"Col" wrote in message
...

No, I don't think you even have to do that. There is nothing wrong with
attempting to provide a rolling account of CET-like temps, perhaps just
make it clearer that these are not the *actual* CET figures.

Hi Col,

I've added a link at the bottom back to the official Met Office CET while I
get some feedback on our version. I will look at finding why our CET is 0.5c
out and try to correct this.

Cheers and thanks for the feedback,

A

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...

"Col" wrote in message
...

No, I don't think you even have to do that. There is nothing wrong with
attempting to provide a rolling account of CET-like temps, perhaps just
make it clearer that these are not the *actual* CET figures.

Hi Col,

I've added a link at the bottom back to the official Met Office CET while I
get some feedback on our version. I will look at finding why our CET is 0.5c
out and try to correct this.

Cheers and thanks for the feedback,

What you are doing is valid. It is Philip and Col who are wrong. You
are providing an instantaeous value, not a daily average or a 30 year
average which my science, climatology, would demand. (Note my
weaseling out of saying a 30 year average is neccessary.)

Providing you are not reporting a cumulative average, and are stating
the curent temperature at the time recorded then your reports will be
scientific. The problem is with the CET. Is it talking about the mean
daily temperature, the mean max. or the mean min? Since you are
comparing you values with the CET it is well worth your time
establishing exactly what the CET measures AND explaining that on
your web site.

Genius is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. You have done
the 10% inspiration, but I am afraid you will still have to go through
a bit more perspiration! I think you need to show daily max. and
daily min. and daily mean. You also need some way that the average
punter can decide which of these he should be comapring with the
current temperature that you are displaying.

I hope this helps. I really like your project.

Cheers, Alastair.






A

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote in
message ...

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...

I've added a link at the bottom back to the official Met Office CET while I
get some feedback on our version. I will look at finding why our CET is 0.5c
out and try to correct this.

Cheers and thanks for the feedback,

What you are doing is valid. It is Philip and Col who are wrong. You
are providing an instantaeous value, not a daily average or a 30 year
average which my science, climatology, would demand. (Note my
weaseling out of saying a 30 year average is neccessary.)


No, we are not wrong.
My point is that although what Andrew is doing is excellent it is
*not* the CET, it's an approximation to it.

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk

"Col" wrote in message
...

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in
message ...

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...

I've added a link at the bottom back to the official Met Office CET
while I
get some feedback on our version. I will look at finding why our CET is
0.5c
out and try to correct this.

Cheers and thanks for the feedback,

What you are doing is valid. It is Philip and Col who are wrong. You
are providing an instantaeous value, not a daily average or a 30 year
average which my science, climatology, would demand. (Note my
weaseling out of saying a 30 year average is neccessary.)


No, we are not wrong.
My point is that although what Andrew is doing is excellent it is
*not* the CET, it's an approximation to it.

Sorry Andrew,

I seem to be missing something here.

I don't understand how you can update it at two hour intervals without the
anomally changing throughout the day. And you are comparing it with a
monthly average then surely you will not have a true comparison until you have
the complete monthly figures. For instance at 6pm on the first of the month
you
will have half the nighttime figures and all the daytime figures which will
distort the average upwards. The effect of that error will be reduced as we
approach the end of the month but it will still be there each day at 6pm, and
at other times as well.

Are you interpolating the values you do not have? Is the interpolation based
on
the historic data or the current data?

Cheers, Alastair.

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in message ...

Are you interpolating the values you do not have? Is the interpolation
based

Hi Alastair,

Yes, the system will provide a running average since the start of the month,
so in essence the first couple of days will fluctuate wildly (more so during
Summer due to diurnal variation) then start to settle down as the month
progresses.

The system will interpolate for figures which have not been recorded, so for
a 9 hour period, if the figures 3c,3c,4c,4c,**,4c,5c,5c,5c were recorded
then it would fill in the missing figure as 4c. The system itself updates
every 3 hours but will take into consideration the recordings sent in during
the previous 2 (hope that makes sense).

It's the same algorithm used to interpolate on Metcheck for areas between
the model grid points.

I'll run the Metcheck CET system for this month and next, see how it
performs, if it looks good then I'll get some feedback and see how it can be
improved.

Cheers,

A

The system itself updates
every 3 hours but will take into consideration the recordings sent in during
the previous 2 (hope that makes sense).

Andrew, it makes sense in terms of understanding what you are saying, but it
does not make sense in terms of the CET being a mean temperature (either mean
daily or mean monthly). Your 'instantaneous updates' may satisfy our hunger for
obtaining near-real time info. from the web but they should be daily updates of
mean temperature. Readers of your site who are not familiar with the background
of the CET may become very confused when they later hear of differing estimates
of the real CET, whether from Philip Eden or the MO or anyone else. .

You are half way to creating a new England and Wales temperature series - a 3
hourly update of temperature (and by detaching it from a CET substitute there
would be no need to calculate it as a moving average from the start of the
month.).

Julian Mayes, West Molesey, Surrey.

"JJCMayes1" wrote in message
...
The system itself updates
every 3 hours but will take into consideration the recordings sent in
during
the previous 2 (hope that makes sense).

Andrew, it makes sense in terms of understanding what you are saying, but it
does not make sense in terms of the CET being a mean temperature (either
mean
daily or mean monthly). Your 'instantaneous updates' may satisfy our hunger
for
obtaining near-real time info. from the web but they should be daily updates
of
mean temperature. Readers of your site who are not familiar with the
background
of the CET may become very confused when they later hear of differing
estimates
of the real CET, whether from Philip Eden or the MO or anyone else. .

You are half way to creating a new England and Wales temperature series - a
3
hourly update of temperature (and by detaching it from a CET substitute
there
would be no need to calculate it as a moving average from the start of the
month.).

Julian Mayes, West Molesey, Surrey.

Hi Andrew,

I agree with Julian. What I think you should do is add some more values to
your page. First, you need the daily CET for the previous day, and the monthly
CET for the previous month as calculated by you. I would like to see how they
compare with the average official CET for that day and for the month. You are
showing the current monthly one already. You could also add the cumulative CET
for this month upto and including the previous day. AISI your present value
has two errors; diurnal and monthly. I can comprehend the monthly error, but
the diurnal error makes your results strange at the start of the month and
uninteresting at the end.

It is a great idea to have a site where there is an istantaneous comparison of
the current CET with the average but I think you have made it too instaneous!

HTH,

Cheers, Alastair.