Weather Winter Months

[Phil Layton]

I always thought were December, January & February. Yet I have heard
twice this evening, the latest from Wendy Hurrell just now that October
was the last Autumn month and November into Winter months....
--
Phil
Guildford

[Anne Burgess]

> Phil
> Guildford

I thought the same as you.

Does that mean that she thinks February is spring, or does the
winter get more than its fair share of months?

Here, today, it was more like summer, albeit pretty windy.

Anne
(Moray)

[Scott W]

there's no way you could consider November as anything other than an
autumn month - at least down here in the south-east. There is still
far too much warmth in the ground for any snowfall to last any length
of time. And in a mild spell the sun is warm enough to enable you sit
outside still in some comfort

[Weatherlawyer]

On Oct 31, 6:56 pm, Phil Layton <t3...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Odd how the heat lags behind the insolation is it not?

[Paul Herber]

GCSE physics



--
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd.
http://www.sandrila.co.uk/

[Nick]

Time of sunset though is IMO an important factor though in determining
winter in the mild south of England where true winter is often not
that cold and frequently ends early. The evenings this month, on
average, are darker than even January, never mind February. I'd
probably compromise to say that it's still autumn until around mid-
month, while the leaves are still on the trees, but the short, dark,
bleak days late in the month are true winter.

On the other side of winter, though, February in some years can have
some claim to being something of a spring month round here.

Nick

[Graham P Davis]

Back in the early 70s, there were some springlike Januaries and
Februaries, even a Christmas or two, but they were usually followed by a
cold, snowy winter in March and April.

The coldest time of the year averages out at around mid-January, so the
standard meteorological winter of December to February fits nicely.



--
Graham Davis, Bracknell
Whilst it's true that money can't buy you happiness, at least you can
be miserable in comfort.
Newsreader for Windows, Mac, Unix family: http://pan.rebelbase.com/

[John Hall]

In article
<2568ed3c-42f5-4267...@eh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

Nick <nick1...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>The evenings this month, on
>average, are darker than even January

On average, that's not true. :) The solstice is nearer to the beginning
of January than it is to the end of November, and nearer to the end of
January than it is to the beginning of November.
--
John Hall
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw

[Nick]

On Nov 1, 10:28 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In article
> <2568ed3c-42f5-4267-ba7d-8733d84ff...@eh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

>
>  Nick <nick150...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> >The evenings this month, on
> >average, are darker than even January
>
> On average, that's not true. :) The solstice is nearer to the beginning
> of January than it is to the end of November, and nearer to the end of
> January than it is to the beginning of November.
> --
> John Hall
>              "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
>               by those who have not got it."
>                                               George Bernard Shaw

Ah but that ignores the fact that the "solar noon", the time the sun
is highest in the sky, shifts as winter progresses. In three months
time solar noon shifts forward by 30 mins, meaning darker mornings and
lighter evenings for a day of the same length. Look at timeanddate.com
and enter any location in the UK, you'll see that January sunset times
are later than November's.

Nick

[Tudor Hughes]

They are, by an average of 5 minutes in the latitude of
London and only slightly more in Edinburgh.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

[Dave Cornwell]

Scott W wrote:

>
> there's no way you could consider November as anything other than an
> autumn month - at least down here in the south-east. There is still
> far too much warmth in the ground for any snowfall to last any length
> of time. And in a mild spell the sun is warm enough to enable you sit
> outside still in some comfort

----------------------
Didn't the first snowfall last winter start on November 30th here - and
it lasted two weeks ;-). Also November 1993. I do agree though,
especially these days.
Dave

[Adam Lea]

On 01/11/11 10:28, John Hall wrote:
> In article
> <2568ed3c-42f5-4267...@eh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> Nick<nick1...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> The evenings this month, on
>> average, are darker than even January
>
> On average, that's not true. :) The solstice is nearer to the beginning
> of January than it is to the end of November, and nearer to the end of
> January than it is to the beginning of November.

The date of the earliest sunset is not the winter solstice, but about a
week earlier i.e. the middle of December. Early November is as far from
this date as late January.

[Adam Lea]

On 31/10/11 21:17, Weatherlawyer wrote:
> On Oct 31, 6:56 pm, Phil Layton<t3...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> I always thought were December, January& February. Yet I have heard

>> twice this evening, the latest from Wendy Hurrell just now that October
>> was the last Autumn month and November into Winter months....
>
> Odd how the heat lags behind the insolation is it not?
>

On average outgoing energy from the earth exceeds incoming energy from
the sun for a few weeks after the winter solstice, even though the
winter solstice is the time of minimum incoming solar energy.

[John Hall]

In article
<b835f682-458a-4b3d...@k38g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,

Nick <nick1...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>On Nov 1, 10:28 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article
>> <2568ed3c-42f5-4267-ba7d-8733d84ff...@eh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>  Nick <nick150...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> >The evenings this month, on
>> >average, are darker than even January
>>
>> On average, that's not true. :) The solstice is nearer to the beginning
>> of January than it is to the end of November, and nearer to the end of
>> January than it is to the beginning of November.
>

>Ah but that ignores the fact that the "solar noon", the time the sun
>is highest in the sky, shifts as winter progresses. In three months
>time solar noon shifts forward by 30 mins, meaning darker mornings and
>lighter evenings for a day of the same length. Look at timeanddate.com
>and enter any location in the UK, you'll see that January sunset times
>are later than November's.
>
>Nick

Ah, OK. I'd overlooked that.

I knew that solar noon varies, such that the dates of earliest sunset
and latest sunrise are quite some distance apart, but I'm surprised that
solar noon shifts by as much as thirty minutes.

[Roger Smith]

"Adam Lea" <lea...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:RfidnfU17I9T1S3T...@bt.com...

Adam

Why is this the case if perihelion is on 3rd January? Surely that is the
time of maximum incoming solar energy.

Roger

[Visage 3:16]

WENDY THE COMMON SENSE DENIER

[Adam Lea]

Perihelion is a second order effect compared to the change in day length
and angle of the sun.

[Alan LeHun]

In article <ioGdne0U0L185i3T...@bt.com>, lea114
@btinternet.com says...

> Perihelion is a second order effect compared to the change in day length
> and angle of the sun.
>

You've lost me here. Surely there is always half the earth in day and
t'other half in night irrespective of the time of year? Same with the
angle. The sun will always be perpendicular to a single point on Earth
at the center of whatever hemisphere happens to be in day.

Have I missed something really obvious?


--
Alan LeHun

[Yokel]

It certainly does, due to a variety of factors such as the earth's orbit
being elliptical rather than circular and the axis of the earth not
being 90 degrees from the plane of the earth's orbit around the sun.
This variation is known as the "equation of time" and can result in your
sundial being as much as 15 minutes out. I have seen sundials which
actually have a table of the correction required by date so you can get
the correct time from them.

The easiest bit to understand is the earth's orbit being elliptical.
When we are closer to the sun, as we are in the months near perihelion
in early January, the earth moves faster in its orbit so has to rotate a
fraction further each day to "line up" with the sun at local noon. So
in winter the days are slightly longer and for a week or two either side
of the solstice both sunrise and sunset are later each day. But
although the days in summer are slightly shorter, there are more of them
(about three more equinox to equinox) because the earth moves more
slowly in that part of its orbit.

The best explanation I have found on a quick search of the internet is here:

http://www.sundials.co.uk/equation.htm

And I will refer you to this for the explanation of how the angle of the
earth's axis affects this as it is very good and, quite frankly, I
learnt something from this.

--
- Yokel -

Yokel posts via a spam-trap account which is not read.

[Roger Smith]

"Adam Lea" <lea...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

news:ioGdne0U0L185i3T...@bt.com...

In an earlier message you state "On average outgoing energy from the earth

exceeds incoming energy from the sun for a few weeks after the winter

solstice". Are you actually referring to the earth, or to certain latitudes
in the northern hemisphere? The more I read your statements, the less I
understand the underlying argument. The obvious temperature lag?

Cheers, Roger

[Yokel]

The bit missing is "Northern hemisphere", which has been left out of the
original explanation.

In the winter half-year, the northern hemisphere is angled away from the
sun. The lower sun angle and shorter days reduce the amount of energy
received from the sun *by that hemisphere*. This far outweighs the
variation in solar energy received due to the earth being just under 92
million miles from the sun at perihelion rather than the "standard" 93
million miles.

The higher sun angle and longer days in the southern hemisphere
compensate so what you say about the situation over the whole Earth is
also true.

Having said that, the "second order effect" comment, although
technically true, is really a "wibble" [term for unnecessarily
complicated explanation which comes from a character in the adult comic
"Viz"] and there is no reason why it could not have been explained in
the sort of terms I have used.

[John Hall]

In article <9-Sdndw-H_QJEC3T...@bt.com>,

Yokel <yokelstev...@btinternet.com> writes:
>On 01/11/2011 23:28, Alan LeHun wrote:
>> In article<ioGdne0U0L185i3T...@bt.com>, lea114
>> @btinternet.com says...
>>> Perihelion is a second order effect compared to the change in day length
>>> and angle of the sun.
>>>
>> You've lost me here. Surely there is always half the earth in day and
>> t'other half in night irrespective of the time of year? Same with the
>> angle. The sun will always be perpendicular to a single point on Earth
>> at the center of whatever hemisphere happens to be in day.
>>
>> Have I missed something really obvious?
>>
>>
>The bit missing is "Northern hemisphere", which has been left out
>of the original explanation.
>
>In the winter half-year, the northern hemisphere is angled away
>from the sun. The lower sun angle and shorter days reduce the
>amount of energy received from the sun *by that hemisphere*.
>This far outweighs the variation in solar energy received due to
>the earth being just under 92 million miles from the sun at
>perihelion rather than the "standard" 93 million miles.
>
>The higher sun angle and longer days in the southern hemisphere
>compensate so what you say about the situation over the whole
>Earth is also true.

Yes. Adam said "On average outgoing energy from the earth..." rather
than "On average outgoing energy from the Earth...", which I suppose
could indicate that he wasn't talking on a global scale.

[Len Wood]

On Nov 2, 12:24 am, Yokel <yokelstevie-gro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 01/11/2011 23:28, Alan LeHun wrote:> In article<ioGdne0U0L185i3TnZ2dnUVZ8uWdn...@bt.com>, lea114

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We must not forget the third order effect.
Namely, friction altering the speed of the earth's rotation from
changing tides, weather patterns, and geological events.
A day can be 50 secs longer or shorter!
:-)

Len
Wembury, SW Devon

[Weatherlawyer]

On Nov 1, 11:42 pm, Yokel <yokelstevie-gro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 01/11/2011 19:25, John Hall wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article

> > <b835f682-458a-4b3d-b797-182a50354...@k38g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> >   Nick<nick150...@yahoo.co.uk>  writes:

How can a sun dial be in error due to the above factors.

I appereciate poor maintenance and incorrect siting etc can spoil one
but that would be more or less a permanent defect.

[Weatherlawyer]

Where?

[Weatherlawyer]

On Oct 31, 9:36 pm, Paul Herber <p...@pherber.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:17:20 -0700 (PDT), Weatherlawyer <weatherlaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Oct 31, 6:56 pm, Phil Layton <t3...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> I always thought were December, January & February. Yet I have heard
> >> twice this evening, the latest from Wendy Hurrell just now that October
> >> was the last Autumn month and November into Winter months....
>
> >Odd how the heat lags behind the insolation is it not?
>
> GCSE physics

Please explain.   

[Weatherlawyer]

On Nov 1, 11:28 pm, Alan LeHun <t...@reply.to> wrote:
> In article <ioGdne0U0L185i3TnZ2dnUVZ8uWdn...@bt.com>, lea114

Nope, just you and me apparantly. Everyone else seems to be buried
head deep in the sands of time.

[Weatherlawyer]

The reason why we get colder weather in the temperate zones is nothing
to do with insolation.* We get cloudy weather most days of the year
but more so in the Autumn and winter.

Coupled with the length of daylight overall, the effects of
anticyclones is for cold weather in winter and warm weather in summer.

With that last effect the ranges of Arctic anticyclones are larger in
Winter than summer. Though of course the set up from this tme(ish)
last year had enough anticyclonic activity in the North Atlantic to
support all the fiendishly clevva inscrutable activity oriented over
Volcano and Bonnin Islands and later Japan proper.

The obverse occurs in summers when the Azores High stretches our way.

We still get Japanese quakes with them though but that is because of
the acoustic pattern set up to cause the whole system.

*Pedants please note, you had long enough to think about the
parameters offered in this thread. I do know the sun's heat brings
warmth. Now piss off.**

**No real offense offered to non pedants. Please ignore the insult if
you feel you are not a pedant but can't think for yourself.

And then piss off.

[Weatherlawyer]

> > was the last Autumn month and November into Winter months....- Hide quoted text -

Who said that?

Whover you are, kindly refrain from top posting.

[Yokel]

I'm pretty sure that the frictional effects you describe have an effect
which is barely measurable in human lifetimes (over geological
timescales tidal effects have forced the moon outwards and significantly
lengthened the day). Even a magnitude 8 earthquake - which releases an
awful lot of energy and can move quite a few billion tons of planet
around - has an effect on the earth's rotation which needs good
instrumentation to detect.

Many of these frictional effects are also effectively random and so
could not form part of an "equation of time" to correct a solar clock
according to the calendar date.

The 50 seconds variation in daylength is down to what you would call the
"first order" effects - the angle of the earth's axis and the
eccentricity of the earth's orbit which are by far the main components
of the "equation of time" under discussion.

[Yokel]

Follow the link I gave and read the first few paragraphs...

[Adam Lea]

Yes sorry, I should have perhaps said "On average outgoing energy from
the ground...".

[Adam Lea]

A poor choice of words by me. I am referring to a localised point on the
Earth's surface, not the energy balance of the Earth as a whole.

Sorry, I have to admit that I am not very good at putting things down in
words, even when I have the understanding in my head.

[Roger Smith]

"Yokel" <yokelstev...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8eSdnUbF_PzPPizT...@bt.com...

Following that look up analemmas and locate some of the montages put
together by Anthony Ayiomamitis. Wonderful!

Roger

[Roger Smith]

"Adam Lea" <lea...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

news:1NednbsqOrmdSyzT...@bt.com...

Don't worry, Adam. I think we have it sorted out now and are just about to
embark on all sorts of tangents.

Roger

[Rupert Wood]

On Nov 3, 1:00 pm, "Roger Smith" <r.smit...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Don't worry, Adam.  I think we have it sorted out now and are just about to
> embark on all sorts of tangents.

To come back to the "50 seconds" - as explained in Yokel's link and
other sources, the solar days are longest near Christmas - about 30
seconds longer than 24 hours, and shortest in early/middle September
(I have conflicting dates for that one from 2 different sources) -
about 20 seconds shorter than 24 hours. There is a lesser maximum in
mid-June of about +13 seconds, and a "barely minor" minimum of about
-18 seconds in late March.

It seems to me that the perception of when winter (or summer) arrive
(or are at peak) in temperate latitudes depends on how much one is
affected by daylight length as opposed to temperatures. For daylight
length only, it might also at a stretch depend on which one notices
more - early sunsets or late sunrises. The date displacements on
either side of the solstice are not great at UK latitudes - for London
11 Dec has 7.56am and 3.51, while 4 January has 8.06am and 4.05pm.
Over here (lat. 41.17 S) I would regard a clear day on 6 December
(5.41am rise, 8.42pm set DST) as less summerlike than 9 Jan (5.58am
rise, 8.57pm set), as I am more of an "evening" type.

Getting a little further into the trivia, while equatorial daylengths
vary the least - virtually not at all, sunrises and sunsets vary in
tandem by 30 minutes over the year, following the equation of time.
The latitudes where a sunrise or sunset time can stay stable for the
longest period are not equatorial. At about 8.15 South, sunrise times
vary by only about 2 minutes
from about 10 Feb to 12 May, and the same latitude North has sunset
behaving similarly over the same timespan. There is another pairing of
results for the other half of the year at about 10.30 North for
sunrise (around 29 Jul - 2 Nov) and 10.30 South for sunset. These
numbers are a little approximate as the rounding is at the minutes
level.

Anyone who has read this far should be feeling sleepy, thus helping to
mitigate other winter side-effects.

[John Hall]

In article
<6fa2d297-aee6-4b75...@c16g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
Rupert Wood <rupert....@gmail.com> writes:
<snip>

>It seems to me that the perception of when winter (or summer) arrive
>(or are at peak) in temperate latitudes depends on how much one is
>affected by daylight length as opposed to temperatures. For daylight
>length only, it might also at a stretch depend on which one notices
>more - early sunsets or late sunrises. The date displacements on
>either side of the solstice are not great at UK latitudes - for London
>11 Dec has 7.56am and 3.51, while 4 January has 8.06am and 4.05pm.
>Over here (lat. 41.17 S) I would regard a clear day on 6 December
>(5.41am rise, 8.42pm set DST) as less summerlike than 9 Jan (5.58am
>rise, 8.57pm set), as I am more of an "evening" type.

I think that's probably right. I effectively lost an hour of daylight
when the clocks went back, as I am still getting up in the dark but it's
getting dark an hour earlier in the evening. Ever since I've felt more
lethargic. No doubt I'll adjust to it in time.

[Howard Neil]

On 03/11/2011 09:57, John Hall wrote:
> In article
> <6fa2d297-aee6-4b75...@c16g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
> Rupert Wood<rupert....@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
>> It seems to me that the perception of when winter (or summer) arrive
>> (or are at peak) in temperate latitudes depends on how much one is
>> affected by daylight length as opposed to temperatures. For daylight
>> length only, it might also at a stretch depend on which one notices
>> more - early sunsets or late sunrises. The date displacements on
>> either side of the solstice are not great at UK latitudes - for London
>> 11 Dec has 7.56am and 3.51, while 4 January has 8.06am and 4.05pm.
>> Over here (lat. 41.17 S) I would regard a clear day on 6 December
>> (5.41am rise, 8.42pm set DST) as less summerlike than 9 Jan (5.58am
>> rise, 8.57pm set), as I am more of an "evening" type.
>
> I think that's probably right. I effectively lost an hour of daylight
> when the clocks went back, as I am still getting up in the dark but it's
> getting dark an hour earlier in the evening. Ever since I've felt more
> lethargic. No doubt I'll adjust to it in time.

Round about next March? ;-)

--
Howard Neil

[Roger Smith]

"John Hall" <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message
news:s4$7Q6C6V...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid...

> In article
> <6fa2d297-aee6-4b75...@c16g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
> Rupert Wood <rupert....@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
>>It seems to me that the perception of when winter (or summer) arrive
>>(or are at peak) in temperate latitudes depends on how much one is
>>affected by daylight length as opposed to temperatures. For daylight
>>length only, it might also at a stretch depend on which one notices
>>more - early sunsets or late sunrises. The date displacements on
>>either side of the solstice are not great at UK latitudes - for London
>>11 Dec has 7.56am and 3.51, while 4 January has 8.06am and 4.05pm.
>>Over here (lat. 41.17 S) I would regard a clear day on 6 December
>>(5.41am rise, 8.42pm set DST) as less summerlike than 9 Jan (5.58am
>>rise, 8.57pm set), as I am more of an "evening" type.
>
> I think that's probably right. I effectively lost an hour of daylight
> when the clocks went back, as I am still getting up in the dark but it's
> getting dark an hour earlier in the evening. Ever since I've felt more
lethargic.

Are you sure about that? Even last week I got up after sunrise so I didn't
have the benefit of the extra hour's daylight in the morning when the clocks
changed. But I was very aware of the earlier sunset.

In your case, if you are still getting up in the dark then you have
benefited from the earlier sunrise and your effective daytime has not
suddenly changed. Your lethargy might be explained by a confused body
clock.

Roger

[Weatherlawyer]

On Nov 2, 8:09 pm, Yokel <yokelstevie-gro...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 02/11/2011 15:09, Weatherlawyer in his descent into pedantry wrote:
>
> >>>> On Nov 1, 10:28 am, John Hall<nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk>    wrote:
>

> >> This variation is known as the "equation of time" and can result in your
> >> sundial being as much as 15 minutes out.  I have seen sundials which
> >> actually have a table of the correction required by date so you can get
> >> the correct time from them.
>

> >> The best explanation I have found on a quick search of the internet is here:
>
> >>http://www.sundials.co.uk/equation.htm
>

> > How can a sun dial be in error due to the above factors.
>

> > I appreciate poor maintenance and incorrect siting etc can spoil one

> > but that would be more or less a permanent defect.
>
> Follow the link I gave and read the first few paragraphs...

""Sun time" and "clock time"
Sundials tell "sun time". Clocks and watches tell "clock time".
-------> Neither kind of time is intrinsically "better" than the other
- they are both useful and interesting for their separate
purposes.<------

"Sun time" is anchored around the idea that when the sun reaches its
highest point (when it crosses the meridian), it is noon and, next
day, when the sun again crosses the meridian, it will be noon again.
The time which has elapsed between successive noons is sometimes more
and sometimes less than 24 hours of clock time. In the middle months
of the year, the length of the day is quite close to 24 hours, but
around 1 September the days are only some 23 hours, 59 minutes and 41
seconds long while around Christmas, the days are 24 hours and 31
seconds long.

"Clock time" is anchored around the idea that each day is exactly 24
hours long.
------>This is not actually true,<------
but it is obviously much more convenient to have a "mean sun" which
takes exactly 24 hours for each day, since it means that mechanical
clocks and watches, and, more recently, electronic ones can be made to
measure these exactly equal time intervals.

Obviously, these small differences in the lengths of "sun days" and
"mean days" build up to produce larger differences between "sun time"
and "clock time". These differences reach a peak of just over 14
minutes in mid-February (when "sun time" is slow relative to "clock
time") and just over 16 minutes at the beginning of November (when
"sun time" is fast relative to "clock time").

There are also two minor peaks in mid-May (when "sun time" is nearly 4
minutes fast) and in late July (when sun time is just over 6 minutes
slow) (These minor peaks have the fortunate effect, in the Northern
hemisphere, that the differences are relatively minor during most of
the months when there is a reasonable amount of sunshine). "

Curses, foist by my own petard.
If anyone on here could just point me in the direction of the pre 1999
North Atlantic sea level pressure archives housed in Wetterzentrales
servers, I will P-off to matters more Germane to the weather (such as
earthquakes and the like.)

[Weatherlawyer]

On Oct 31, 9:16 pm, "Anne Burgess" <anne.andes...@btinternet.com>
wrote:
> >I always thought were December, January & February. Yet I have

> >heard twice this evening, the latest from Wendy Hurrell just
> >now that October was the last Autumn month and November into
> >Winter months....
>

> I thought the same as you.
>
> Does that mean that she thinks February is spring, or does the
> winter get more than its fair share of months?
>
> Here, today, it was more like summer, albeit pretty windy.

What would be interesting (instead of the 40 posts and counting of
basic detritus on this thread) is if someone would take the time to
analyse the amounts of sunlight for similar days of the year and
compare temperature data for the same days examined.

I'm pretty certain the results would reveal something worth knowing.

Posted (as usual) with no real hope of getting results but at least
occasioning a time stamp on the metaphysics.

Weatherlawyer, impractical as ever and as irksomely prescient as an
irksomely prescient thing (not unlike a sundial maker in some
respects; old fashioned, accurate enough and nobody ever takes any
notice of his work.)

[John Hall]

In article <liwsq.20274$UN2....@newsfe04.ams2>,

You're right of course.

[Nick]

On Nov 3, 9:57 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In article
> <6fa2d297-aee6-4b75-a1a8-c9146466c...@c16g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,

>  Rupert Wood <rupert.weat...@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
>
> >It seems to me that the perception of when winter (or summer) arrive
> >(or are at peak) in temperate latitudes depends on how much one is
> >affected by daylight length as opposed to temperatures. For daylight
> >length only, it might also at a stretch depend on which one notices
> >more -  early sunsets or late sunrises. The date displacements on
> >either side of the solstice are not great at UK latitudes - for London
> >11 Dec has 7.56am and 3.51, while 4 January has 8.06am and 4.05pm.
> >Over here (lat. 41.17 S) I would regard a clear day on 6 December
> >(5.41am rise, 8.42pm set DST) as less summerlike than 9 Jan (5.58am
> >rise, 8.57pm set), as I am more of an "evening" type.
>
> I think that's probably right. I effectively lost an hour of daylight
> when the clocks went back, as I am still getting up in the dark but it's
> getting dark an hour earlier in the evening. Ever since I've felt more
> lethargic. No doubt I'll adjust to it in time.
> --

I am too but that's because I'm getting up an hour earlier (I "feel"
like getting up at 7am rather than 8am, so my body clock's basically
still on BST, and also at this time of year, quite frankly I need all
the natural light I can get) but going to bed at the same time (around
midnight) so I'm consistently losing an hour's sleep. As sunrise
starts creeping back towards where it was doubtless that will change.

Nick

[Yokel]

On 03/11/2011 14:28, Weatherlawyer wrote:
> On Oct 31, 9:16 pm, "Anne Burgess"<anne.andes...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:

>>> I always thought were December, January& February. Yet I have

I'm afraid this will prove little as temperatures depend on much more
than incoming sunlight.

Also relevant is the storage of heat by the ground / water during the
preceding summer. This gets released during winter and this has the
effect of delaying (on average) the coldest time of year to some time
after the solstice.

In the middle of continents, this normally results in the coldest
average temperatures being well into January, as it is not until then
that the sun starts to rise noticeably higher in the sky. Over the
oceans, the coldest (and warmest) periods can be two or three months
after the solstice. In the Arctic where there is no sunlight (or
continuous sunlight) for months on end allowing cold (or heat) to
accumulate steadily, the maximum sea-ice extent is normally in March and
the minimum in September.

Weather patterns also play a part. Here in the UK we lie between an
ocean which stays very warm in winter (thanks to the Gulf Stream and its
extension, the North Atlantic Drift, which keeps the west coast of
Spitzbergen ice free at more than 75 degrees North) and the world's
largest continent with the coldest winter temperatures in the Northern
Hemisphere at its heart.

For much of the winter the daylength is virtually irrelevant. Here in
Ashurst we have seen 15C for the last time this year and will probably
not see it again until early March. Yet at any time in Winter the
temperature could reach 12C. Our winter temperatures are largely
controlled by the weather type and wind direction, which determine the
source of the air which reaches us. Overlain on this is the slow but
steady fall during the winter of sea surface temperatures around the
British Isles which in normal years mean our coldest weather is likely
to be in February. Recent years have shown that many years are not
"normal".

[Nick]

>
> For much of the winter the daylength is virtually irrelevant. Here in
> Ashurst we have seen 15C for the last time this year and will probably
> not see it again until early March.  Yet at any time in Winter the
> temperature could reach 12C.  Our winter temperatures are largely
> controlled by the weather type and wind direction, which determine the
> source of the air which reaches us.  Overlain on this is the slow but
> steady fall during the winter of sea surface temperatures around the
> British Isles which in normal years mean our coldest weather is likely
> to be in February.  Recent years have shown that many years are not
> "normal".
>
> --
> - Yokel -
>
> Yokel posts via a spam-trap account which is not read.

Indeed, I'm struggling to recall the last time when February was the
coldest winter month, I think it may have been 1991. Jan and Feb tend
to be milder than Dec these days largely due to wind direction - they
seem to have more tendency for Atlantic air than Dec, which almost
without exception has had a prolonged cold, anticyclonic spell in
recent years. However in sunny weather, day length, or rather the
elevation of the sun, does seem to make February rather milder in
sunny weather compared to Dec and Jan, all other factors being equal.

Nick

[Norman]

The one that I remember vividly was Feb 1986. At Bushey, Hertfordshire (where I
lived at the time) I recorded a monthly mean temp of -1.3 and a monthly max of
only +3.0. There were 24 air frosts with a lowest min of -13.5 on the 10th. The
max was below zero on 10 days during the month. Snow was lying at 0700z on 24
days and snow fell on 15 days during the month. The wind was almost
continuously E-NE throughout the month. All in all, it was something of a
classic 'old style' February.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.

[John Hall]

In article
<8161bd4d-b2d9-451d...@hv4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

Nick <nick1...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>Indeed, I'm struggling to recall the last time when February was the
>coldest winter month, I think it may have been 1991.

Checking with the CET (Philip Eden's version), it seems to have been
2006-7. However since the February mean CET was 6.1C, it wasn't exactly
a cold month! February was also the coldest month the previous winter,
with a more respectable 3.9C. February 2010 was the coldest in recent
years, with 2.9C, but was not nearly so cold as January. February 1996
came in at 2.4C, but the previous December had averaged 2.3C. February
1994 averaged 3.3C and was easily the coldest month that winter. But
February 1991 was the last one to average less than 2C, at 1.75C.

I haven't checked, but I think that February is now probably on average
milder than December, which never used to be the case. Indeed February
used to be almost as cold as January. You could argue that February has
become a spring month.

[Eskimo Will]

"John Hall" <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message

news:e5UK5fDn...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid...

> In article
> <8161bd4d-b2d9-451d...@hv4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> Nick <nick1...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>Indeed, I'm struggling to recall the last time when February was the
>>coldest winter month, I think it may have been 1991.
>
> Checking with the CET (Philip Eden's version), it seems to have been
> 2006-7. However since the February mean CET was 6.1C, it wasn't exactly
> a cold month! February was also the coldest month the previous winter,
> with a more respectable 3.9C. February 2010 was the coldest in recent
> years, with 2.9C, but was not nearly so cold as January. February 1996
> came in at 2.4C, but the previous December had averaged 2.3C. February
> 1994 averaged 3.3C and was easily the coldest month that winter. But
> February 1991 was the last one to average less than 2C, at 1.75C.
>
> I haven't checked, but I think that February is now probably on average
> milder than December, which never used to be the case. Indeed February
> used to be almost as cold as January. You could argue that February has
> become a spring month.

Here are the modern (2003-2010) figures for Haytor (1971-2000) in brackets.
Mean temp.
Dec 4.3 (5.3)
Jan 4.5 (4.3)
Feb 4.3 (4.3)

Average number of days snow falling (not including sleet).
Dec 4.0
Jan 6.4
Feb 7.8

So up here the only real change is that Decembers have got notably colder.
February is the month when snow falls the most often, however Feb. 2011 was
my first snowless February since moving here (1 day of sleet). What is
notable is how warm Aprils have become, snow in April used to be common on
Dartmoor now it is much rarer.

Apr. 8.5 (7.1)
that is 1.4 degrees warmer!
and only 1 day of snow falling on average 2003-2010.

March is 0.4 warmer with 4 days of snow falling.

Of course 2003-2010 is only 9 years, but interesting I think.

Will (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl)
--

[Nick]

>
> I haven't checked, but I think that February is now probably on average
> milder than December, which never used to be the case. Indeed February
> used to be almost as cold as January. You could argue that February has
> become a spring month.

... and on this thoroughly bleak November morning I would like there
to be some truth in that. Gives hope that it's only 3 months to
spring ;-)

Nick

[Len Wood]

On Nov 5, 10:38 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In article

> <8161bd4d-b2d9-451d-9d31-c85b08fdb...@hv4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Dec. is the new Feb. according to CET figures:

1981-2010 averages
Dec 4.65C, Feb 4.50C

2001-2010 averages
Dec 4.21C, Feb 4.78C.

Interestingly there is no such difference here in Wembury:
2001-2010 averages
Dec 6.5C, Feb 6.4C

This is most likely due to the nearness of the sea.
SST about 12C in Dec and 9C in Feb.

Len Wood
Wembury, SW Devon, 83 m asl

[John Hall]

In article <LV8tq.9405$eC4....@newsfe16.ams2>,

Eskimo Will <wi...@lyneside.demon.co.uk> writes:
>Here are the modern (2003-2010) figures for Haytor (1971-2000) in brackets.
>Mean temp.
>Dec 4.3 (5.3)
>Jan 4.5 (4.3)
>Feb 4.3 (4.3)

That surprises me. I'd have expected recent Februaries to have been
milder than that. The fall in December is probably mainly due to the
extreme nature of December, 2010, which will have a big impact on a
short record.

>
>Average number of days snow falling (not including sleet).
>Dec 4.0
>Jan 6.4
>Feb 7.8
>
>So up here the only real change is that Decembers have got
>notably colder. February is the month when snow falls the most
>often, however Feb. 2011 was my first snowless February since
>moving here (1 day of sleet). What is notable is how warm Aprils
>have become, snow in April used to be common on Dartmoor now
>it is much rarer.
>
>Apr. 8.5 (7.1)
>that is 1.4 degrees warmer!
>and only 1 day of snow falling on average 2003-2010.
>
>March is 0.4 warmer with 4 days of snow falling.
>
>Of course 2003-2010 is only 9 years, but interesting I think.

I make it eight. :) Yes, it is very interesting. How did you arrive at
the 1971-2000 values?

[John Hall]

In article
<0aa6958b-7e6e-4a5c...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,

Len Wood <wave...@fsmail.net> writes:
>Yes, Dec. is the new Feb. according to CET figures:
>
>1981-2010 averages
>Dec 4.65C, Feb 4.50C
>
>2001-2010 averages
>Dec 4.21C, Feb 4.78C.
>
>Interestingly there is no such difference here in Wembury:
>2001-2010 averages
>Dec 6.5C, Feb 6.4C
>
>This is most likely due to the nearness of the sea.
>SST about 12C in Dec and 9C in Feb.

Yes, and that probably accounts for Februaries remaining relatively cold
at Haytor too. The SW peninsula as a whole is more maritime than Central
England.

[Eskimo Will]

"John Hall" <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message

news:5TapIHBr...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid...

> In article <LV8tq.9405$eC4....@newsfe16.ams2>,
> Eskimo Will <wi...@lyneside.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>Here are the modern (2003-2010) figures for Haytor (1971-2000) in
>>brackets.
>>Mean temp.
>>Dec 4.3 (5.3)
>>Jan 4.5 (4.3)
>>Feb 4.3 (4.3)
>
> That surprises me. I'd have expected recent Februaries to have been
> milder than that. The fall in December is probably mainly due to the
> extreme nature of December, 2010, which will have a big impact on a
> short record.
>

The impact of 2010 is -0.625, so December has still got colder.

>>
>>Average number of days snow falling (not including sleet).
>>Dec 4.0
>>Jan 6.4
>>Feb 7.8
>>
>>So up here the only real change is that Decembers have got
>>notably colder. February is the month when snow falls the most
>>often, however Feb. 2011 was my first snowless February since
>>moving here (1 day of sleet). What is notable is how warm Aprils
>>have become, snow in April used to be common on Dartmoor now
>>it is much rarer.
>>
>>Apr. 8.5 (7.1)
>>that is 1.4 degrees warmer!
>>and only 1 day of snow falling on average 2003-2010.
>>
>>March is 0.4 warmer with 4 days of snow falling.
>>
>>Of course 2003-2010 is only 9 years, but interesting I think.
>
> I make it eight. :) Yes, it is very interesting. How did you arrive at
> the 1971-2000 values?

Combination of Met Office estimates, Princetown, Teignmouth and Yarner Wood
(just down the road).

Will
--

[Eskimo Will]

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

"John Hall" <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message

news:yzurAiB5...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid...

> In article
> <0aa6958b-7e6e-4a5c...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
> Len Wood <wave...@fsmail.net> writes:
>>Yes, Dec. is the new Feb. according to CET figures:
>>
>>1981-2010 averages
>>Dec 4.65C, Feb 4.50C
>>
>>2001-2010 averages
>>Dec 4.21C, Feb 4.78C.
>>
>>Interestingly there is no such difference here in Wembury:
>>2001-2010 averages
>>Dec 6.5C, Feb 6.4C
>>
>>This is most likely due to the nearness of the sea.
>>SST about 12C in Dec and 9C in Feb.
>
> Yes, and that probably accounts for Februaries remaining relatively cold
> at Haytor too. The SW peninsula as a whole is more maritime than Central
> England.

I think you are right John. After seeing that February is the snowiest month
at Haytor I did surmise that it was down to SST. In November and early
December winds off the sea are notably mild but by February it can snow up
here even in a returning polar maritime SW'ly! One year I recall persistent
snow above 500 metres asl in a warm sector in February (admittedly it was a
westerly).

Will
--

[John Hall]

In article <F1ftq.13414$_p4....@newsfe19.ams2>,

Eskimo Will <wi...@lyneside.demon.co.uk> writes:
>"John Hall" <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:5TapIHBr...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid...

>>How did you arrive at
>> the 1971-2000 values?
>
>Combination of Met Office estimates, Princetown, Teignmouth and
>Yarner Wood (just down the road).

Thanks, Will.