On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 7:16:23 PM UTC+3, wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 1:59:37 PM UTC+3,
wrote

Although aren't you always claiming just that, that you are 'used to it'?


Yes but so what? I know how to drive in hill fog, and so does Norman, and so
does Ken and David, but folk going from say Chesterfield to Manchester may
not be that familiar, or from Exeter to Launceston on the A30 or Exeter to
Plymouth on the A38. All these roads are prone to hill fog and folk may not
expect it, but there will be no warning as there would be for lowland roads
in radiation fog. So as I argued above it is not simply good enough to say
that people in the area are "used to it", it is nothing to do with us.

I take your point and would agree however I was responding to your comment that
made no mention of those who are inexperienced in such conditions but merely said it was 'a load of tosh' to say that people in the area were used to it, which contradicted what you had previously said about being used to it yourself.
Sorry if this seems picky but I was only responding to the comment made.

Col

On Thursday, 12 November 2015 10:59:37 UTC, wrote:
Well finally got some feedback from contacts in the Met Office (both
official and ...ahem... others).

You remember I and others on here (e.g. Norman) queried why fog warnings
were never issued for hill fog depite the fact that there are some busy
roads above 400 metres in the UK. E.g. in Derbyshire. Even if visibilities
are less than 100 metres no warnings are issued if it is caused by low
cloud.

Official answer is that my query caused a lot of discussion and the
conclusion was that since the warning system is impact based and fog on
high ground is low impact then no warnings will be issued. They also said
that impacts are low presumably because people who drive and live at
altitude are "used to it".

What a load of tosh that is. We now have an amber warning for wind in
northern Scotland, surely folk who travel and work up there are "used to
it". We will get snow warnings no doubt later for Highland region in winter,
are they not "used to it" as well? Sorry that argument doesn't wash.

Interestingly the unofficial answer from my contacts is that it would be too
much work. The dangers and risks are understood but they do not want to
overload the system by issuing a lot of fog warnings per year. I can accept
that reluctantly. But why not say that officially?

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

I would do away with the custard warnings altogether, and only issue a warning if it is going to satisfy the current tangerine warning criteria. If the yellow warning is telling us to 'be aware' of something, then we should know about it from watching/reading the forecast anyway. At least then we wouldn't have the continuous warnings of icy pavements in winter!

On 12/11/2015 12:05, David Mitchell wrote:
The problem with the warning system though, is the way they map the areas, which are predominantly done using county boundaries, which are in no way related to topography.
David, the area expected to be affected is shown on a map and every
administrative area gets the warning. This, of course, includes those
that are just brushed by the area drawn. You can see the area affected
on the Met O website. Remember a picture is worth a thousand words; it's
difficult describing an area of weather which isn't bounded by county
boundaries.

Now whether the warnings are good or not is another issue....

On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 4:36:58 PM UTC, Norman wrote:
Eskimo Will wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 1:59:37 PM UTC+3,
wrote

Official answer is that my query caused a lot of discussion and the
conclusion was that since the warning system is impact based and fog on
high ground is low impact then no warnings will be issued. They also said
that impacts are low presumably because people who drive and live at
altitude are "used to it".

What a load of tosh that is. We now have an amber warning for wind in
northern Scotland, surely folk who travel and work up there are "used to
it". We will get snow warnings no doubt later for Highland region in
winter, are they not "used to it" as well? Sorry that argument doesn't
wash.

Although aren't you always claiming just that, that you are 'used to it'?


Yes but so what? I know how to drive in hill fog, and so does Norman, and so
does Ken and David, but folk going from say Chesterfield to Manchester may
not be that familiar, or from Exeter to Launceston on the A30 or Exeter to
Plymouth on the A38. All these roads are prone to hill fog and folk may not
expect it, but there will be no warning as there would be for lowland roads
in radiation fog. So as I argued above it is not simply good enough to say
that people in the area are "used to it", it is nothing to do with us.

Will

Of course, there is the argument that warnings need not be issued for any
conditions that are fairly normal for the time of year. Warnings would be
reserved for fairly extreme conditions that have an average return period of,
say, once in 20 years or longer. That way the warnings would likely have much
more impact and we wouldn't get the "warning fatigue" that must inevitably set
in with the constant barrage of warnings that we get under the present system.

There's no "right" answer, of course.

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

Yes talking of weather warnings, I see there is one for Penzance tomorrow at 09:00 combined with a whole sun, 5% chance of rain, 56% humidity & excellent visibility. http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/w...ime=1447372800

Perhaps a warning against being blinded by the low sun on the drive to work?

I'm in the 'there are far too many' warnings camp.

Graham
Penzance

wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 7:16:23 PM UTC+3,
wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 1:59:37 PM UTC+3,
wrote

Although aren't you always claiming just that, that you are 'used to
it'?


Yes but so what? I know how to drive in hill fog, and so does Norman, and
so
does Ken and David, but folk going from say Chesterfield to Manchester
may
not be that familiar, or from Exeter to Launceston on the A30 or Exeter
to
Plymouth on the A38. All these roads are prone to hill fog and folk may
not
expect it, but there will be no warning as there would be for lowland
roads
in radiation fog. So as I argued above it is not simply good enough to
say
that people in the area are "used to it", it is nothing to do with us.

I take your point and would agree however I was responding to your comment
that
made no mention of those who are inexperienced in such conditions but
merely said it was 'a load of tosh' to say that people in the area were
used to it, which contradicted what you had previously said about being
used to it yourself.
Sorry if this seems picky but I was only responding to the comment made.


Oh dear I didn't mean what you think my comment on "load of tosh" was
referring to the MetO official attitude.

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

"Graham Easterling" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 4:36:58 PM UTC, Norman wrote:
Eskimo Will wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 1:59:37 PM UTC+3,
wrote

Official answer is that my query caused a lot of discussion and the
conclusion was that since the warning system is impact based and
fog on
high ground is low impact then no warnings will be issued. They also
said
that impacts are low presumably because people who drive and live at
altitude are "used to it".

What a load of tosh that is. We now have an amber warning for wind
in
northern Scotland, surely folk who travel and work up there are
"used to
it". We will get snow warnings no doubt later for Highland region in
winter, are they not "used to it" as well? Sorry that argument
doesn't
wash.

Although aren't you always claiming just that, that you are 'used to
it'?


Yes but so what? I know how to drive in hill fog, and so does Norman,
and so
does Ken and David, but folk going from say Chesterfield to Manchester
may
not be that familiar, or from Exeter to Launceston on the A30 or Exeter
to
Plymouth on the A38. All these roads are prone to hill fog and folk may
not
expect it, but there will be no warning as there would be for lowland
roads
in radiation fog. So as I argued above it is not simply good enough to
say
that people in the area are "used to it", it is nothing to do with us.

Will

Of course, there is the argument that warnings need not be issued for any
conditions that are fairly normal for the time of year. Warnings would be
reserved for fairly extreme conditions that have an average return period
of,
say, once in 20 years or longer. That way the warnings would likely have
much
more impact and we wouldn't get the "warning fatigue" that must inevitably
set
in with the constant barrage of warnings that we get under the present
system.

There's no "right" answer, of course.

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

Yes talking of weather warnings, I see there is one for Penzance tomorrow at
09:00 combined with a whole sun, 5% chance of rain, 56% humidity &
excellent visibility.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/w...ime=1447372800

Perhaps a warning against being blinded by the low sun on the drive to work?

I'm in the 'there are far too many' warnings camp.
================

At present there is a massive disagreement between the "abigail" hype and
the auto forecasts. In this situation I would believe the auto forecasts any
day. There is still no gale predicted for Thurso on the auto forecasts. This
warning should have stayed at "custard" but having named Abigail it had to
be made amber.

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

In your opinion. In mine, you are talking a load of tosh and the MetO would be highly likely to agree with me. 😄

On Thursday, 12 November 2015 11:31:58 UTC, wrote:
"Ron Button" wrote in message
...
On 12/11/2015 10:59, Eskimo Will wrote:
Well finally got some feedback from contacts in the Met Office (both
official and ...ahem... others).

You remember I and others on here (e.g. Norman) queried why fog warnings
were never issued for hill fog depite the fact that there are some busy
roads above 400 metres in the UK. E.g. in Derbyshire. Even if
visibilities are less than 100 metres no warnings are issued if it is
caused by low cloud.

Official answer is that my query caused a lot of discussion and the
conclusion was that since the warning system is impact based and fog on
high ground is low impact then no warnings will be issued. They also
said that impacts are low presumably because people who drive and live
at altitude are "used to it".

What a load of tosh that is. We now have an amber warning for wind in
northern Scotland, surely folk who travel and work up there are "used to
it". We will get snow warnings no doubt later for Highland region in
winter, are they not "used to it" as well? Sorry that argument doesn't
wash.

Interestingly the unofficial answer from my contacts is that it would be
too much work. The dangers and risks are understood but they do not want
to overload the system by issuing a lot of fog warnings per year. I can
accept that reluctantly. But why not say that officially?


Pardon my ignorance, but would'nt it be simpler to announce the probable
cloud base height and leave it up to the individual to do his own
analyse,i.e if you know where you live and its above the cloud base it
will be foggy !



To be fair Ron, forecasts do mention hill fog, both auto and human. But I'm
talking about the warning system which does not warn for low cloud - full
stop.

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

At Saville House your ex-officio is considered irrelevant. Why are you bothering about an agency that a child-molesting agency considers irrelevant?

On Thursday, 12 November 2015 17:29:49 UTC, Graham Easterling wrote:
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 4:36:58 PM UTC, Norman wrote:
Eskimo Will wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 1:59:37 PM UTC+3,
wrote

Official answer is that my query caused a lot of discussion and the
conclusion was that since the warning system is impact based and fog on
high ground is low impact then no warnings will be issued. They also said
that impacts are low presumably because people who drive and live at
altitude are "used to it".

What a load of tosh that is. We now have an amber warning for wind in
northern Scotland, surely folk who travel and work up there are "used to
it". We will get snow warnings no doubt later for Highland region in
winter, are they not "used to it" as well? Sorry that argument doesn't
wash.

Although aren't you always claiming just that, that you are 'used to it'?


Yes but so what? I know how to drive in hill fog, and so does Norman, and so
does Ken and David, but folk going from say Chesterfield to Manchester may
not be that familiar, or from Exeter to Launceston on the A30 or Exeter to
Plymouth on the A38. All these roads are prone to hill fog and folk may not
expect it, but there will be no warning as there would be for lowland roads
in radiation fog. So as I argued above it is not simply good enough to say
that people in the area are "used to it", it is nothing to do with us..

Will

Of course, there is the argument that warnings need not be issued for any
conditions that are fairly normal for the time of year. Warnings would be
reserved for fairly extreme conditions that have an average return period of,
say, once in 20 years or longer. That way the warnings would likely have much
more impact and we wouldn't get the "warning fatigue" that must inevitably set
in with the constant barrage of warnings that we get under the present system.

There's no "right" answer, of course.

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

Yes talking of weather warnings, I see there is one for Penzance tomorrow at 09:00 combined with a whole sun, 5% chance of rain, 56% humidity & excellent visibility. http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/w...ime=1447372800

Perhaps a warning against being blinded by the low sun on the drive to work?

I'm in the 'there are far too many' warnings camp.

Graham
Penzance

Have they got plenty of food in your camp?
With all the custard and tangerines you should be OK for dessert and antiscorbutics.

Now tell me who is going to look for pudding on their drive from Manchester to wherever now that the child minders have gone elsewhere?

The MetOffice is not considering operating a Weather Channel of its own is it?
Having a flag system for car radios to tune into hill fog as for heavy traffic seems a little OTT.

There is a custard warning for here, with forecast wind speeds
from 15 gusting 30 to 25 gusting 46 highlighted. On Saturday,
20 gusting 39 is not included in the warning.

Rothes, 10 miles away by road, has a custard warning from 12
gusting 33 to 20 gusting 42. On Saturday, there is no warning,
but forecast wind speeds of up to 19 gusting 36.

Grantown, another 30 miles or so, has an amber warning of wind
speeds of 13 gusting 30 to19 gusting 40, but only a custard
warning later on with forecast wind speed of 19 gusting 40. No
warnings for Saturday, with forecast wind speed of 17 gusting
32.

I am confused. If 13 gusting 30 at 07:00 on Friday justifies
an amber warning for Grantown, why does 20 gusting 39 on
Saturday at 00:00 not justify even a custard warning for here?


What happened to Abigail, I wonder? The custard warning I
commented on yesterday (see above), valid all day today, has
vanished, even
though the predictions go up to 20 gusting 37, which is a lot
more than in yesterday's amber one for Grantown-on-Spey, which
has also now vanished.

Anne
(Fochabers)