mushymanrob

youre quite close actually... yep, couldnt agree more. look to the ops for the detail ( at short range ) , but the flavour of the pattern will be shown in the anomaly charts. i believe it would be very unusual for the ops to pick up on a pattern change before the upper air pattern would 'allow' for it. i dont view the ops much now, except for detail when theres something interesting happening, the anomalies accurately predict the overall general pattern) the upper air flow remains in the west (broadly), we keep the mobile, unsettled regime, and next weeks looking cooler and wetter as atlantic systems cross the uk square on (as opposed to taking a more northerly track, recently ). so more wind and rain for the foreseeable, less mild, more cool/cold)

the tv weather presenters ALWAYS deliver the weather with a smile regardless of the predicted weather - its their job! suggesting that they have preferences that cloud their delivery is bonkers. oh... and just in case you coldies didnt realise - i find the vast majority of people i know do not want cold weather! the % on here is not representative of the population as a whole.

seriously?.... (tv presenters having the audacity to smile whilst delivering the weather outlook).

a modified flow, the source of the air was still from the west, and as lows track further south some of the preceding air gets drawn westward - hence its not very cold. it would need a deeper easterly feed from a colder source to be cold enough for snow.

tbh, after watching the vid posted by weather-history, so am i! i was under contract at the time, so would have made every effort to stick to the agreed schedule. it wasnt easter break so i couldnt have skived off unseen. as it was the first visit of the new season (april-march) id have all winters growth and debris to clear up. maybe we missed the snow on the 4th, and had just rain or sleet, im sure if i was snowed off id have recorded it (i note very wet, hot, cold, snowy days - but i dont keep daily weather records) - or put my daily earnings in brackets (which indicates thats what i earned off the contract but didnt actually work that day - to be made up later).

not really, i just keep my work diary up to date, but my diary did have me working which at that time of the year in that location would be mowing . i cannot remember the event, i can only report what my diary says i did.

oddly enough, i was working on tuesday 4/4/00 , mowing at a school (checking work records)... maybe your snow event was localised?

yes i missed 87-8 in april, thats 3. ok, i see what you are saying about late snow after a relatively mild winter with little snow and there being a notable snowfall in spring - thats a fair point however id suggest that ratio is similar to winters where there has been greater snow events. hmm... i do take you point on this though, but as you say theres no idea of how long these late snow events lasted, and i was always referring to a 'decent spell ' of 72 hours or more, as in a winters spell. im possibly guilty of lazy posting and not clarifying fully what im on about. thats why i referred to 2013 earlier - that was a decent wintry spell after an unremarkable winter. it was a widespread spell that lasted, which im sure we will all agree is a rare event!

hi but i didnt present my statement as one that was suggesting causation, i cannot scientifically prove a link, but i cannot prove the sun is warmer in summer then in winter either other then its higher in the sky! lol. in my 43 years of working outdoors (like yourself) being 'snowed off' after february has ended is a rare event although we often do see snow. the evidence does suggest a notable snow event after february is more unlikely after a mild/snowless winter - but thats not a 'law' . i do think though that a cold pattern in jan/feb often lingers into march as the synoptic pattern needed is already in place?..

hi... i did provide the evidence that clearly demonstrates that late snow is rarer, much rarer, after a winter with no preceding snow. , i cannot show you the causation , i have no clue how it works. all i can demonstrate is what the stats are telling us. i assume a cold pattern through winter often lingers into spring making a late snowfall more likely - and conversely a mild winters pattern often lingers into spring making a late snowfall less likely. thats not unreasonable is it? i wasnt actually thinking about you regarding 'desperate snow lover' or 'point scoring' . i dont get 'snippy' with people disagreeing with me, i get frustrated when people seem deliberately obtuse, and/or either by accident or design misrepresent the point being made - especially in the face of evidence asked for, provided, then ignored. now you either accept that or not,

i provided the evidence that 'notable' snowfall is highly unlikely after march 1st when there has been no notable snowfall in the preceding months - 'mild' by default, im not going to argue what constitutes 'mild' its clear that i was refering to a snowless winter as 'mild' , and not the cet.

can we now please put this march snow malarkey behind us now... i made a statement, ive supplied the stats that support what i actually said - and they clearly do. there really is nothing to say, you either accept the stats or you dont.

yep, now you are begining to get it!

there are only 2 winters, 1884-5, 1991-2, where that chart says there were 'notable' snowfalls after march 1st when there was no notable snowfall in the preceding months. ive always been on about 'notable' or 'decent' snowfalls that lasted longer then 48 hours. even at 19 'months' , out of 140 years (280 months if your counting months 140 years x 2 months- march april) it still makes the notion that 'notable snowfall in march/april is UNLIKELY , a very fair statement.

you answered your own question there "Surely saying (whether the stats agree or not) that a late cold spell won't happen, or is very unlikely to happen, if there has been no preceding cold spell is implying that one causes the other. How can that be? the question, followed by the answer" I know that weather patterns can and do get locked in," im not saying we wont get a decent snowfall, im not implying the preceding months categorically have a determined impact on what will come, of course the only certainty in meteorology is uncertainty! but it IS about patterns, and the link you provided clearly demonstrates this... out of the 87 years in the last 140 years that had snowfall after march 1st, only 2 had a significant late significant snowfall without there being a similar spell in the preceding months. THATS what the stats are telling us off the link you provided. so i do not think its that outrageous or misplaced to suggest that its unlikely that we will get a significant snowfall after march 1st (of course theres still time for one this month! lol) i really dont see what the problem is here, unless its snow lovers refusing to see what the stats are telling us about the probabilities , or cheap point scoring,

http://www.neforum2.co.uk/ferryhillweather/bonacina.html shows that in the last 140 years, a significant snowfall occurred after march 1st in 87 years, but only twice did that occur when there had been no significant snowfall in the preceding winter months. the stats back up the point i made, thank you.

.... but 98 99 were 24/48 hour wonders, not the decent spells im on about. checking my diaries, i lost no work - although i think i remember snow on a sunday - but i wasnt snowed off - in fact the only time ive been snowed off (in 'mowing' season march - nov) was 2013.

there was?.... i didnt see anything until march. im central uk too.. however if im wrong on this, it just goes to prove that late cold after a relatively mild winter is even more uncommon!

..... theres nothing particularly mild either

i do wish people would read what i said from the outset and not bits from later on - that way there would be no misunderstanding... most marches/aprils have a cold spell, they might even produce snow. but that was never my point! i was always talking about a proper dumping of snow - like in march 1970, a proper cold spell, not a 48 hour wonder. the chart (i think 'jethro') posted a link to a couple of weeks ago confirms what i posted, since 1875 i counted 4? 5? occassions where march had a dumping after an apparently mild winter. hence, saying a decent cold spell with widespread snow is highly UNLIKELY, after a mild winter. as for 2013.... that might have a below average cet, so what? it wasnt a cold winter with previous cold/snowy spells. but 2013 DOES prove that late cold/snowy spells can occur even after a winter with no prior cold/snowy spells , they are just highly uncommon. so i cannot now see the chances of a decent cold spell and widespread snow being very great now, as theres no indication of any change to the current pattern in the next 2 weeks at least. however, a short lived blip (like some of us had mid jan) is still likely - a 48 hour wonder? likely - a 72 + hour spell of settled snow ? in reality no.

yes. there was a link to the data posted here a week or so ago, i should have saved it but didnt. the evidence is the stats, which shows that a late cold/snowy spell in march/april is a rare occurance after a mild dec-feb. it can occur as 2013 proved (but even then the ecm had a cold spell in fi as early as early feb) .

yep, look at weather history here in the uk, and youll find that 'heavy snow storms' in march and april are extremely rare following a mild dec-feb. late snow events usually follow an already cold winter.

..... but i didnt read gibbys post as 'one sided', far from it, he said that all weather types should be discussed and not just the hunt for cold.

sorry old chap, i agree with gibby . and i AM an 'all or nothing' person, i dont like the cold - i do like mild, but i do like a damn good blizzard with DEEP drifting snow. cold for the sake of cold imho is pointless, as is getting excited by cherry picked fi charts.

so tell me... wheres anything cold coming from?... it very rarely just pops up unseen, undetected, as if by magic. we see signs of change, of an evolution in the predictive charts. and the current charts are nowhere near starting a cold evolution. its true that something cold might evolve yet, but we can see with some confidence 2 weeks ahead, and theres nothing there to indicate a synoptic shift that would even make a cold spell (a proper cold spell) possible. the odds are firmly stacked against a proper cold spell, although just 2 years ago the very short odds won, dont expect that again! maybe the recent events in the usa is down to better reporting now? the thing that i cant get away from is the fact that historically our climate has always fluctuated, long before we started to keep records and tried to standardise the climate. is the climate changing? probably, is this change outside what theres been before? ... dunno... dont think anyone does. have they?... have you any stats for that or is it a guess?