METMEN
 

Would appreciate comments on the accuracy (or otherwise) of met forecasting recently. In my neck of the woods it seems to have gone for a complete w http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gifk!

In my neck of the woods, looking SW gives the forecast, and NE the aftercast.

Seriously though, I do think that some airfields in the UK have suffered with the removal of experienced metmen and the substitution of centrally produced forecasts.

------------------
Another day in paradise

I have to say that despite watching all the TV met forecasts with the news bulletins, the actual weather comes from somewhere else! Therefore I use that good old system of WYSIWYG with a huge dollop of SIAS!!

The UK Met office , I have heard have a 47% accuracy of forecasting the weather - Or put another way 53% of the time they are wrong!
In fact if you take what they say as being the opposite you have a slightly better chance of getting it right.

I've found the best source of met these days is the BBC local teletext (p402), especially for the mountains. Without a doubt, the quality of service has gone down, not only with the centralisation of forecasters, but also with the redction in observers.

Most civilian met men toe the Bracknell party line so they can blame somewhen else when they get it wrong. They.ve not been honest since Sevenoaks lost a few oaks! The military met men are a different breed though if they'll speak to you. Their interpretation based on experience and local conditions which is what we all want.

I agree with your view on Military met men.
I 'phoned the met office at Manchester airport a while back as the weather wasn't agreeing with the TAF. The man seemedsurprised that I had the affront to question the TAF, and he wasn't at all helpful.