osmposm

...and a pretty crippling 40-point late penalty, which will make a bad dent in your score even if you're spot on! I tend to think anything over two days late is not worth it, as you can easily end up with a negative score...

....and from a further data source in the south east: Hurley, nr Maidenhead (Berks) recorded 16 snow falling days in Feb '63. See here: http://www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~brugge/hurley.html

After studying the summaries of the daily Met Office bulletins here http://www.mtullett.plus.com/1962-63/index.htm , I am not at all sure that January on the top of Hampstead Heath could not have managed the 18 snow falling days recorded for January, and just possibly even the 20 for February (the missing day, the 1st Feb, was in fact quite snowy in the south) - especially if very light flakes or pellets accreting from freezing fog was included. But you are quite right that quantities after the first week of January were mainly quite small (<5cm) or very small, and less than in several other notable winters.

You may possibly be right - but I'd be surprised if Hampstead's 'falling snow' recording is based solely on finding it in the funnel. It is a long-standing and highly-regarded manual station run by the Hampstead Scientific Society, and it seems likely that experienced human visual assessment forms an integral part of their observations. Edit: More on the station here: http://www.weather-uk.com/hampstead/index.html Observations seem to have been made twice a day. It does appear that at the relevant time direct observations were actually made by Water Board staff (though at all times collated and supervised by a very distinguished meteorologist, Eric Hawke), so perhaps they got it wrong. It would be interesting to read data from other south-eastern stations, if I knew where to find it....though I fear I am getting a bit off-topic here, sorry.

I'm not sure if this is quite right, OP, though I cannot speak for everywhere in the SE. It is certainly true that the heaviest snowfall was in the last few days of December '62 - indeed below is a picture of me and my sister in it (in central London) on or about Jan 1st 1963. However I certainly remember further snow during January & February - I would have been in London or, later on, away at school in Sussex. The statistics for Hampstead (inner North London - see here http://www.weather-uk.com/hampstead/data.htm ) during the winter tend to support this. The Hampstead weather station is quite high (128m), and snowy for London; but London generally does not usually get as much snow as many other areas in the SE: Dec 1962: falling snow 09 days - lying snow 07 days - max depth 30 cm on 30th December Jan 1963: falling snow 18 days - lying snow 31 days - max depth 45 cm on 1st January Feb 1963: falling snow 20 days - lying snow 24 days - max depth 35 cm on 2nd February The snow at the end of December, incidentally, was more like 12 inches than 7, even in London - the Hampstead data, my photo, and this useful website http://www.napier.eclipse.co.uk/weather/bonacina.html all seem to confirm that. The latter talks, too, of "widespread falls" in Jan & Feb. There had also been several days of snowfall in November as well, with a couple of cm lying at Hampstead on the 21st.

I don't have a problem with people changing their guesses once. It's an inevitable result of being scored higher than the people who make the same guess as you, but later - there's nothing to be lost by making an early wild guess, and it may be the (higher scoring) one you end up sticking with. But I do think that changing it several times is a bit of a bore, if only because it makes the job of extracting the entries so much harder (let alone trying to get the order of precedence right). Maybe we should either only allow one change, or stop the bonus scoring by order of entry altogether? Alternatively, anyone who changes more than once could be asked to draw up and post the final list of entries! Ironically, having spent a week assuming my +4.4 early guess was far too high, I am now wondering if it isn't actually too low!! And I may not change it at all.....possibly.

Surely the evenness of station distribution nationwide is irrelevant to the measurement of the CET mean, which is calculated from just three stations - Stonyhurst, Pershore & Rothamsted I think it is (or was)?

Adam, the great link Noggin very kindly gave us above seems to show this is just not true. Here is the map of synoptic and climate stations in Wales from that link (and also the one for central/SE England): While I agree that there is a sparsity in your part of South Wales, as you can see there are numerous inland stations over Wales as a whole. The same seems to be true in most other parts of the country - whether or not they are evenly distributed, there are many, many that are nowhere near a coast. Nobody is being defensive, mate, nobody is in denial, and nobody is on a GW bandwagon. And as I've already said, I'd appreciate it if in this forum area you avoided trying to tie this into your opinions about supposed GW agendas. If that's what you still want to do, why not open up a thread on the subject in the Climate Change area?

Good points, Duncan - and I will probably be lowering my intial (+4.4) guess in the next day or two.

IMO, on the other hand, it is not for the reason you suggest, but for the reasons TWS has carefully explained - and it's certainly not "obvious" either way. There are good arguments for other measures, certainly, perhaps in conjunction with 61-90; but following standard world meteorological practice is hardly evidence of wicked intent, even if it may be a little unimaginative. Perhaps, too - to avoid conflict in these nice, clean threads - we could try and keep the GW-conspiracy theories safely corralled in the Climate Change area? Thanks, Ossie I'm confused, Mike. The actual contest is still for the guesses everybody made before (or very shortly after, with penalties) the start of the month - nobody can or is changing them. But the thread is not only about the competition, it is a free discussion on where we think the CET figure is heading; and that, of course, changes as the month progresses and its weather unfolds.

February's CET mean stats: 1961 - 1990: 3.8 1971 - 2000: 4.2 1981 - 2009: 4.4 10-yr running: 5.0 5-yr running: 4.7 There were already signs that things were settling back down a bit after the exceptional highs of 1990, 1998 (both 7.3) & 2002 (7.0), and that feeling can only be stronger now. AderynCoch, your caveat about 1945's 7.1 is well taken, but I will go (for the time being) for an only slightly above average +4.4 (I'm tempted by something a bit lower, but am swayed by the rarity of winters that manage three cold/coldish months.)

Actually, the nearest 1000 ft ground is only about two miles (as the crow flies) south-west of Ludlow - but I can't see any houses on Google Earth, so I presume they're not up there! Ossie

Not quite sure if having a river stops you being at 1000ft, but I agree that in England if it's of any size it makes it a lot less likely! Even along the valley of the River Teme, Ludlow seems to be all above 80 meters (260 ft). Around the castle above, and into the old town centre, it's more like 350 ft (107 m). And in the new developments to the north-east it rises to nearly 130 m, or 420 ft+. That may not be 1000 ft, but it's enough to make a big difference in the borderline snow stakes.

Thanks for that, MAF. And from the same piece re your responsibility for the state of the path inside your property: On your own land, it is a different matter. In England and Wales, you owe visitors a duty under the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 to take reasonable care to ensure that they are reasonably safe. So if you know someone is likely to walk up your garden path, like the milkman, and you know it's slippery, you must take reasonable steps to clear it and grit it if necessary. But some people say it is your civic duty to help, even those high up. Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond, whose home is in Strichen, Aberdeenshire, has reportedly urged people to help neighbours. "These are the worst weather conditions we've had for 30 years," he was quoted as saying in the Times. "I would urge people to engage in self-help so that they have access to their driveways and pavements. They should do the same for their neighbours who might not be able to help themselves." Of course there is shovel etiquette when it comes to clearing pavements and paths. Just shunting it in front of the neighbours' gate would probably be considered rude. The gutter might seem a better bet. Or your own garden. So do the nice thing, the right thing - and the legal thing.

I don't understand what you mean, Stew. I am sorry you think my phraseology is "poor", I will try and make myself clearer (though I'm not sure anyone else is having a problem with it). I am referring to the Hadley (Met Office) published daily CET means (halfway beween min & max averaged over the three representative stations used). The confirmed daily data (up to the end of 2009) comes from here: http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetdl1772on.dat . The unconfirmed provisional data for January so far comes from here: http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cet_mean_est_2010 . What I am looking at (or for) is a single day with a CET mean value of -5 degrees or below; and three successive days with a CET mean value of -2 degrees or below. The third measure - seven successive days with a CET mean value of zero degrees or below - has, as I've said, already been achieved this winter twice.

Yes, sorry - though since it's grey and unexceptional not much to say about it really. And the discussion did start and continue with specific reference to recent weather conditions, so not (IMHO) wholly off-topic. Perhaps you'd like to add to your 12 posts, James, and raise a more specifically weather-related matter for us all to discuss....?

It is a fact that you might theoretically be held responsible for it, not that you will. As a Health and Safety consultant, you personally are professionally required to act as if the worse-case scenario were always going to happen: the fact is that it very, very rarely does. As you say, you have never been sued - is that because you always play it by the book, or - in part, at least - because it doesn't happen much? I ignore the more ridiculous end of health & safety completely, and I've never been sued either. How many people on this forum have actually been sued or threatened with suing for taking a sensible and responsible action, I'd love to hear from them? I have a friend staying here at the moment who was indeed sued for damage caused by trees in his garden - but he acted idiotically in ignoring the threat for for years even after he's been warned of a potential problem. My young neighbour cut his hand badly a week ago, I helped slow the bleeding, blocked up the smashed window with a board, and drove him to hospital in the snow. Hmm, a bit risky - might have caused problems if there was still glass in the wound (there wasn't as it turned out); might have cut myself working on the window; might have had an accident driving him there or back; either of us might have slipped on the (uncleared!!) snow in the hospital car park. If I'd minimised potential risk I'd have stayed clear and called an ambulance. Well, bless him, he brought me round a seriously nice bottle of wine this morning. Oh, and by the way, do you know how he did it? He slipped on the snowy steps down to his front door, and stuck his hand through the glass as he tried to save himself. I bet he's really glad he didn't expose himself to the risk of legal action by trying to clear it himself. If the world has changed, it is only because we let it. You, and I, and everybody else can stop the changes you abhor now if we want to - at least in our domestic lives.

Indeed - I have a feeling the three days at or below -2.0 may be cracked. Less optimistic about the -5.0 - the provisional Hadley figure for the 7th is -3.9....that would be a big adjustment, though -4.0 is quite likely.

I'm sorry, but this is madness. If you take that to its logical end, then we would be ill-advised to try and help someone after they have fallen, lest we are sued for doing it in a slightly (in someone's opinion) less-than-perfect manner. Jan had the courage (and the heart) to help him after he had fallen, so surely we should all have the courage (and the heart) to try and prevent the fall in the first place? Or is Jan implying that she only helped him because of her professional obligation to do so, and that those of us without her expertise and 'code of conduct' duty should keep our distance and just call an ambulance? Probably best not even to reassure the injured party that an ambulance is on its way, as if it were delayed there might be psychological damage from the falsely-raised hope. There have been a number of studies showing that - like crime in general - people's perception of how much this nonsense goes on is far, far greater than its actual occurrence. And where these things actually - and rarely - reach court, British judges continue to show a refreshing tendency to throw them out. The problem lies, as you say, with the insurance companies - and the tendency to settle immediately out of court 'without prejudice' as it is cheaper than even beginning to fight the case. Sorry, but my path will stay cleared, and I will continue to help people who fall down, despite my lamentable lack of advanced first-aid skills. Sue me if you like - I'll see you in court!

Oh dear - sorry! Stick to sharp sand (not the soft, orangey builder's type which just forms a sort of sludge) or horticultural grit. EDIT: you're right, see here http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/strange-but-true/Cat-litter-gritting-warning-as.5971728.jp However, I think it could still work on already cleared surfaces as a temporary grip-aid to counter a thin frosty layer - but clear it when it starts to absorb misture and soften. There's also a (more expensive) type that doesn't soften and stays hard and granular - it's the cheaper (Fuller's Earth) type, that forms big clumps in the litter tray, that would be problematic.

I completely agree, TT. Apart from the legal minimum for my vehicle, I have no insurance of any kind, even buildings. Since I paid off my mortgage many years ago I have elected to take on all the risk myself. I protect myself and my property by being careful and pro-active in maintenance in as risk-free a manner as possible for myself and others, and since I work largely from home and am usually here, I am able to keep on top of things. I have had to shell out occasionally - a water tank burst a couple of years ago and did much damage - but the cost to me (so far!) is far less than the thousands saved in premiums. I am thoroughly depressed that anyone with jan's mind and heart should seriously think it sensible not to clear a path of snow for fear of the legal consequences - particularly as I believe it is a wholly erroneous fear.

Even if it was on jan's property, I shouldn't worry too much - I imagine the Post Office has its own insurance, unlike many casual visitors. Unlike last February when my deliveries were suspended for three days for 'elfnsafety (in inner London!), my posties were out straight away this year - they had sensibly been issued with good high-grip boots (though I'd have thought studded over-shoes would be even better). I was grateful, and thanked them warmly, and I feel very sorry for this postie who came a cropper. But the sensible - and obvious - way to prevent it happening on people's own patch is to clear, and keep clearing the snow/ice/slush from their path. It's not so hard, and quite apart from any legal questions seems the kind and responsible thing to do. Temps in the south have not been severe, and after clearing at night or first thing in the morning, a scattering of salt (and gritty sand or cat litter) should keep it safe for a while. The question of the pavement outside your house is more complex - I've heard lawyers argue that if you effectively accept responsibility for its safety by voluntarily clearing it, you could be asking for legal trouble. Well, lawyers like to make trouble, and a government minister on television said this was nonsense. I agree - and besides, even if it is technically risky in law, in my book the higher law of kindness and good citizenship trumps it. In Germany I believe it's a legal requirement for every householder. If people are too lazy - or too accustomed to the modern idea that everything is someone else's responsibility - then we need a law too. If someone is genuinely physically unable to do it (and not just reluctant to miss 'Celebrity Big Brother), then why not ask an able-bodied neighbour to help - or even pay a local teenager a tenner, that's what I did? And if you don't know any of your neighbours well enough to ask - well, maybe it's time you did. Sorry, this sounds like an attack on jan, which it isn't meant to be at all - your actions make it clear that you're a very kind, thoughtful and public-spirited person. But our recent unfamiliarity with the formerly commonplace hazards of cold weather mean that many people seem to have lost their ability to use common-sense to deal with it.

11th Dec-10th Jan was +0.5 (rounded from 0.494). That's 31 days, though, not 30. For 30 days, 11th Dec-9th Jan was also +0.5 (rounded from 0.530); 12th Dec-10th Jan was +0.4 (rounded from 0.407). So a bit more than "just missed out". 17th Dec-15th Jan will be much closer - perhaps +0.1, or even zero (rounded down).

Indeed. 17th - 13th provisionally works out at -0.1 (rounded from 0.093). The 14th & 15th will surely push that above zero (they only need to average +1.3), but January's daily figures may perhaps be adjusted down later. Also of interest is that we finally managed to achieve one (the second) of the three measures I arbitrarily suggested in November as representing significant cold, and did it twice - once in December & already again in January, both of which have had a week with the mean continuously below zero: "For the daily figures since 1772: the current and continuing run of 22 winters without a single day whose mean was -5.0 or below has never happened before; the current and continuing run of 18 winters without a week where every day's mean was zero or below has never happened before; the current and continuing run of 13 winters without a 3-day period where every day's mean was -2.0 or below has never happened before." On the current figures, however, the other two measures (three straight days at -2.0 or below, and/or a single day at -5.0** or below) are still eluding us - confirming the impression that in south (very different in Scotland) the cold has been unusually persistent, but not at all severe. Let's hope that this winter may still hold one or both of them in store. (**or -4.0 for that matter)

Actually over 5 degrees today here - the first time since, I think, December 27th...in fact the first time over 4 degrees for that matter. Just wondering now whether January will see us break 10 degrees at all - if not, I suspect it's quite a few years since that's happened. Last 10o+ day here was 9th December. Ossie