A new toy...

Basically obtains the archived weather data for 18 stations within the UKMO
CET "triangle", calculates the average temperature from the start of this
month to present to each reading and gives the CET... updated every 3 hours.

http://www.metcheck.com/cet.asp

Must admit, when it displayed 8.9c earlier I thought my code was up the
creek ;-)

A

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...
A new toy...

Basically obtains the archived weather data for 18 stations within the
UKMO
CET "triangle", calculates the average temperature from the start of this
month to present to each reading and gives the CET... updated every 3
hours.

http://www.metcheck.com/cet.asp

Must admit, when it displayed 8.9c earlier I thought my code was up the
creek ;-)

It might be wise either (a) to call it something other than CET, or
(b) to find out what monthly corrections you need to make your
temperature index directly comparable with the CET that we all
know and love.

The CET is presently 8.4ºC.

Philip Eden

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...
A new toy...

Basically obtains the archived weather data for 18 stations within the UKMO
CET "triangle", calculates the average temperature from the start of this
month to present to each reading and gives the CET... updated every 3 hours.

http://www.metcheck.com/cet.asp

Must admit, when it displayed 8.9c earlier I thought my code was up the
creek ;-)

That's very interesting, now bookmarked.

But I'm wondering whether it *really* needs to be updated every
3 hours!

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

"Philip Eden" philipATweatherHYPHENukDOTcom wrote in message
...

It might be wise either (a) to call it something other than CET, or
(b) to find out what monthly corrections you need to make your
temperature index directly comparable with the CET that we all
know and love.

The CET is presently 8.4ºC.


How about 'CET representative'?

I wonder if they could even get into trouble for claiming that something
is the CET when it clearly isn't, given that the CET is a cornerstone
of British climatology and people are unlikely to take kindly to it's name
being taken in vain.

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

"Col" wrote in message
...

How about 'CET representative'?

How about "Not the CET?" ;-)

Yep, I see you're point, at the end of the day I'm just trying to bring a
little extra weather information to the internet for people to use... GET?
General... (if I included more stations across the North, East and Northern
Ireland?)

A

"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
...

How about 'CET representative'?

How about "Not the CET?" ;-)

Yep, I see you're point, at the end of the day I'm just trying to bring a
little extra weather information to the internet for people to use... GET?
General... (if I included more stations across the North, East and Northern
Ireland?)

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.

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

"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

"Col" wrote in message
...

"Andrew Bond" wrote in message
...

"Col" wrote in message
...

How about 'CET representative'?

How about "Not the CET?" ;-)

Yep, I see you're point, at the end of the day I'm just trying to bring
a
little extra weather information to the internet for people to use...
GET?
General... (if I included more stations across the North, East and
Northern
Ireland?)

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.

Yes, Col is exactly right. It is simply a matter of the different stations
that
you use. The CET is just a temperature "index" ... it doesn't apply to any
specific station value or areal value.

I'm not criticising your attempt to produce something useful ... it's
an excellent idea ... it's just that it's neither quite one thing nor the
other.

Strictly speaking the Met Office shouldn't have called it the CET when
they took over calculating it in the 1970s because they abandoned
Gordon Manley's scheme (which was half the sum of the mean monthly
temperature for the Oxford area and the South Lancashire Plain),
although they did apply the necessary corrections to make the
continuing CET series and Manley's original series homogeneous.

It's worth reading Manley's final paper, published in the QJRoyMetSoc
in 1974, if you want to learn about the origin and development of the
CET series and the decades of work he put into producing it.

I suspect, Andrew, that your figures could supply a very good guide
to the "official" CET value if you applied a monthly correction ... which
may well be around -0.5 degC, and would probably vary by a few points
from month-to-month throughout the year.

(And, yes, it is perfectly clear from your site that you are talking about
the mean monthly temperature to date (i.e. 1st-13th) and not an
instantaneous figure).

Philip Eden

"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