March CET

[Terminal Moraine]

What a pity that the weather projected for next week couldn't have been last weekend and this week. Had that been the case I would have had the coldest March since 1969.

As it stands it should still just about manage to be colder than 2001 but certainly won't be colder than 1996.

Having said all that, it is quite unusual for cold to persist throughout a whole calendar month, at least during the last 20 years or so.

T.M

[drfeelgood]

Not sure about the last comment- indeed, last year, Philip's predictions were consistently higher than the Hadley ones, although Hadley corrected theirs upwards shortly afterwards.

As far as I'm aware, Hadley's December CET was actually lower than Philip's.

Yes, that's right. Philip Eden's CET is on generally around 0.02 higher than Hadley's. The biggest disparity I've noted so far is from Feb 1986 (our last subzero month!!) , which was -1.1 according to Hadley but "only" -0.7 according to Philip. I'm sure others will find more. Curiously, Phil already has March 06 as 4.91.

Edited March 29, 2006 by drfeelgood

[Thundery wintry showers]

It seems to me that Philip Eden's Manley emulation CET gives more weight to the Lancashire area as opposed to the current Hadley readings. This correlates well with the Hadley producing lower readings during severely cold months. I also notice that a high proportion of westerly months with frequent cold NW airmasses (e.g. March 1995, October 1998, December 1999) come out 0.3-0.4C lower on the Manley series than on the Hadley series.

[PersianPaladin]

Why do they have to make it 'central england temperature'?

Is that really representative?

(btw - they should have an independent one for the Kingdom of Northumbria...)

Edited March 30, 2006 by PersianPaladin

[Metomania]

It seems to me that Philip Eden's Manley emulation CET gives more weight to the Lancashire area as opposed to the current Hadley readings. This correlates well with the Hadley producing lower readings during severely cold months. I also notice that a high proportion of westerly months with frequent cold NW airmasses (e.g. March 1995, October 1998, December 1999) come out 0.3-0.4C lower on the Manley series than on the Hadley series.

Interesting thoughts, though Philip's Manley one is usually lower under high pressure inversion because the Hadley stations are at higher elevation. So in cold settled months with inversion Hadley is usually above Philip.

Persian, the reason it is central England is just that is the way it has been since the series began in the C17th.

[Weather-history]

Here's the daily CET mean that is needed in bold to get to predicted values

Button 04 - 7.7 52.7

Westerly Gales - 7.7 52.7

Catchmydrift - 7.6 51.1

Reef - 7.3 46.5

Stephen Prudence - 7.1 43.4

Mike W - 7.0 41.8

PersianPaladin - 7.0 41.8

Bottesford - 6.7 37.3

Magpie - 6.7 37.2

Peter Tattum - 6.7 37.2

Dave J - 6.6 35.6

ThunderyWintryShowers - 6.6 35.6

Fordy - 6.5 34.1

Great Plum - 6.5 34.1

Roger J Smith - 6.5 34.1

Joneseye - 6.4 32.5

Kold Weather - 6.3 31.0

Mark - 6.3 31.0

Snow-Man2006 - 6.3 31.0

The Pit - 6.3 31.0

Evo - 6.2 29.4

Noggin - 6.2 29.4

Rikki - 6.1 27.9

SteveB - 6.1 27.9

Anti-Mild - 6.0 26.3

SnowmanReturns - 5.9 24.8

Stratos Ferric - 5.8 23.2

Paul Carfoot - 5.5 18.6

Thundersquall - 5.5 18.6

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Optimus Prime - 5.1 12.4

Shuggee - 4.9 9.3

Snowmaiden - 4.8 7.7

Summer Blizzard - 4.8 7.7

Helly Hanson - 4.6 5.5

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Snooz - 4.3 -0.1

Tinybill - 4.0 -4.7

Drfeelgood - 3.8 -7.8

Nick Sussex -2.0 -35.7

[Metomania]

Curiously, Phil already has March 06 as 4.91.

4.6C up to yesterday evening. Where did you see the 4.91?

It's still rising briskly so I think Philip will finish at 4.9C rounded up. Might be 4.8C. Hadley may be a shade higher. The official Met Office Hadley figure for February is not yet published.

[The PIT]

Shuggee is looking good.

[Guest Mike W]

It's going to be tight, I have a max of 14 and a min of 10 for Friday, as for today it's saying 13 and 8, so it's going to the wire on this one.

[Metomania]

It's going to be tight, I have a max of 14 and a min of 10 for Friday, as for today it's saying 13 and 8, so it's going to the wire on this one.

Rising very fast today. Maxes will be much higher than 14C in some places.

4.69C at the moment on NW, and that is a little below Philip Eden's reading as well.

[Bottesford]

Rising very fast today. Maxes will be much higher than 14C in some places.

4.69C at the moment on NW, and that is a little below Philip Eden's reading as well.

16C here right now...

[Guest Mike W]

It looks like a low 5 CET to me sadly, but at least it's a average to below month, or another one if your using 71-00. What I mean is is that Feb is definately below the 71-00 but not sure yet wether it's 3.9 which would be above the 61-90 or 3.8 which would be average, so using the 71-00 this month and last month are defiantely average to below on the 71-00 but not sure wether both are average to below on the 61-90.

Edited March 30, 2006 by Mike W

[Weather-history]

It looks like a low 5 CET to me sadly, but at least it's a average to below month, or another one if your using 71-00. What I mean is is that Feb is definately below the 71-00 but not sure yet wether it's 3.9 which would be above the 61-90 or 3.8 which would be average, so using the 71-00 this month and last month are defiantely average to below on the 71-00 but not sure wether both are average to below on the 61-90.

March 2006 is definitely going to be below the 1961-90 CET average, as that is 5.7

[Guest Mike W]

Yes that's what I said, it's February thats uncertain using the 61-90, on the 71-00 their both average to below.

[Optimus Prime]

Yes that's what I said, it's February thats uncertain using the 61-90, on the 71-00 their both average to below.

It came out at 3.8c. That's average.

[Metomania]

It came out at 3.8c. That's average.

February has not been officially released yet so no-one knows the Hadley figure, except people inside the relevant Met Office department

[Thundersquall]

4.6C up to yesterday evening. Where did you see the 4.91?

It's still rising briskly so I think Philip will finish at 4.9C rounded up. Might be 4.8C. Hadley may be a shade higher. The official Met Office Hadley figure for February is not yet published.

Metomania,

I came up with 4.91C as well.

This was calculated as follows using your calculation methods:

4.73 (current net-weather CET) x 29 (days) = 137.17

7.55 (average n-w tracker) X 2 (days) = 15.1

(137.17 + 15.1) / 31 = 4.91C.

Cheers,

TS.

Edited March 30, 2006 by Thundersquall

[PhilipEden]

February has not been officially released yet so no-one knows the Hadley figure, except people inside the relevant Met Office department

Given the wraith-like quality of their figures over the last 2 or 3 years you are clearly being extremely generous to them! My attempt to emulate the Hadley figure for February produced 3.8°C on March 1. This month's Hadley figure is likely to be approx 0.1 to 0.2 degC below the Manley one.

Philip

[Metomania]

Metomania,

I came up with 4.91C as well.

Hi - oh, I see! The final figure will be 4.91C I get it. Yes, that looks close doesn't it? Might be a shade higher.

Interesting to see Philip's comment (thank you!) suggesting Hadley slightly below his figure. Good news for all you sub-5C fans!

[Metomania]

This month's Hadley figure is likely to be approx 0.1 to 0.2 degC below the Manley one.

Philip

Philip, how do you estimate the Met Office Hadley if you are not using exactly the same station feeds? (I assume you are not!)

The tracker on this site is now up to 4.78C. The symbolically significant 5C on this and possibly Philip's looking quite possible, but if Philip is right, Hadley will be below this. It really needs to be more than 0.2C below the 5.2C of 2001 for it to be fairly described as the coldest since 1996 because of statistical margins for error, so below 5C will have double importance for those who are key CET watchers!

Edited March 30, 2006 by Metomania

[Optimus Prime]

Metomania, it's the last day of March tomorrow. I don't think it's at all possible the CET will rise by nearly 0.4c in a day.

4.8c looks about right. But has been said, the official one is usually slightly lower. Presuming there's no change this time around I would say 4.6c is a sure bet.

Saying that my temp tracker is likely to be around 5.4c.

Edited March 30, 2006 by Optimus Prime

[Metomania]

Metomania, it's the last day of March tomorrow. I don't think it's at all possible the CET will rise by nearly 0.4c in a day.

4.6C was yesterday evening. The NW tracker has risen nearly 0.2C today so I think Philip's figure will be either 4.9C or 5C depending which way it rounds. NW tracker will be in the 4.9's by the look of it by midnight tomorrow.

[Thundersquall]

Metomania, it's the last day of March tomorrow. I don't think it's at all possible the CET will rise by nearly 0.4c in a day.

4.8c looks about right. But has been said, the official one is usually slightly lower. Presuming there's no change this time around I would say 4.6c is a sure bet.

Saying that my temp tracker is likely to be around 5.4c.

I've calculated 4.91c already, so it's definitely going to be above 4.8c.

Edited March 30, 2006 by Thundersquall

[Metomania]

I've calculated 4.91c already, so it's definitely going to be above 4.8c.

Agreed!

In fact both Philip and NW tracker are currently on 4.8C, so with 26.5 hours to go it is very likely that it will be in the 4.9's at least, and possibly 5C.

[Thundersquall]

Agreed!

In fact both Philip and NW tracker are currently on 4.8C, so with 26.5 hours to go it is very likely that it will be in the 4.9's at least, and possibly 5C.

The N-W Temperature Tracker's creeping up all the time.

It's now at +4.8c, so my 4.91c estimate has probably crept a little higher.