January C.E.T

[J10]

The Vote on the Calculation method to be used has been concluded and based on this the Hadley CET has been chosen for the competition running from Dec 2007 to Nov 2008.

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?showtopic=44533

As such, the Hadley CET will be obtained from the Meto Website a couple of days after each month end, regardless of any subsequent changes. This does mean that in future the results will be slightly later going forward.

The Hadley CET for December was 4.9c and that figure will be used. The spreadsheet containing these results is on the December CET thread.

[Stu_London]

The Vote on the Calculation method to be used has been concluded and based on this the Hadley CET has been chosen for the competition running from Dec 2007 to Nov 2008.

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?showtopic=44533

As such, the Hadley CET will be obtained from the Meto Website a couple of days after each month end, regardless of any subsequent changes. This does mean that in future the results will be slightly later going forward.

The Hadley CET for December was 4.9c and that figure will be used. The spreadsheet containing these results is on the December CET thread.

I sure, I speak for many when I thank you for your efforts, Julian and I am pleased we have consistency going forward

[osmposm]

The Vote on the Calculation method to be used has been concluded and based on this the Hadley CET has been chosen for the competition running from Dec 2007 to Nov 2008.

* * * * * *

Oh....Curses!?*?*!, since that'll send me tumbling down the list again for December! But I will grumpily accept the voice of the people....or at least the 51 of them who voted. Incidentally, Jack1, did we ever find out why the poll showed 51 votes cast when you add them up, but only 47 as "Total Votes"?

Notwithstanding the above, Thank You for all your trouble in getting it sorted - and, as ever, for the work you put in to running the comp, and calculating and displaying the results.

[J10]

No I'm still unclear as to why the votes didn't tally, but as the winning margin was bigger than this, so it should be immaterial.

BTW We did not get the vote counting machines from Texas.

[Stratos Ferric]

The Vote on the Calculation method to be used has been concluded and based on this the Hadley CET has been chosen for the competition running from Dec 2007 to Nov 2008.

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?showtopic=44533

As such, the Hadley CET will be obtained from the Meto Website a couple of days after each month end, regardless of any subsequent changes. This does mean that in future the results will be slightly later going forward.

The Hadley CET for December was 4.9c and that figure will be used. The spreadsheet containing these results is on the December CET thread.

Hang on a minute, this is madness. Wasn't the argument for not using Manley that the figures sometimes changed. I really couldn't give a rat's I have a problem which numbers are used, but to shift from one scale to another, then to say "irrespective of subsequent changes" just puts us in a different street in the same shabby suburb.

Given that the Manley options in the vote were split, but the Hadley option wasn't, and that the preferred Manley option was to stick with the month end option, I can't help thinking that an inadvertently poor set of voting options has skewed the result. Are we saying that Hadley never revises, in which case fair enough? However, if it does I'd suggest that we've made a rather careless error in the vote just gone, and despite Stu's inference that we have stability going forwards (I'm not aware there was an instablility last year) I'd suggest that we don't have that at all.

[Roger J Smith]

Correct me if I'm right, but isn't Hadley the series that everyone always looks at to make their assessments of past records, in other words, the list that you see on the Metoffice website?

So that's probably a good thing if we are using that, because in years to come, that's what people will look back on as being "the" CET values for 2008.

I totally understand the point SF is making about having two options in the poll for Manley and one for Hadley, but perhaps this argument I am making would counter that valid objection. I never really thought about it before last month, my estimates are usually miles away from Hadley, Manley, NW and even the Central Irish Dew Point, so what do I care which distant scale is being used?

Bottom line, it's all fun and entertainment (especially this month).

With regard to the discussion of my "high sixes" estimate, I suppose I was being a bit careless there, would you accept that it seems plausible by the 23rd -- the models keep hinting at a few very mild days in that time frame, and certainly my own research indicates that this is where temperatures can max out in a mild spell ... also it's where they can tank in a cold spell, northern max to full moon, this is what the various date analogues show, with about a 2-1 preponderance of mild over cold, even back in "the good old days."

This is probably why Fred and I, using similar research ideas, have come up with rather different outlooks, but I could see his verifying with any kind of a faster shift, and I'll bet he could see mine verifying too (soon will in real time, he said hopefully).

But the nice thing is, we can remain friends, and enjoy it whatever happens ... that's what the prozac does for me.

Edited January 12, 2008 by Roger J Smith

[Stratos Ferric]

Correct me if I'm right, but isn't Hadley the series that everyone always looks at to make their assessments of past records, in other words, the list that you see on the Metoffice website?

So that's probably a good thing if we are using that, because in years to come, that's what people will look back on as being "the" CET values for 2008.

I totally understand the point SF is making about having two options in the poll for Manley and one for Hadley, but perhaps this argument I am making would counter that valid objection. I never really thought about it before last month, my estimates are usually miles away from Hadley, Manley, NW and even the Central Irish Dew Point, so what do I care which distant scale is being used?

Bottom line, it's all fun and entertainment (especially this month).

With regard to the discussion of my "high sixes" estimate, I suppose I was being a bit careless there, would you accept that it seems plausible by the 23rd -- the models keep hinting at a few very mild days in that time frame, and certainly my own research indicates that this is where temperatures can max out in a mild spell ... also it's where they can tank in a cold spell, northern max to full moon, this is what the various date analogues show, with about a 2-1 preponderance of mild over cold, even back in "the good old days."

This is probably why Fred and I, using similar research ideas, have come up with rather different outlooks, but I could see his verifying with any kind of a faster shift, and I'll bet he could see mine verifying too (soon will in real time, he said hopefully).

But the nice thing is, we can remain friends, and enjoy it whatever happens ... that's what the prozac does for me.

Roger, my point was less about the choice of scale, so much as the fact that the catalysing point for movement was not the validity of Hdley as I recall, but the tendency for Manley to change and for any results to thus - arguably - be nullified. We've now moved to precisely the same position - i.e. we stick with the month end irrespective of any further revisions. People, it appears, have voted for the very thing they were originally moaning about (well, actually, there was hardly an uprising - just one or two moans I think). The fact that the voting inadvertently may have made this decision inevitible (by splitting the option for Manley but not Hadley) might have something to do with the apparent madness.

And to think that people always prefer to suppose conspiracy rather than cock-up when the wheels of Government occasionally run rough. All very amusing.

[Stu_London]

SF

Philip's month end figure changed 6 out of the 10 months from going from the from page to the Manley CET record he keeps (the one that read 5.06C for December)

This would seem to suggest that the front page figure is provisional and some members probably felt that if they were subject to so much change then they were therefore inaccurate to start with

The Hadley figure once declared (usually 1st or 2nd of month) has to my knowledge only ever been revised one (Feb 2007) and this was some time after the event. Julian made it quite clear that any late revisions such as this would be disregarded if the Hadley figure was adopted.

A vote has been taken and as far as I am concerned, this is a far more fair, democratic means of dealing with this that your post no 23 of the attached thread where you made a unilateral decision for everyone, despite the fact that people had raised grumblings about the system used.

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?s...41782&st=17

[Snowly does it]

With regard to the discussion of my "high sixes" estimate, I suppose I was being a bit careless there, would you accept that it seems plausible by the 23rd -- the models keep hinting at a few very mild days in that time frame, and certainly my own research indicates that this is where temperatures can max out in a mild spell ... also it's where they can tank in a cold spell, northern max to full moon, this is what the various date analogues show, with about a 2-1 preponderance of mild over cold, even back in "the good old days."

Hmmmm, by the 23rd?? I'd say not - would require 8 from here which granted is an outside shot IF we get the 13/13 days showing next weekend, but these have been wild mild outliers thus far (not saying they won't come off)

Into the low 6s by the 23rds, 6.5 tops - but could easily be falling back the other way and be low 5s.

[osmposm]

Philip's month end figure changed 6 out of the 10 months from going from the from page to the Manley CET record he keeps (the one that read 5.06C for December)..........A vote has been taken and as far as I am concerned, this is a far more fair, democratic means of dealing with this that your post no 23 of the attached thread where you made a unilateral decision for everyone, despite the fact that people had raised grumblings about the system used.http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?s...41782&st=17

Stu, I find this a slightly "needly" comment: I've read and re-read SF's post no 23, and I can see no "unilateral decision" about anything - all he did was re-iterate the reason we originally went with Manley. It is now apparent that we either were or have become wrong about it, as I think you are saying above, though that first sentence has an awful lot of "froms" in it!!

I understand your point, SF, both about the split vote and the slightly unsatisfactory nature of the result. BUT....as well as being what was voted for, Hadley as immediately revised at month's end (ignoring any probably very rare change months down the line) seems to be the least unsatisfactory option: it's both "official" and revised quite quickly, so only a short wait is needed.

Either way, it doesn't matter which we choose, as people (including SF) have said several times. So it seems to me high time the comments and arguments stopped. Pleeeeeease.

It's 'post-month announced' Hadley for this year's competition. (If you've really got the energy and care enough you can argue about it all again next year).

[Stratos Ferric]

As expected, a fairly pronounced gap is opening between N/NW-S/SE this month, though even Scotland is only running at their average to date. Certainly nothing in the outlook to suggest anything much other than above average as the likely outcome; we're well ahead as things stand, with an at times mild looking spell to come. Not sure the whole month will turn out quite AS mild as GFS suggests at present, but not looking cool, for sure.

[eddie]

Well the 06z GFS is showing much warmer temperatures compared to yesterday's 06z which showed some fairly cold nights extending right down to the bottom of the CET zone. Everything seems to have been shunted north 200 miles.

Having said that, it does tend to overcook night time minima under a SW flow in the winter. Look at Saturday 19th for example, where a minima of 10C+ is shown right across the CET zone and a datime CET of well over 11. That would put it in the top 0.2% of January days. I'll eat my virtual hat if that happens.

Edited January 12, 2008 by eddie

[Stratos Ferric]

...BUT....as well as being what was voted for, Hadley as immediately revised at month's end (ignoring any probably very rare change months down the line) seems to be the least unsatisfactory option: it's both "official" and revised quite quickly, so only a short wait is needed.

...

Os, as you suggest, and for avoidance of any doubt, and particularly to make life easier for those doing the processing, let's all agree that we use Hadley as first announced post month-end. If there's any further revisions, irrespective of how large they may be, we stick with the initially announced result.

[Roger J Smith]

The GFS temp forecasts were consistent with the thickness parameters given the SW'ly flow indicated. Thickness approaches 552 dm which is usually where the 15 C isotherm resides in mixed winter air masses at this latitude (same over here). To see something like 16 C you would be looking for the rare 558 dm thickness (and moving air, 15 mph needed to keep the inversion away). The pattern would be similar to last December (06) at its peak before the inversion high set in, if you recall, there were some overnight lows of 11-13 C in that period. The subsequent appearance of a strong inversion is something that also might happen very late this month. I will continue to predict an upward drift of the CET to nearly 7 at some point 21-23, then a drift down towards 6 as the month ends. Monday is going to give it a boost upwards too, could see 11-12 C highs both Monday and Tuesday.

There were also quite a few 9-11 C days in the CET analogues, even those from the 19th century, so caution is suggested for those eager to make a meal of their delicates.

I suppose almost everyone is served by this menu of a near-Bartlett turning into a near-Scandi high, you can imagine your favourite outcome from this progression. Craig Evans would do well if it was Bartlett all the way to the finish line. Of course, that's a given in any month, it seems.

[Stu_London]

Stu, I find this a slightly "needly" comment: I've read and re-read SF's post no 23, and I can see no "unilateral decision" about anything - all he did was re-iterate the reason we originally went with Manley. It is now apparent that we either were or have become wrong about it, as I think you are saying above, though that first sentence has an awful lot of "froms" in it!!

Osoposm

Firstly excuse my poor grammar from last night, it had been a long day.

What I found frustrating was that an awful lot of comments had been made through the year about the use of Manley and yet when I brought the matter up (even though I myself was more than happy to carry on as before) the query was casually sideswiped without further opportunity for debate

I just think these boards could do without this sort of arrogance and self-importance

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

This is probably why Fred and I, using similar research ideas, have come up with rather different outlooks, but I could see his verifying with any kind of a faster shift, and I'll bet he could see mine verifying too (soon will in real time, he said hopefully).

But the nice thing is, we can remain friends, and enjoy it whatever happens ... that's what the prozac does for me.

Indeed we can. Roger just made a post over on the model discussion re Jan verifying as you suggested. No whammo coming so my punt is tooooooo looooooow. Damn it the jet did kick south as predicted too...never mind I'll go and climb a big mountain for cold.

BFTP

[Roger J Smith]

I still think there could be wind whammo or snow whammo at some point later this month -- don't entirely trust this trend in the models towards swelling highs around the 23-24 of Jan because that's a very large energy peak (Full + RC/SC which were two separate events in Dec both giving strong wind gusts) ... so looking for a shift in later runs towards stronger low pressure near Ireland on the 24th ... how will it actually shape up, possibly just a blast from the west followed by rapidly building ridge N-S giving some snow and frost potential too. The month may well come in as a very mild January with wintry blasts at both ends, at least for some favoured regions. That would be unusual, I never hear people talking about big snow events in mild winters, but that can certainly happen in places like Toronto. The worst snowstorm I have ever seen was in April 1975 after what was almost a snow-free climatological winter season. But I also recall a very nasty snowstorm on the 27th of Jan 1967 after three days of record warmth (55-60 F back in those days). Patterns don't seem to change that fast in the UK very often ... but it could happen this year, everything seems finely balanced with this southerly jet, high SST values, potent arctic highs yet tons of mild air around too. You would have to think perhaps this is the kind of mild winter that might end a long series of cold-free winters, still mild BUT ... getting the attention of many, as seen by the January CET table (a stark warning of the dangers of mass delusion if ever there was one).

[Kentish Man]

You would have to think perhaps this is the kind of mild winter that might end a long series of cold-free winters, still mild BUT ... getting the attention of many, as seen by the January CET table (a stark warning of the dangers of mass delusion if ever there was one).

An interesting point there and something that's occurred to me as well. The last 20 years have been warm - just look at the Hadley CET anomaly tables. Far greater anomalies and more consistent than the 20's and 30's for example. January as of yesterday 5.2C at Hadley is not remarkable temp wise but pattern wise it is different, more akin to winter months of yore. SST anomalies will ensure we're not in a Jan 1984 scenario but as Roger says is this the first stirrings ahead of the start of a colder period?

[Stratos Ferric]

...as seen by the January CET table (a stark warning of the dangers of mass delusion if ever there was one).

Roger, not sure how it would stack up c.f. last January, but I suspect this year's punts were more driven by much of the hubris during December, and the cold end to the month.

Osoposm

Firstly excuse my poor grammar from last night, it had been a long day.

What I found frustrating was that an awful lot of comments had been made through the year about the use of Manley and yet when I brought the matter up (even though I myself was more than happy to carry on as before) the query was casually sideswiped without further opportunity for debate

I just think these boards could do without this sort of arrogance and self-importance

Stu, I'm not aware of any action taken by anyone on this thread, or anywhere else, that ever stopped you making a point you wanted to make, much less continuing any debate.

[The PIT]

Well we're running 0.5C above normal. No ones commented that the Met O Winter forecast is doing rather well at the moment.

[Stratos Ferric]

Well we're running 0.5C above normal. No ones commented that the Met O Winter forecast is doing rather well at the moment.

PIT, I was just about to say "isn't the MetO winter forecast proving to be very good so far". Good spot sir.

[J10]

The Vote on the Calculation method to be used has been concluded and based on this the Hadley CET has been chosen for the competition running from Dec 2007 to Nov 2008.

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?showtopic=44533

As such, the Hadley CET will be obtained from the Meto Website a couple of days after each month end, regardless of any subsequent changes. This does mean that in future the results will be slightly later going forward.

The Hadley CET for December was 4.9c and that figure will be used. The spreadsheet containing these results is on the December CET thread.

Just to Confirm that we are going ahead with the Hadley CET as confirmed yesterday above.

And sorry for any confusion caused with the initial poll , but we have now decided on the way forward, and hopefully every one can enjoy the competition from here on in.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

I still think there could be wind whammo or snow whammo at some point later this month -- don't entirely trust this trend in the models towards swelling highs around the 23-24 of Jan because that's a very large energy peak (Full + RC/SC which were two separate events in Dec both giving strong wind gusts) ... so looking for a shift in later runs towards stronger low pressure near Ireland on the 24th ... how will it actually shape up, possibly just a blast from the west followed by rapidly building ridge N-S giving some snow and frost potential too.

Neither do I trust the outlook as you say peak potential in that period. Mind you this week is looking nasty....but average temp wise. As long as the LP is Ireland and not the other place with a C.

BFTP

[Roger J Smith]

Whammo.

Just practising in case, like.

[Snowly does it]

Some eye openers for January which maybe we all should have thought about before we guessed this month.

Since the Very Cold Jan of 1987 there have been (of course) 20 Jans, of these

Only 9 have been below 5c

Only 4 have been below the 71-00 average of 4.2

Only one (1997) falls beneath 3 degrees

The average is just shy of 5 degrees for the last 20 years.

4 years in 20 below average, pretty pathetic

February has had 5 below average in the last 20 years, ad December has been below average more often than not (11 times)

In the rolling 10 years averages, December is now about equal with Jan and Feb for cold.

Mid Winter has been truly disfigured!