You notice that I said 'person' and not 'man'!
anyway, if there is one thing that bugs me it is when an automated site, Met'O or EA, has a fault, a problem or just goes wrong.
the end result = missing data = estimated figures = inaccuracy.
And I don't like it.
How quickly are these 'problems' sorted? Sometimes after the end of the month.
Once I was on a train at Shap and it was thick fog and when I looked at the 'last 24hrs' page on the Met'O site for Shap it had Visibility as 'excellent'.
An e-mail followed ad fault rectified after a few days!!
Anyway, Newton Rigg, August - missing rainfall data - problem with the gauge mid month.
So now we are on a provisional estimated figure!!!!
Now, in June and July the Met'O gauge had 49.4 and 53.4 mm
The EA gauge at the site is always under and had 44.4 and 47.8 - in August it had 81.0.
My provisional estimated figure was 89.5 mm (which I thought was slightly low) - the Met'O have come up with 84.0 mm.
Any other offers?
And of course the central point to all this is: if only a man or woman was manually doing these readings such errors would be rectified forthwith and probably wouldn't occur in the first place.
I know that I'm pushing at an open door with you all, but it does irk me.
Add everything else here
1 post • Page 1 of 1