53.17539 -0.52333 Met Office CIMO assessed Class 4 Installed 1/1/1946
Waddington is obviously another of the more than 100 aviation sites in the UK, the majority being operational or former military airports. It is just south of Lincoln with weather stations at RAF Cranwell 10 miles to the south, RAF Coningsby 15 miles to the south east and (oddly importantly) the recently closed RAF Scampton 10 mikes to the north. It is listed on the Met Office Historic Stations data with readings going back to 1947 which demonstrates the most shameless Met Office misrepresentation I have encountered so far.
These types of station were established solely for aviation purposes and the readings were originally a function of the air traffic controllers who had appropriate meteorology training to advise pilots of local immediate conditions. They were not intended even for forecasting and storing historic readings were not always considered a priority. The Stevenson screens were frequently relocated usually in line with expansions and developments of the airfield or changes to the aircraft operating there. There was often more than one operational unit serving different purposes around the airfield.
The C.A.A. produces a specific guide for aviation meteorology that runs to 137 pages and demonstrates their much more complex requirements that are often incompatible with the Met Office climate data requirements. The Met Office originally recognised that the transfer of aviation site’s data to supplying historic temperature records would not be perfect stating:
“It is unavoidable that some sites do not meet all these requirements, particularly where a station set up for one purpose gradually takes on a different role, for example an airport site originally established for aviation observing may become a key synoptic or climate station while suffering the effects of urbanisation. A few sites are in city centres and may be unsuitably located close to large obstacles or even on the roof of a building.”
For whatever reasons, the Met Office more recently decided such constraints of inappropriate siting for “Climate” station’s purposes should be ignored and re-invented requirements with weasel worded claims of “Internationally agreed distances from the runway ” The end result is that inappropriate sites such as Waddington now dominate.
Tim Channon not only reviewed this site back in 2012 but also went on to expand in much more detail in a second posting relating to the site’s data record. This latter post attracted much poster commentary and clearly shows Tim’s extreme exasperation at the extraordinarily poor readings record. In recent Talkshop attempts to analyse Met Office data great assistance has been offered by reader retired auditor Dave Woolcock – he has also expressed extreme frustration at how poorly kept Met Office data actually is which will be evidenced in the near future. I strongly recommend looking at both Tim’s reports for context to issues raised below. Firstly the station review
And then the extended discussion piece:Tim knew his stuff!
Coming back to date, the site is a very poor Class 4 but personally I do not accept these sort of sites are acceptable at all for the historic temperature record as the site is far too compromised to be considered consistently reliable or accurate. I genuinely feel that those sites such I recently reviewed at Class 5 Libanus are more appropriate than Waddington. Clearly the Met Office feels otherwise and heavily promotes this site’s data…..but there is a sinister twist.
Why should anyone question the validity of the above data? Am I just some conspiracy theorist weirdo blogger? Or is a lot of this “Historic Station Data” completely bogus? Well to start with this from the Archives
“NO DAILY DATA : CLOSED 8/1953-5/1955; 7-8/1968. DATA FOR SCAMPTON SUBSTITUTED”
So with the station not operable for almost two years the Met Office (in 1996) casually just slipped in the exact same data from a station 10 miles north in lieu. The same for a period in 1968. Well that’s okay then is it? How does just slyly splicing in a different site’s data meet any form of scientific integrity.
There are numerous cases of missing daily data or obviously incorrect numbers appearing in the archived daily logs but by some unknown means the Met Office managed to compile a continuous monthly average to pass off as authoritative fact to the public which is, in fact, largely fabricated. However, going back to their claims regarding “Climate Averages” the Met Office clearly stated in response to FOI review procedure the following:
“By way of further advice and assistance as part of this internal review, I can advise you that
the Met Office is unable to supply specific details of the observing sites requested, as this is
not recorded information. We would advise you that we do not attribute unmodified values
from one station to another station. “{my bold}
The evidence proves that the Met Office simply dumped Scampton’s data onto Waddington when it presumably suited them to fill the empty boxes. A practise than can be seen to occur at other times as well. The evidence shows the Met Office definitely has attributed unmodified values from one station to another.
This issue does not seem to have ended. My review of nearby RAF Coningsby referred to the UK all time highest temperature recorded there on the 19th July 2022, the Met Office’s subsequent synopsis of events and their attempts to debunk and denigrate a quality investigative journalist who rightly queried issues. Here is their report. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2022/2022_03_july_heatwave_v1.pdf
The entire report is well worth reading but I will highlight one table in it. This records “selected” {Talkshop comment:like fine wines?} stations readings on the hottest day. What were the readings at unselected sites?
Waddington does not appear on the table and is not mentioned in the text. However, on the associated map Waddington appears just north west of the 40.3°C of Coningsby recording 39.9°C but lower than the 40.1°C shown at the extraordinarily dubious back garden Gringley-on the-Hill site further north to be reviewed soon.
The quite astonishing thing about this data is revealed when looking at the archived readings for Waddington. Quite miraculously it is now showing as 40.3°C. ………………………………..I ask readers to look the links up themselves, open the files and screen capture them to confirm I have not amended this data in any way and also to create a record for future reference.
This reading is clearly bogus and I do not feel inclined to give the Met Office the benefit of the doubt or the option of claiming yet another of their numerous “human error” excuses. Had it actually been recorded at Waddington it would have shown in their 2022 synopsis and used to “debunk” any queries of the Coningsby record. So how did that figure get there and why? What inferences will be drawn by any student studying this “historic” event in future? All those “deniers” querying the record were wrong because it was recorded at more than one site – the official records “prove” that.
I, and others, have encountered amended and misrepresented data from the Met Office very many times. I hold the view I expressed regarding Braemar – “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past” This must be stopped.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
January 31, 2025 at 05:17PM
