BBC Weather Forecasts and Graphics Discussion

[Andy Bown]

I think it would be useful if forecasters could occasionally explain that the temps shown are for cities and that in the countryside it will be much cooler. I know that is the case but not everybody does.

A friend said earlier that tonight would only get down to zero from looking at the Countryfile forecast. At that point I hadn't watched it.

I got home and watched the recording, only to see that the 0c temps were for Cardiff and London but it looked like they counted for right across the South of Britain.

I have texted him to explain and that we should be expecting -4c (at highest) judging by the last 4 nights.

[Great Plum]

Does anyone know if the whiter shade underneath the snow showers is to account for settling snow or that that area will experience snowfall...

[Grape Soda]

The new maps are good, to an extent ( the moving graphics bit ) but!!.... I think the map is way to big for the screen for starters, the people in the SE always get covered by any kind of warning. Ok if your in Scotland, but these warnings don't dissapear for ages, and its virually impossible to see through them, especially if it's one of those 30 second forecasts on N24 lol

The maps also fail to have any citys on the Eastern side of England either!, its like no towns or anything are in that part of the map! So we have no idea of Temps.

Also, my regional forecasts, seem to be missing a graphic only the main BBC forecast have, .... dense fog!

Maybe they can't afford that add-on lol. Bit dissapointing though when fog is no different to cloud

Another concern is how do we know what the intensity of the snow falling means?, I really can't see much of a difference. Bring back the 1, 2, 3 snow symbols!, light, moderate, heavy.... there easy to read.

My favourite forecasters though have to be in Order : Dan, Helen and Matt.... I always smile when I see them come on, they always give a good, full forecast

Edited November 25, 2005 by Grape Soda

[Microburst]

Does anyone know if the whiter shade underneath the snow showers is to account for settling snow or that that area will experience snowfall...

If I am correct in understanding your question, I believe it shows where snow has fallen or is laying.

[Great Plum]

If I am correct in understanding your question, I believe it shows where snow has fallen or is laying.

Sorry my question wasn't wrded very well... That 'symbol' shows settling snow then? Thanks for the quick answer...

[Microburst]

The new maps are good, to an extent ( the moving graphics bit ) but!!.... I think the map is way to big for the screen for starters, the people in the SE always get covered by any kind of warning. Ok if your in Scotland, but these warnings don't dissapear for ages, and its virually impossible to see through them, especially if it's one of those 30 second forecasts on N24 lol

The maps also fail to have any citys on the Eastern side of England either!, its like no towns or anything are in that part of the map! So we have no idea of Temps.

Also, my regional forecasts, seem to be missing a graphic only the main BBC forecast have, .... dense fog! :huh:

Maybe they can't afford that add-on lol. Bit dissapointing though when fog is no different to cloud

Another concern is how do we know what the intensity of the snow falling means?, I really can't see much of a difference. Bring back the 1, 2, 3 snow symbols!, light, moderate, heavy.... there easy to read.

My favourite forecasters though have to be in Order : Dan, Helen and Matt.... I always smile when I see them come on, they always give a good, full forecast

Hi GS

OK, the maps have to be bigger to allow compensations for digital and widescreen television. Otherwise they appear elongated, this was one of the problems with the old graphics.

The position of the warning 'dog' is placed there over the SE for a technical reason.

It is not desireable to have all towns placed over the maps. They pick out half a dozen major cities or towns for the examples. However if there is a specific story of national interest to tell the forcasters can add a town quite easily.

The software for the graphics is the same for all BBC local tv stations, the forecaster just does not choose to use it.

Intensity of snow is defined by bigger and smaller blobs you hopefully will see this as the Winter draws on.

Ihope this helps to answer your questions

MB

Sorry my question wasn't wrded very well... That 'symbol' shows settling snow then? Thanks for the quick answer...

If it is what I think you mean then, yes.

[Grape Soda]

Thanks MB for your response.....

[Veritas]

If it is what I think you mean then, yes.

Since when have the Met Office been able to supply data for where snow is laying?

[Veritas]

A few of the people on the biogs page are no longer with BBC Weather for various reasons or are on attatchments elsewhere. The new faces (and I cannot tell you who they are yet) will be replacing Helen Young, Sarah Wilmshurst and Mike Fish. Keep an eye the Met Office pages and BBC Weather pages for more details next year.

MB

The biogs do still include Helen, Sarah and Mike Fish - but all the others, surely, are still very much part of the team. The photo on the page is an old one.

Also, Mike Fish retired over a year ago - so must have been replaced!

Is there any truth in the rumour that another face from the past will be making a return to the national team?

[Andy Bown]

I know Microburst will read this and accuse me of putting down one of the forecasters. But at the end of today's 18.30 forecast Darren Bett (who I thought had improved his presentation recently) said those dreaded and unnecessary 5 words.

And I quote : "At least it will be mild."

So it's ok to have wind, heavy rain, heavy showers and a considerable risk of flooding as long as it's 'mild'. I know we've had this discussion before, but IMO it is a waste of words in a vain attempt to make the impending conditions sound better.

[Somerset Squall]

I know Microburst will read this and accuse me of putting down one of the forecasters. But at the end of today's 18.30 forecast Darren Bett (who I thought had improved his presentation recently) said those dreaded and unnecessary 5 words.

And I quote : "At least it will be mild."

So it's ok to have wind, heavy rain, heavy showers and a considerable risk of flooding as long as it's 'mild'. I know we've had this discussion before, but IMO it is a waste of words in a vain attempt to make the impending conditions sound better.

Indeed Andy, I entirely agree, the wind is raging here now, but it's all alright because at least it's mild. Sounds silly doesn't it. The dreaded 5 words i agree are simply one thing. Unnecessary.

I also agree with your comment about towns and city temps that are shown in forecasts not been explained. It is highly deceiving, especially as many times last week there was a 0c over the taunton area (near me) and the temp here in the sticks was dwn to at least -4c. I have heard some forecasters explain this in their forecasts, (a rareity) but it needs to be done more consistently to avoid confusion.

Edited December 1, 2005 by Somerset Snow

[Thundery wintry showers]

I have just watched a few weather forecasts, and would like to make some observations:

1. The zoomed out view, where you see the whole country and the weather that will occur, expressed in terms of blobs of precipitation, shading etc. is much improved. That aspect of the forecasts is probably better than the use of weather symbols, and illustrates what our new graphics system is capable of.

2. On the other hand, I find the "flying zoomed into specific sectors of the country" view quite disconcerting, and it is difficult to find what the weather is going to be like, specifically in my part of the country. Many others have also suggested that overuse of the "flying" view has its drawbacks.

3. There is still no context for the day ahead forecast. Not only is there usually no synoptic chart to show the airmass/atmospheric circulation properties, but there is often no indication of winds, coastal influences etc, as there generally was prior to the launch of the new graphics system. This, to me, still screams "dumbing down", and means that anyone wanting more information than "will it be wet or dry, warm or cold, sunny or dull" will not get any of that information. Occasionally winds and/or synoptic charts are used, but very sparingly, such that most of the time you don't get any more than the basic information- meaning people with any knowledge of their local climate characteristics cannot interpret the forecast in his/her own way due to the lack of information. I suggest that some kind of context needs to be brought back- whether through offering a Europe wide view, a synoptic chart or wind directions, and with consistency, at least for the 18:27 and 22:27 broadcasts.

4. Detail is very poor for more than 1-2 days out. The four cities and associated weather 'symbol' types is fine if you live in one of those cities, but if weather is given for Glasgow and Aberdeen and you lived in Perth, how would you judge what your weather was going to be like? I suggest something a bit less vague- maybe use of a map showing the general weather type distribution over Britain, possibly a wind diagram, or a synoptic chart etc.

5. Although the 'dumbing down' issue has receded, it still stands that had the forecasts been as they are now, during the period 1995-2000, I would almost certainly have much less of an interest in weather. Just as an aside, while showing synoptic charts sparingly is intended to avoid offending the people who don't understand them, if they had been shown sparingly between 1995 and 2000, I probably wouldn't have understood them until I joined Net-weather. Instead, because they were shown regularly, I understood them within a few weeks of watching forecasts regularly.

[The PIT]

TWS you're not suggesting the Forecast can also be an education tool. Now that won't do. What will the NUT say. :lol:

Good points overall TWS

[J10]

I have just watched a few weather forecasts, and would like to make some observations:

1. The zoomed out view, where you see the whole country and the weather that will occur, expressed in terms of blobs of precipitation, shading etc. is much improved. That aspect of the forecasts is probably better than the use of weather symbols, and illustrates what our new graphics system is capable of.

2. On the other hand, I find the "flying zoomed into specific sectors of the country" view quite disconcerting, and it is difficult to find what the weather is going to be like, specifically in my part of the country. Many others have also suggested that overuse of the "flying" view has its drawbacks.

3. There is still no context for the day ahead forecast. Not only is there usually no synoptic chart to show the airmass/atmospheric circulation properties, but there is often no indication of winds, coastal influences etc, as there generally was prior to the launch of the new graphics system. This, to me, still screams "dumbing down", and means that anyone wanting more information than "will it be wet or dry, warm or cold, sunny or dull" will not get any of that information. Occasionally winds and/or synoptic charts are used, but very sparingly, such that most of the time you don't get any more than the basic information- meaning people with any knowledge of their local climate characteristics cannot interpret the forecast in his/her own way due to the lack of information. I suggest that some kind of context needs to be brought back- whether through offering a Europe wide view, a synoptic chart or wind directions, and with consistency, at least for the 18:27 and 22:27 broadcasts.

4. Detail is very poor for more than 1-2 days out. The four cities and associated weather 'symbol' types is fine if you live in one of those cities, but if weather is given for Glasgow and Aberdeen and you lived in Perth, how would you judge what your weather was going to be like? I suggest something a bit less vague- maybe use of a map showing the general weather type distribution over Britain, possibly a wind diagram, or a synoptic chart etc.

5. Although the 'dumbing down' issue has receded, it still stands that had the forecasts been as they are now, during the period 1995-2000, I would almost certainly have much less of an interest in weather. Just as an aside, while showing synoptic charts sparingly is intended to avoid offending the people who don't understand them, if they had been shown sparingly between 1995 and 2000, I probably wouldn't have understood them until I joined Net-weather. Instead, because they were shown regularly, I understood them within a few weeks of watching forecasts regularly.

I agree fully with points 1 and 4, while I think the forecasts are getting better in relation to point 3, and the other points raised are very interesting, perhaps it is still easier to see the weather for the southern areas using the new system. Certainly the period from 1-2 days onward could be improved massively.

[conor123]

I still think the bbc graphics need changing

[multi cellular thunderstorm]

Personally I like the new graphics and recent changes have just made it better.

Its good how the old symbols are still on the website aswell.

Mark.

[shuggee]

I've noticed since the new year that previous problem of fronts of rain grinding to a halt to be moved on by another second band of rain developing - a sort of stuttering movement - has been solved. The bands of rain now sweep much more smoothly over the UK - which is both much more realistic and rules out the previous apparent existence of two bands of rain moving at once.

Have alos been impressed with the snow graphics interspersed with rain to show wintry conditions over higher ground.

[Thundersquall]

The colour-scheme for rain areas is still very vague, isn't it?

Maybe it should be altered to match the original colour scheme shown on the old precipitation radar maps? That is, light blue, dark blue, green, yellow, orange, red, mauve.

[multi cellular thunderstorm]

I agree, too many shades of blue are used making it harder to tell between drizzle, light and moderate rain.

It seems only heavy rain is represented with different colours.

[shuggee]

You'd have thought that since it rains so much in so many different ways, we'd be like the Inuits and have 72 different colours diffrentiating between categories!

[shuggee]

Back to the stuttering again tonight (see four posts up). Friday's progged rain belt moving NW-SE stutters across the country in the most unconvincing way. Weird inconsistency.

[A Gower Guy]

I see that in the last few days the time on the forecast (on News24 at least) has been changed to the 24 hour clock instead of 12am/pm

Sunday's Countryfile

Todays

[The PIT]

I guess most people have got used to it judging by the lack of posts.

I suppose 24 hour clock on News24 is logical.

[fine wine]

It is still terrible, much preferred the graphics introduced in 1998 and then upgraded in 1999.

[nanu]

I dont like it all anyway.. still think the old graphics are better. Mind you i noticed they upgraded the lightning graphic, which is a lot better.

Just out of curiosity, Has anybody got a picture of the very old stick on graphics from the 70s they used which was just black dots used as rain? i dont think clouds were used then.