at Australia House
in London and the atmosphere was so very different from the AXO
interviews. They were looking for enthusiasm and a genuine
interest in the subject and we had a chat rather than an
interview. The upshot of it was that I was offered a job and in
July 1967 I flew out to Melbourne as a £10 POM. The training
course lasted 9 months and I came out of it successfully and
started my forecasting career at Brisbane Airport in April 1968.
The rest, as they say, is history. I'm sure that I have ended up
with a much more satisfying career than if I had stayed in the
Met Office.

When I joined the Met Office as a Scientific Assistant in 1962 at
the end of July, I had taken my A-levels but was waiting for the
results. After I heard that I'd got 3 passes (and one failu art)
I applied for promotion to AXO. I got an interview with the
commissioners at Savile Row in November. I'd only just sat down
when they mentioned my qualifications and expressed surprise that
I'd only got A-levels as they were only accepting people with
degrees. This deflated me more than somewhat. An older version of
me would have told them exactly what I thought of them dragging me
down to London on false pretences.

About 18 months later, I applied for a bursary to study for a
degree as this seemed to be the only way I could get promoted. A
while later, my boss at 3-Group called to tell me that he'd been
informed that I'd failed to get that as it was only open to AXo's.
He was almost as annoyed as me about the Catch-22 situation and
said he'd pursue it further. Next I heard that I'd got another
promotion board. This one was a tad different in that after a few
simple questions they asked, if I got promoted, where I'd like to
work and would I have any problems with going on Weather Ships.
Although I'd get sick on the IOW ferry, I said "no trouble at all!"
When I was next at work, I was asked how I'd got on and I said,
"I've got it!" Next I heard was that I had indeed got the promotion
and a posting to Met O 1 (the Marine Division). Never did get on a
Weather Ship although it was a near miss.

The O-i-C posts on the Weather Ships were XO posts but they never
could get enough XO volunteers. It was therefore common practice for
the posts to be filled by AXOs before they went on the IFC.
Similarly, young AXOs often filled the Supervisor posts at upper air
stations on land. These posts were nominally SSA posts. I'm talking
about the 1960s. Practices may have changed after that.


I'm not sure the interviewers were aware that my job in Met O 1 would
not involve Weather Ships.

However, a "fam flight" was arranged for me some months after I'd been
posted whereby I'd go out on a ship bound for station Alpha, get
transferred by Breeches buoy to India, then return to UK on that ship.
If the weather was unsuitable, I'd have been on the full trip to Alpha.
Shortly before I was due to go, the chap I was working with fell ill
and so the trip was cancelled. Imagine my disappointment. ;-)

My stomach wasn't entirely spared as, next year, another fam flight was
arranged. This time it was in a Shackleton (10,000 nuts and bolts
flying in loose formation) to Greenland and back to see the ice north
of Iceland. At least the flight was only 11 hours instead of a few
weeks and I was only sick for half of it. Perhaps the "anti-honk" pills
finally kicked in after five hours.


I was sick for the first 24 hours of every trip on the Weather Ships but after
that I was fine, no matter how rough it got. That pattern never changed in the
3 years that I was on the ships.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
http://peakdistrictweather.org

On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 12:03:45 UTC+1, xmetman wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 22:03:13 UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Monday, 5 October 2015 09:47:43 UTC+1, wrote:
"xmetman" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 22:17:12 UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 18:07:30 UTC+1, xmetman wrote:
I've been analysing the occurrence of frost using the data in the daily
Central England Temperature [CET] series from 1878 to 2015. It may not
come as a surprise to some to learn that the first frost is getting
later and the last frost getting earlier. The first frost of the
autumn/winter at the start of the series in 1878 occurred around the
29th of October, but 137 years later this has now slipped by over two
weeks to the 13th of November. Likewise the last frost of any
winter/spring has slipped back 11 days from the 16th of April in 1878 to
the 5th of April in 2014.

Charts etc

How is a frost defined in the daily CET? Is it that the average
minimum at the 3 or 4 (correct?) stations used is below 0°C or does it
need just one station to be below 0°C? My guess is that it is the former
and this would mean that the first CET frost of autumn would be later than
the first frost at any individual CET station. It would seem to be the
explanation of why my own figures over 32 years show an earlier first
frost and a later last one than CET. The dates are 21 April and 4
November, both with a wide range. The standard deviations are 14 and 18
days respectively.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, NE Surrey, 557 ft, 169 m.

Yes Tudor its a composite temperature from a number of sites - I forget how
many - so the best way of looking at a CET frost is as a 'general' frost and
not just a local one. I would prefer to use daily values from a 'real'
station with a very long record, the problem is they are very few of them
and places like Oxford charge for the data as do the Met Office, but I'll
content myself with the CET and EWR series until one day someone see's what
a nonsense it is to lock away the nations climate data.
======================

It is not locked away, but a small charge for processing is reasonable. Can
you get a death certificate for your ancestor free of charge, no, but it is
available. Same thing. You are also using CET data inappropriately as Tudor
has revealed.

Will
--

I don't think that's fair. All xmetman was doing was comparing data from the present with that of the past and showing that there has been a change, unsurprisingly perhaps. The fact that this data is not strictly comparable with data from single station is neither here nor there - it is consistent over the period of comparison. This comparison seems to me to be quite valid, there being no intention to deceive or sensationalise.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

Hi Tudor

Thanks for seeing my contribution for what it is not an authoritative scientific paper but an article from an "amatuer" meterologist who has spent some time doing a little research to show that since 1659 temperatures in Central England have risen, and along with this the times of the first frost which have gotten later, and conversely the last frost which are occurring earlier.

Everybody using this newsgroup knows very well that CET is a composite temperature made up of values from several sites- and we can thank Gordon Manley for that.

Will in some way reminds me of what a frustrating career I had in the Met Office, I would say he was typical of a lot of the HSO & SSO that I came up against when I tried in vain to get into forecasting - the best way I can describe it is a scientific arrogance - his reply to you is full of it.

I spent most out of my outstation career trying to impress one SMetO after another, trying to jump (like many other assistants) the many academic hurdles that were put in your way, first it was highers or A levels, then it was an HNC, now for most jobs in the Met Office it's a degree minimum even if it's in Martian meteorology - having any kind of interest in the weather or meteorology counts for very little. As far as I know that's the way Will did it but he jumped ship into teaching and then research.

You worked for a time for the office in what must have been the golden years and must remember it well - there was always outstations and headquarters, and when you got to headquarters it was the scientists and the rest of us!

I suppose that's part of the reason why I have an aggressive attitude towards the Met Office, but after nearly 4 years away from it, I'm beginning to work that out of my system and see the Met Office for what it is, a bit of a corporate dinosaur that's lost its way, forgotten its past and can't remember who it's supposed to serve.

Not so much a weather service which is just secondary, more of just a "Trading Fund within the Department for Business" as the 'About us' on their website says.

Bruce.

Yes, I worked in the Met Office from Jan 64 to Nov 66, as an AXO. Met0 18a, MetO 18b, IFC, Speke Airport, Preston ATCC. Found I hated shift work and relocation despite knowing it was necessary. Silly boy! Computer forecasts were just coming (1965) and soon became mandatory despite being a little flaky at times.
Since 1982 I've done it in the back garden (shut up at the back). It's the least I can do. :-)

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.