Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were
several, especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there
were several threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of
those charts)that didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to
remember much of the UK and Europe remained snow covered. How much would
that have depressed the temperature had there not been such widespread
cover? I wonder if the same charts showed up now whether the same
expectation of cold would materialise. I doubt it, with Europe being
relatively mild still, sea temperatures warmer and I suppose +1C for GW.
Dave

Dave Cornwell wrote:

Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were several,
especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there were several
threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of those charts)that
didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to remember much of the UK and
Europe remained snow covered. How much would that have depressed the
temperature had there not been such widespread cover? I wonder if the same
charts showed up now whether the same expectation of cold would materialise.
I doubt it, with Europe being relatively mild still, sea temperatures warmer
and I suppose +1C for GW. Dave

The excellent web-site on the 1962/63 winter created by the late Mike Tullett
is still 'live'. It can be found at

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/mtullett/1962-63/

It includes daily synoptic charts scanned from the Met Office Daily Weather
Report.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.
http://peakdistrictweather.org

Norman wrote:
Dave Cornwell wrote:

Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were several,
especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there were several
threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of those charts)that
didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to remember much of the UK and
Europe remained snow covered. How much would that have depressed the
temperature had there not been such widespread cover? I wonder if the same
charts showed up now whether the same expectation of cold would materialise.
I doubt it, with Europe being relatively mild still, sea temperatures warmer
and I suppose +1C for GW. Dave

The excellent web-site on the 1962/63 winter created by the late Mike Tullett
is still 'live'. It can be found at

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/mtullett/1962-63/

It includes daily synoptic charts scanned from the Met Office Daily Weather
Report.

--------------------------------------------
Yes I love that site - not just for the nostalgia but reminds us of the
great knowledge and warmth that Mike's contributions gave us.
Dave

In message , Dave Cornwell
writes
Norman wrote:
Dave Cornwell wrote:

Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were
several,
especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there were several
threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of those charts)that
didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to remember much of
the UK and
Europe remained snow covered. How much would that have depressed the
temperature had there not been such widespread cover? I wonder if the same
charts showed up now whether the same expectation of cold would materialise.
I doubt it, with Europe being relatively mild still, sea temperatures warmer
and I suppose +1C for GW. Dave
The excellent web-site on the 1962/63 winter created by the late
Mike Tullett
is still 'live'. It can be found at
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/mtullett/1962-63/
It includes daily synoptic charts scanned from the Met Office Daily
Weather
Report.

--------------------------------------------
Yes I love that site - not just for the nostalgia but reminds us of the
great knowledge and warmth that Mike's contributions gave us.
Dave

Indeed. I took the liberty a year or two ago of taking a copy of
everything, in case one day the site should disappear.
--
I'm not paid to implement the recognition of irony.
(Taken, with the author's permission, from a LiveJournal post)

In message , Dave Cornwell
writes
Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were
several, especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there
were several threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of
those charts)that didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to
remember much of the UK and Europe remained snow covered. How much
would that have depressed the temperature had there not been such
widespread cover?

I think that, especially when winds are light, a deep snow cover can
depress temperatures quite a lot, though I'm reluctant to try to put a
figure on it.

I wonder if the same charts showed up now whether the same expectation
of cold would materialise. I doubt it, with Europe being relatively
mild still, sea temperatures warmer and I suppose +1C for GW.

Yes, sea temperatures must have a big effect.
--
I'm not paid to implement the recognition of irony.
(Taken, with the author's permission, from a LiveJournal post)

John Hall wrote:
In message , Dave Cornwell
writes
Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were
several, especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know there
were several threatened thaws (probably based on expected evolution of
those charts)that didn't happen. After a very snowy start I seem to
remember much of the UK and Europe remained snow covered. How much
would that have depressed the temperature had there not been such
widespread cover?

I think that, especially when winds are light, a deep snow cover can
depress temperatures quite a lot, though I'm reluctant to try to put a
figure on it.

I wonder if the same charts showed up now whether the same expectation
of cold would materialise. I doubt it, with Europe being relatively
mild still, sea temperatures warmer and I suppose +1C for GW.

Yes, sea temperatures must have a big effect.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I must admit if it was one in a hundred then the odds for a repeat must
be a lot less now. Loking at the current output one in a million might
be more appropriate!
Dave

In message , Dave Cornwell
writes
John Hall wrote:
In message , Dave Cornwell
writes
Looking at the historic charts earlier I noticed that there were
several, especially early on, that didn't look that cold. I know
there were several threatened thaws (probably based on expected
evolution of those charts)that didn't happen. After a very snowy
start I seem to remember much of the UK and Europe remained snow
covered. How much would that have depressed the temperature had
there not been such widespread cover?
I think that, especially when winds are light, a deep snow cover can
depress temperatures quite a lot, though I'm reluctant to try to put a
figure on it.

I wonder if the same charts showed up now whether the same
expectation of cold would materialise. I doubt it, with Europe being
relatively mild still, sea temperatures warmer and I suppose +1C for GW.
Yes, sea temperatures must have a big effect.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I must admit if it was one in a hundred

One in 200 might be closer to the mark.

then the odds for a repeat must be a lot less now.

True (I'd actually say "a lot more" but I know what you meant), although
December 2010 was a reminder that lengthy spells of severe cold can
still occur.

Loking at the current output one in a million might be more
appropriate!
Dave



Though some notable winters (notably 1947) haven't begun till
considerably later than this. And looking at that winter's charts for
the first couple of weeks of January seemed to give no hint of what was
to come.
--
I'm not paid to implement the recognition of irony.
(Taken, with the author's permission, from a LiveJournal post)

"John Hall" wrote in message
.. .
Though some notable winters (notably 1947) haven't begun till considerably
later than this. And looking at that winter's charts for the first couple
of weeks of January seemed to give no hint of what was to come.

Exactly. It does amuse me how on TWO board that they say we are approaching
groundhog day for winter. Ridiculous, especially when, at least for me, we
haven't had 4 weeks of winter yet! Not even thinking of Spring, neither is
the garden.

Will
--
http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm
Will Hand (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl)
---------------------------------------------

On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 11:08:11 +0000
John Hall wrote:

Though some notable winters (notably 1947) haven't begun till
considerably later than this. And looking at that winter's charts for
the first couple of weeks of January seemed to give no hint of what
was to come.

But December and January were both cold, about 1-1.5C below average.
December CET was 3.0C below 2014. As for minimum temperatures, December
1946 was 19= coldest in the full CET record, whilst Jan '47 was 25=.
So 1946-7 was already a cold winter well before the February snowfall
occurred. The frosty December and January would have gotten into the
ground and, like the build-up to the 1962-3 winter, would have aided
the persistence of the lying snow.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks.
[Retired meteorologist and computer programmer]
Posted with Claws: http://www.claws-mail.org/

In message 20150106115132.1f7eb84f@linux-pkou, Graham P Davis
writes
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 11:08:11 +0000
John Hall wrote:

Though some notable winters (notably 1947) haven't begun till
considerably later than this. And looking at that winter's charts for
the first couple of weeks of January seemed to give no hint of what
was to come.

But December and January were both cold, about 1-1.5C below average.
December CET was 3.0C below 2014.

Oh yes, I'm certainly not trying to claim that we could see a repeat of
1947.

As for minimum temperatures, December
1946 was 19= coldest in the full CET record, whilst Jan '47 was 25=.

For January, that's largely because the real cold set in around the
23rd.

So 1946-7 was already a cold winter well before the February snowfall
occurred. The frosty December and January would have gotten into the
ground and, like the build-up to the 1962-3 winter, would have aided
the persistence of the lying snow.


I don't think much frost would still have been in the ground when the
main cold spell started, as there had been a mild spell from around the
8th to the 19th, with daily mean CETs of 3.3, 3.9, 2.9, 5.1, 5.9, 5.1,
6.7, 9.1, 10.0, 6.9, 6.3 and 2.8. Given that those are daily means
rather than daily maxima, that is pretty mild.
--
I'm not paid to implement the recognition of irony.
(Taken, with the author's permission, from a LiveJournal post)