Sun Strength

[conor123]

Well were reaching the time of year again in which the strength of the sun starts to go increase at its most rapid rate.

The UV index is still quite low at the moment at 2.0 here though expected to be 3.0 by this time next week in parts of the south.

Certainly only a matter of weeks until its time to whip of the sunscreen if your exposing your skin for lengthy periods of time.

I think the highest UV value we saw last year here was just over 7? not sure if anywherei n the UK hit 8 last June?

[Alex]

Every year somewhere I'n extreme south hits 8, if a clear sunny day is reached in Penzance then this is most likely spot as it's most southerly point.

[Scorcher]

Well were reaching the time of year again in which the strength of the sun starts to go increase at its most rapid rate.

The UV index is still quite low at the moment at 2.0 here though expected to be 3.0 by this time next week in parts of the south.

Certainly only a matter of weeks until its time to whip of the sunscreen if your exposing your skin for lengthy periods of time.

I think the highest UV value we saw last year here was just over 7? not sure if anywherei n the UK hit 8 last June?

It's already been 3 on several days in the south of England and it's been getting up to 4 on clear days in the Isles of Scilly. If you've got clear skies at this stage in March 3 is to be expected, certainly from the Midlands southwards.

[Iceberg]

I believe the highest Average UV in the country is in Dorset, due partly to it's southerly location but it benefits from being far enough from the far SW to avoid the cloud that often impacts UV levels.

[davehsug]

I believe the highest Average UV in the country is in Dorset, due partly to it's southerly location but it benefits from being far enough from the far SW to avoid the cloud that often impacts UV levels.

I actually got a liitle burnt in Santander last Monday, only there for 3 hours & didn't take any cream as I didn't expect the sun to be that strong in Northern Spain at this time of the year.

[Nick L]

I've caught the sun in April and early September in this country before. I burn annoyingly easily!

[Thundery wintry showers]

I caught the sun in the last week of March 2004!

[conor123]

I wouldnt be surprised if a few people in the South are caught out next week and get a little sunburnt, i always remember getting caught out in April 2008 on a several hour hike after it had snowed a fair amount, the sun was blinding off reflecting off the snow (though it melted fairly quick and was gone by 11am) and i came back thinking i was just rosy from the cold, until it started stinging.

Edited March 18, 2011 by conor123

[Milhouse]

I'd imagine quite a lot of less knowledgeable people get caught out early in the season when temperatures arent as high as they would be in September or October. For example that day late in September 2006 when it got to 28c, i bet lots of people who were outside for long periods would have applied sunscreen when its very difficult to get burnt so late in the year. However because it was hot that would have made people think the sun was strong. You are more likely to get burnt on a clear cold day in May than a hot one in September and that would catch a lot of people out.

[Derp Patrol]

Yes, does anyone know the most reliable UV forecast site? both the BBC and Met office seem to suggest 2 at max for the next week for all parts of the UK and i don't generally find their UV forecasts that reliable. For catching the sun, 3 is usually good enough if you are in the direct sun for long periods, and when it reaches 4 it gets quite easy to burn. I remember last year it was 4 late in the first week of April for southern areas, so surely by next week in the forecast sunny conditions we should see some 3s in southern areas.

[TonyH]

I am already starting to tan but I dont burn, even after a day on the beach. I keep a t shirt on most of the time but dont use sun cream.

[johnholmes]

My usual plea to all those wanting to get a tan - read my note in my signature about how careful you need to be.

I Have a minor skin cancer op=cut and stitch, so far some 80 external stitches in various places, (well so far minor thank goodness) about twice a year as when I was in my twenties the only warning was don't burn no suggestion that moderate suntanning could end up with skin cancer.

Edited March 18, 2011 by johnholmes

[conor123]

Yes, does anyone know the most reliable UV forecast site? both the BBC and Met office seem to suggest 2 at max for the next week for all parts of the UK and i don't generally find their UV forecasts that reliable. For catching the sun, 3 is usually good enough if you are in the direct sun for long periods, and when it reaches 4 it gets quite easy to burn. I remember last year it was 4 late in the first week of April for southern areas, so surely by next week in the forecast sunny conditions we should see some 3s in southern areas.

http://www.temis.nl/uvradiation/nrt/uvindex.php?lon=-2.6&lat=52.8

This is the best, gives forecast UV for any location in the world for the next 7 days, just need to type in your Latitude and Longitude.

[cheeky_monkey]

I believe the highest Average UV in the country is in Dorset, due partly to it's southerly location but it benefits from being far enough from the far SW to avoid the cloud that often impacts UV levels.

ill think you will find its in the channel islands for obvious reasons

[Scorcher]

Weatheronline's UV index is always higher than the BBC's, not sure why! I do think though that the BBC's tends to be slightly low- if you look at the historical data on the site Conor posted, you can see that places like Manchester have recorded UV index values over 6 on some days in summer but these kind of values hardly ever seem to appear on the BBC's forecast.

[damianslaw]

Would like to know at what rate do UV levels increase with height? This is an important consideration for aynone venturing into the fells where due to closer proximity to the sun and less shelter you are much more susceptible to sunburn as I can vouch for on many an occasion..

It isn't usually until about mid April I tend to feel the full effects of the sun and begin to think about putting some suncream on if I am out walking. At this time of year the sun is still quite weak though rapidly strengthening, today for instance I was out walking in clear skies and whilst I definately could feel some heat in the sun and no stage did it feel particularly strong on my skin.

I do remember back to mid April 2007 when due to very warm temps and clear skies UV levels were very high for the time of year and I think many got caught out by the strength of the sun. I don't believe many people think they can get burnt in April but the sun is every bit as strong as it is in late August by the time you reach mid April. Certainly by May the sun is as strong as the peak summer holiday period i.e. late July/early August and by then I always make sure I have some suncream to hand if I am out walking. I think the reason why peope don't tend to slap on the suncream in April and May is because temps can still be quite supressed even under clear sunny skies with low teen maxes, whereas people are more likely to use it in Sept despite the sun being much weaker because temps are often hovering around the high teens low 20's under clear sunny skies and occasionally much higher.

[Derp Patrol]

http://www.temis.nl/...n=-2.6&lat=52.8

This is the best, gives forecast UV for any location in the world for the next 7 days, just need to type in your Latitude and Longitude.

Ah thanks, i remember that site, i've been looking for it for a while!

[J07]

Would like to know at what rate do UV levels increase with height? This is an important consideration for aynone venturing into the fells where due to closer proximity to the sun and less shelter you are much more susceptible to sunburn as I can vouch for on many an occasion..

Don't recall the exact relationship but it's so slow you don't need to worry about it in the UK unless you're going up the very highest Scottish hills. Snow cover is probably the bigger concern.

I don't understand the rush for sunscreen. You should give your skin some chance to feel the sun in Spring without blocking out its useful impacts immediately!

The increase is 4% per 300 hundred metres.

So assuming a day with a max noon clear sky UV of 4, if you went up Scafell the UV at the summit would be 4.5. It would be 4.7 on the summit of Ben Nevis.

I think you've no reason to worry!

For an example of how bad it could get, climb Mt Ruapehu down here on an early day in January and you could expect a UV index of 20 at the summit (assuming 13 at sea level) and that's not taking into account reflection from the permanent snow cover.

It gets even worse when you look at places such as Papua New Guinea or the Andes, where I've heard quotes of UV index getting up to 25!

Edited March 19, 2011 by J07

[damianslaw]

Don't recall the exact relationship but it's so slow you don't need to worry about it in the UK unless you're going up the very highest Scottish hills. Snow cover is probably the bigger concern.

I don't understand the rush for sunscreen. You should give your skin some chance to feel the sun in Spring without blocking out its useful impacts immediately!

The increase is 4% per 300 hundred metres.

So assuming a day with a max noon clear sky UV of 4, if you went up Scafell the UV at the summit would be 4.5. It would be 4.7 on the summit of Ben Nevis.

I think you've no reason to worry!

For an example of how bad it could get, climb Mt Ruapehu down here on an early day in January and you could expect a UV index of 20 at the summit (assuming 13 at sea level) and that's not taking into account reflection from the permanent snow cover.

It gets even worse when you look at places such as Papua New Guinea or the Andes, where I've heard quotes of UV index getting up to 25!

Thanks for the post. Wasn't sure how fast the rate of change occured but as you say nothing too quick compared to other mountainous parts in the world.

I do think people get caught out by the sun more whilst in the hills due to the likelihood of being exposed to the sun for longer than on lower ground due to lack of shelter - lower ground you have more vegetation, trees and buildings which help block out the sun. The other big difference is the wind, which can blow hard on the hills on a hot summers day giving a false sense of a cooler day and people thus tend to put less cream on less often as they don't feel the sun burn on the skin, whereas on lower ground there tends to be less wind and the full effect of the sun is felt more readily.

Gosh all this talk of sunburn and suncream must mean I am thinking about summer, but it normally takes until mid May before we see the first 'warm spell' of the year.

[conor123]

Don't recall the exact relationship but it's so slow you don't need to worry about it in the UK unless you're going up the very highest Scottish hills. Snow cover is probably the bigger concern.

I don't understand the rush for sunscreen. You should give your skin some chance to feel the sun in Spring without blocking out its useful impacts immediately!

The increase is 4% per 300 hundred metres.

So assuming a day with a max noon clear sky UV of 4, if you went up Scafell the UV at the summit would be 4.5. It would be 4.7 on the summit of Ben Nevis.

I think you've no reason to worry!

For an example of how bad it could get, climb Mt Ruapehu down here on an early day in January and you could expect a UV index of 20 at the summit (assuming 13 at sea level) and that's not taking into account reflection from the permanent snow cover.

It gets even worse when you look at places such as Papua New Guinea or the Andes, where I've heard quotes of UV index getting up to 25!

A UV index of 13 must catch a lot of Northern Hemisphere visiters out in your Summer as the Med peaks around 11 at most with

pretty much consistant sunshine and heat, whilst New Zealands summers are much more variable.