Sutton Bonnington DCNN 4202 – Yet another Unsatisfactory record breaker.

52.83652 -1.25114 Met Office Assesses CIMO Class 5 and “UNSATISFACTORY” Installled 26/07/2005

Firstly the Met Office claims this site dates from 1/1/1900 – it does not. There was a site known as “Sutton Bonnington” dating back then but this certainly was not it. A different site numbered DCNN 4201 did exist but in a significantly different location. The Met Office frequently claims long term historic records from sites that are not continuously from the same location, a problem making genuine long term site reading comparisons very difficult.

More importantly this site is currently defined by the Met Office themselves as “UNSATISFACTORY“

Obviously an unsatisfactory site would not be used to record daily “extremes” would it?

So this is what the site looked like back in 2010 before the overgrown site hedging blocked the view from the road. Note the soon to be demolished last UK operating coal fired power station – Ratcliffe-on-Soar in the distance.

It is not immediately evident why this site is CIMO assessed as just Class 5. The green structure to the rear is probably a generator for site power. This is a close up from aerial imagery indicating the structure is about 30 metres away. By standards applied to some other stations Class 3 would appear more appropriate but the Met Office may well know of other local issues not openly visible, or possibly the changing cropping structure is considered problematic

What is definitely known from Freedom of information request is that the Met Office itself rated the site as “Unsatisfactory” September 2024.

So why are readings from “Unsatisfactory” rated sites continuing to be used by the Met Office?

“Consistency of measurements is vital across the network, both for informing our forecasts and for the long-term weather and climate records of the UK.

To ensure consistency of measurements in the records, weather stations must meet strict criteria, in alignment with meteorological organisations across the world. This includes specific standards on the levels of grass-cover within the observations area, as well as having enough clear space for the weather station to be free from the influence of non-meteorological factors on the readings.”

So how is it that despite all these fine words and puffed up claims, the Met Office continues to use sites they know (but keep it secret) are unacceptable? Is this really the way taxpayer funded government agencies are supposed to operate?

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/09/30/sutton-bonnington-dcnn-4202-yet-another-unsatisfactory-record-breaker/