Underton DCNN 4783 – Enthusiastically not bothered and more Met Office data manipulation.

52.52379 -2.46790 Met Office CIMO Assessed Class 4 Installed 1/7/2014.

Underton is an official Met Office “Climate Reporting” and manually recording weather station which appears on this listing https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-synoptic-and-climate-stations. To ensure clarity (and retention) here is a screen shot of its entry.

I am confident that everyone viewing this would agree this weather station is genuinely attributable to the UK Met Office…….or is it?

From the Met Office weather observations website -WOW- (https://wow.metoffice.gov.uk/observations/details?site_id=881196001 Which includes data from amateur and unofficial sites we have this below.

The site carries the official Met Office logo but under site details the “Reasons for running the site” are shown as “Enthusiast” with the location given as a “wildlife reserve” and having been awarded the 2024 “Bronze Award”. {Quite for what or why such awards are granted is not clear and almost certainly irrelevant to accuracy or data recording as I will demonstrate.} However, this site description with no website address shown is completely at odds with the way other Met Office stations are shown on WOW which appear like this:

Why Underton is so differently described (almost to the point of seemingly being disowned) I have been unable to ascertain, though I can demonstrate that the Met office publishes and archives its readings…..on the occassions when the “enthusiast” actually either bothers to take them or manages to get them right.

For uniformity, I will assess the site quality though it really is rather a pointless exercise given the atrocious readings record I will highlight later and the typically bizarre interpretations the Met Office makes of them.

The above image indicates no obstructions within the immediate (smaller) 10 metres circle radius. On this basis alone Class 3 could almost be considered plausible, however, this site fails miserably on even on the Met Office stipulations

Not only is the site heavily sheltered by trees and hedging it also sits in a frost hollow indicated by the Ordnance survey sheet. It is worth noting Shropshire has recorded England’s lowest ever temperature in similar frost hollow conditions at the original Newport station. At the bottom of a 100 metre slope in a river valley with small lakes known as “Pam’s Pool” (also the name of the wildlife reserve) rather indicates a significant frost hollow. Whilst a great site for recording extreme lows it really is not representative of a wider area.

Looking at the site history I find it quite ridiculous that in 2014 the Met Office is still adding such absurdly low grade sites to its official network. The CIMO regulations had been adopted when this site was “chosen” so what possible reason did the Met Office have in including a unit known to have inaccuracy due to siting of (at best) +/- 2°C by their own assessment? I do not accept the Class 4 rating and such a site, if it must be used, only ranks Class 5 and is officially “Undesirable”. …..but what of its readings record?

1. 2014 The site started readings 1st July. Despite opening enthusiasm out of a potential 191 days only 159 readings were taken.
2. 2015 342 days readings were taken but on 5 of those either t.max or t.min were missing making daily averages impossible to calculate so only 339 days (93%) viable readings.
3. 2016 344 days readings, 8 missing components thus only 336 (92%) viable readings.
4. 2017 341 days readings, 141 missing components thus only 230 (63%) viable readings.
5. 2018 ZERO maximum readings taken thus ZERO daily averages can be derived.
6. 2019 ZERO maximum readings taken thus ZERO daily averages can be derived.
7. 2020 ZERO maximum readings taken thus ZERO daily averages can be derived.
8. 2021 Somebody eventually either fixed the PRT or alternatively learned how to read it (minima are read on LIG) on the 20th June. Here is when the Met Office mania for constructing nonsensical averages took over

The above data was extracted from viewing the CEDA data downloads. The following was obtained under Freedom of Information act which together with the number of days viable readings that were actually taken also shows the “Mean Daily Air Temperature” that the Met Office derived from the readings. Here is the data for Underton for 2021.

Carrying on the site’s tradition of unenthusiastically bothering to actually fulfil the basic function of a weather station and only taking readings 177 times out of 365 (48% of the time) the Met Office amazingly derived a mean daily air temperature of 12.7°C. A sign of how completely farcical such a figure (that the Met Office felt unembarrassed to release under FOI) actually is, consider where the Met Office compares Underton’s data to.

Leaving aside the obligatory (it seems) Zombie stations of Halesowen and Penkridge which both died over 20 years ago, the alleged nearest “well correlated …..climate station” is Shawbury . Here are the comparative figures for there.

Shawbury (an automatic unit) recorded 363 days and provided a mean daily air temperature of 10.2°C, a mere 2.5°C cooler than Underton.

Does the Met Office expect to be taken seriously when openly producing such comedic data? I challenge any meteorologist – in fact anyone at all – to justify this arrant misuse of data.

To continue going through the history, 2022 saw a sudden uplift in effort and for the only year ever in its existence Underton broke the 350 barrier with 351 readings viable readings taken. Typically recidivism returned and for the last archived year of 2023 just 302 readings were managed with an abrupt stop before the year end. If Underton is still reporting is anyone’s guess. I would ask the Met Office if the site is still operational but I asked that same question regarding Eastbourne back in February and they have not deigned to answer at all.

The Met Office is currently refusing to divulge (even under FOI) which “well correlated” stations are being used to compile “climate averages” for long closed weather stations, some of which closed over half a century ago. Could this be because they do not want people to know that readings from such appallingly bad sites like Underton are actually being used in that “process”. I have taken the Met Office FOI refusal responses to further challenge on the basis that if they cannot verify the data used then the derived data is “unproveable.” and thus false. I also have further enquiries relating to “Historic Stations” such as Lowestoft and Nairn:Druim where data is being estimated and attributed on an ongoing basis despite station closure. If the Met office cannot/will not state which stations are being used now in 2025 then there is clear proof of data fabrication.

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2025/05/21/underton-dcnn-4783-enthusiastically-not-bothered-and-more-met-office-data-manipulation/