UKMO Rovers 1 Meteogroup United 1

I realise the yellow warning for strong wind runs until 15 UTC, so call these charts the preliminary results from storm Klaus (with a name like that it really should have happened in late December). A peak gust of 84 mph at 03 UTC at Aberdaron on the Lyn peninsula which was just fractionally lower that those promised by Meteogroup on the BBC weather yesterday lunchtime and much higher than the 70 mph predicted by the UKMO in their yellow warning. The warning itself could have been adjusted a little higher on Tuesday, but the Met Office chose to sit tight and not bother. All in all this was a typical winter gale across IONA and the warning was more or less correct, but on the low side, even inland maximum gusts at a number of sites were well in excess of the 55 mph anticipated. It may be my imagination but I did notice that the tweets from BBC Weather came more into line with the yellow warning from mid afternoon? So I made the final score was 1-1 between the two sides. I added a bit of an own goal to the UKMO, that was because Meteogroup refused to even mention or display the severe weather warning in any of their broadcasts I saw during the day. That’s understandable, the 70 mph in the warning was so much lower and out of kilter with the 85 mph suggested by the NWP on the day and which proved to be correct. Wind gusts of 84 mph would have been sufficient to have merited a name storm back at the start of the storm naming fiasco trial back in 2015-16, but the UKMO have tightened the impacts that they assign to such events in the intervening years, and now coastal gales and storm forced gusts don’t cut it anymore. I wonder what the Dutch would have done if winds of 84 mph were forecast for the Frisian Islands?

Courtesy UKMO
Originally tweeted by Met Office (@metoffice) on 10 March 2021.

Even the winds in this animation they posted on twitter contradict the wind strengths in their warning, and notice that this animations runs to 15 UTC on Thursday as did the yellow warning.


It strikes me that if the Met Office want to concoct the evidence to name any storm they can, equally they can ignore the evidence and hide behind the subjective ‘impacts’ of any event which they are the sole arbiter regarding if they don’t.

Scroll to Top
%d bloggers like this: