 |
|
| uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) (uk.sci.weather) For the discussion of daily weather events, chiefly affecting the UK and adjacent parts of Europe, both past and predicted. The discussion is open to all, but contributions on a practical scientific level are encouraged. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
February 25th 05, 11:09 AM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
solar differences
I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had
we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? |
|
#2
February 25th 05, 02:44 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some
clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? |
|
#3
February 25th 05, 05:19 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Dave.C wrote: Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? Sorry to mention soil temps again, but I can't help thinking that they have been doing what the sea normally does, ie warm the air beyond the point where copious snow is possible. With the only prolonged settling being in the east, I feel that the track over 200-odd miles of unfrozen, abnormally warm ground has zapped the best part of the snow by the time it reached here, just as a too-long fetch over the North Sea/Atlantic, or abnormally high SSTs, has been known to ruin promising situations. It hasn't simply been the land drying the air out, that should give clearer skies and little/no precip, rather than 90-100% RH and solid cloud with rain/snow. Just my theory. Edmund |
|
#4
February 25th 05, 05:19 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Dave.C wrote: Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? Sorry to mention soil temps again, but I can't help thinking that they have been doing what the sea normally does, ie warm the air beyond the point where copious snow is possible. With the only prolonged settling being in the east, I feel that the track over 200-odd miles of unfrozen, abnormally warm ground has zapped the best part of the snow by the time it reached here, just as a too-long fetch over the North Sea/Atlantic, or abnormally high SSTs, has been known to ruin promising situations. It hasn't simply been the land drying the air out, that should give clearer skies and little/no precip, rather than 90-100% RH and solid cloud with rain/snow. Just my theory. Edmund |
|
#5
February 25th 05, 05:19 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Dave.C wrote: Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? Sorry to mention soil temps again, but I can't help thinking that they have been doing what the sea normally does, ie warm the air beyond the point where copious snow is possible. With the only prolonged settling being in the east, I feel that the track over 200-odd miles of unfrozen, abnormally warm ground has zapped the best part of the snow by the time it reached here, just as a too-long fetch over the North Sea/Atlantic, or abnormally high SSTs, has been known to ruin promising situations. It hasn't simply been the land drying the air out, that should give clearer skies and little/no precip, rather than 90-100% RH and solid cloud with rain/snow. Just my theory. Edmund |
|
#6
February 25th 05, 05:19 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Dave.C wrote: Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? Sorry to mention soil temps again, but I can't help thinking that they have been doing what the sea normally does, ie warm the air beyond the point where copious snow is possible. With the only prolonged settling being in the east, I feel that the track over 200-odd miles of unfrozen, abnormally warm ground has zapped the best part of the snow by the time it reached here, just as a too-long fetch over the North Sea/Atlantic, or abnormally high SSTs, has been known to ruin promising situations. It hasn't simply been the land drying the air out, that should give clearer skies and little/no precip, rather than 90-100% RH and solid cloud with rain/snow. Just my theory. Edmund |
|
#7
February 25th 05, 02:44 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some
clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? |
|
#8
February 25th 05, 02:44 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some
clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? |
|
#9
February 25th 05, 02:44 PM
posted to uk.sci.weather
|
|||
|
|||
|
solar differences
Not sure, because SST's were higher but nights longer. If we'd had some
clear nights then or now and as you alluded the Continent had been colder I think it would have been special in either case. Dave "Scott Whitehead" wrote in message ... I've been wondering what the snow situation would have been like had we had a carbon copy of this cold spell in the first week of January. Obviously daytime solar radiation would have had been much less, but I wonder whether it would have made THAT much difference to temperatures in the near continent. Comments anyone? |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| What are the differences and similarities of the calculations?... for .Dew Point .Reel Feel Temperature .Heat Index and .Wind Chill | alt.talk.weather (General Weather Talk) | |||
| GW is not sunspots, solar cycle length, solar magnetic field, cosmic rays, or solar irradiance. | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
| Differences between this spell and the changeable spell of Nov/Dec | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
| crazy gfs differences | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
| Heathrow/Northolt TAF differences | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Hybrid Mode
