Coningsby’s Fake Record
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ray Sanders
Ray has been doing a bit of sleuthing into the siting of the temperature station at RAF Coningsby, where the record UK temperature of 40.3C was set last year.
As the arrow indicates, close to the runway, a building and two seemingly concrete adjacent areas.
Looking at the Google scale, the runway is about 20m away, and those two areas to the left and right are closer still.
WMO rules are quite clear. Class 1 sites must be at least 100m away from concrete surfaces, and even Class 2 ones must be 30m away, which seems to rule out Coningsby. It only qualifies as a poor quality Class 3 site, which the WMO say may overstate temperatures by 1C.
This clearly means that the so-called record of 40.3C should not have been accepted by the Met Office.
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I could not agree more. I spent 14 years in the RAF and served on airfields both in the UK and abroad. Siting a weather recording station next to a peritrack or a runway is no-no as the local temperature can be way above anything a few hundred metres away. Flying model aeroplanes close to the main runway at RAF Tengah in Singapore at weekends, you did not venture onto the runway itself, wearing only shorts and flip-flops – that was a painful experience! However, pilots do need to know local air temperature conditions as that affects both lift and drag on takeoff. But, using such a weather station to establish a record is a complete nonsense.
Hi Merv you make an excellent point and one that I have also made in my contact with the Met Office. The recording sites and instrumentation are very accurate and vitally important for the purposes intended – aircraft takeoff and landings in an artificial micro-climate. This expressly excludes their data as being meaningful for general climate recording
There are literally dozens and dozens of such sites around the country.
In addition though, many other Met Office sites are in equally compromised situations.
Some are in Walled Kitchen Gardens deliberately built to create an artificially warm micro-climate – it is actually quite laughable that the Met Office would instal them in such locations, but they do! Some are adjacent to car parks, air-con exhausts for radar stations, electricity sub stations the list goes on and on.
Perhaps the most damning site of all was the 2019 “record” site of the Botanic Gardens in Cambridge. This site was taken out of the Central England Temperature series as it was found to be inaccurate due to Urban Heat Island effect……in 1931!Who removed it? Well the Met Office themselves of course.
You really could not make it up.
Click to access Parker_etalIJOC1992_dailyCET.pdf
“a complete nonsense.” You are too kind. It is an untruth, a falsehood, a lie.
But no worries; someone expects it’ll advance his career.
Ray is a bit slow on the uptake!
Not quite sure what you mean.
Seeing Anthony Watt’s comments on USA station locations and the various comment on UK sites, it is surely imperative that the quality of stations used for climate assessments are Class 1. The inadequate allowances for UHI on all sites are clearly a major source of error and misdirection.
Depends on your motives. Trying to do the best you can or obeying orders from the UN and World Empire of Fascists.
Is there a time sequence for the ‘record’?
In recent times the Met Office started changing recording systems from those requiring chemical expansion for measurement (basically a Six Thermoneter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six%27s_thermometer) to those working by measuring electrical resistance relative to temperature. The latter are much more rapidly responsive. So whilst an old thermometerwould not record a short term heat pulse, the modern variants will. This basically translates to a modern system will record a Typhoon Jet exhaust whilst an old one would not.
And as Jennifer Marohasy has found in Australia that these electronic measuring devices are susceptible to electronic noise such as radar systems and radio communications given that it seems that they are not tested for this.
On the BBC weather forecast this evening, it was claimed that an all-time record for the number of days above a certain temperature was about to be broken and that this was a sign of global warming. You can guess that the site is ideal for breaking records – yes of course, it was Heathrow. The BBC weather forecasters have no shame.
Oh you must mean this perfectly natural, highly representative site!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/51°28'45.0“N+0°27’02.0″W/@51.4791667,-0.4531359,424m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d51.4791667!4d-0.4505556?entry=ttu
Then again at least they were honest enough to name it “Heathrow” – you should see what they call “Charlwood”.
Don’t tell me Ray. As Charlwood is very close to Gatwick, let me guess that the site is within the Gatwick perimeter.
And from the aerial view, it looks like it’s nicely positioned for a blast of jet exhaust on the turn – see tyre marks.
Indeed —and far closer than the main runway (see Google Maps), taxiing at this point and laying a nice warm blanket over the station as it turns…
I think those marks are from vehicles (e.g. tow trucks) rather than aircraft, as the track towards the runway is narrow. But they do suggest that the tarmac gets hot enough to melt their tyres. All it takes is a mild southerly breeze to waft the jet exhaust from the taxiway. It’s wide enough for a jet to do a wiggle as it passes, designed to bathe the station in a hot blast. Must be a very tempting prank.
According to CountryFile weather, Coningsby was the hottest place again today 32.2C – this is the second time the hottest temperature of the day (of the year so far too I think) has been spot on 90F, what are the odds? The last one was Porthmadog, also featuring on NALOPKT as suspect junk site!
Weatherman also added random cherry picks, Somewhere in Scotland has smashed the number of June days over 25C, Heathrow is currently just 1 day off the record number of June 25C days (for England?) reached in 1976.
So I wonder what caused the record in 1976?
It would be true to say 1976 was an outlier in its time, recent years since the 1990s have had many very similar exceptional summer months that have challenged/matched 1976 in some ways – depending how you gauge them exactly. I’d make no claim for the reasons why, but those are the facts.
1976 remains without parallel if you are not fixed to calendar months. The hottest heatwave of that year straddled the latter part of June and early July. There were 16 consecutive days of maxima over 32.2C/ 90F. We haven’t come close to that since.
And if you picked days over 36C, 1976 loses hand down. See how silly it is?
Regarding 1976, it is almost impossible to evaluate how it ranked with subsequent years when using current met office data. For example the 2003 record was “allegedly” set at Brogdale, Faversham (it was well known locally to be a bogus figure) but how did that compare with the temperature there in 1976?
Well given the station was only installed in 1999 there is no way to make a comparison. That same day in 2003 the record broke another record set at Gravesend (actually Broadness, Dartford) but that station was only installed in 1997, was co-located with the air-con exhaust of the Thames Radar Station, and actually dismantled in 2018. Apparantly nobody told the Met Office as they still include it (and other non existent sites) on the website list of climatic stations.
Consider this though, an organisation considered the Met Office 2003 recording as so dubious they mounted an investigation. Which heretics would dare challenge the accuracy of the UK Meteorological Office?….The Royal Meteorolgical Society!
https://tinyurl.com/RMETS-Report
I totally agree Ray, but people need to stop pretending 1976 is completely unparalleled, when summer’s that would have been similarly memorably in the 1970s are now fairly routine.
Ray, you’ll know you’re winning when the BBC do a program on the threats/abuse MO climate experts have to endure.
As well as the poor siting, it has geographical features that combine to produce temperature highs:
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/welsh-town-thats-hottest-place-27054998
“Despite being a coastal town, where temperatures are typically lower, Porthmadog’s geography is the reason for the consistently high temperatures and its own microclimate. Met Office meteorologist Mark Wilson says: “When the wind comes from the north east Porthmadog gets a lot of shelter. Although it’s by the coast it’s not really getting a lot of breeze off the sea meaning the temperatures keep rising and rising.”
For anyone interested, I have sent a detailed report to the Met Office querying a large number of their recording sites (over 25 initially with far more to come) . It is far too long to post here but basically I have queried sites by runways, in Walled Gardens, by car parks, in sites with known waste heat sources, in areas known to be “tampered” with, in plain wrong sites and those deliberately moved to enhance records amongst others. I am awaiting their response following their first stage fob off.
Here is just one example of what the Met Office feels is acceptable – YCMIU!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/53°48'40.0“N+1°52’00.0″W/@53.8103699,-1.8669725,402m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d53.8111111!4d-1.8666667?entry=ttu
Yes, the Met Office really do think that a large Electricity sub station with all the hum and waste heat it generates is worthy of a modern recently installed site! IIRC, CatWeazle666 has photographed this site (amongst others) for analysis as well.
Ray, I covered this a year ago.
Hi Jit thanks for the heads up. I am in the process of directly taking the Met Office “on”. I have challenged them to justify sites and their rather dodgy recording regime.
Here is my personal view and “Modus Operandi”. If I start querying the AGW theory then that (obviously) makes me a “Denier” and they dismiss me as a nut job/conspiracy theorist. But if I query the data accuracy relative to exact stated standards and they cannot justify their regime, then I am simply after accuracy for its own sake. If I identify their data as essentially bollocks (it clearly is) then THEY have aproblem and cannot deride me. Let’s see how they respond because my next step is to take it to their lords and masters….okay that’sGrant whatisname but nevertheless!
p.s. I am considering moving into politics in my retirement as I have completely lost the last vestige of faith I ever had in the mainstream parties.
Great work Ray. I look forward to seeing the Met Office squirming and good luck with any future career in politics. We could certainly do with some honesty and integrity in that profession.
I’ll look out for you locally, I’m on strike from voting Lib/Lab/Con at the moment.
I’m reduced to voting for the spoilt paper party at national elections. Not voting at all is not an option for me
At this very moment, MET will be hunkered down, peevishly muttering “Standards, accuracy, facts, – We don’t need no stinkin’ standards, accuracy and facts! We FEEL that we approach a Climate Apocalypse- and that’s just what Grant Shits pays us for!”
Nigel, Ben, ReformUK are skeptical of the need for Net Zero policies. I’m considering them.
Hi Ray, Can you send me your information on these temperature measuring sites. I have some contacts in parliament and I will try to persuade them to get this investigated by a parliamentary committee. I think that is the best way to highlight this. You can contact me via email at derektipp@tiscali.co.uk or via my website https://www.climatescience.blogspot.com I make no promises, but will do my best
When are you going MAINSTREAM with this incredible information?
Ray, I did a comparison of a sample of UK sites, comparing average annual temperatures of these sites to those from Oxford. I used the anomaly for the graphs over time to show any trends in UHI over time.
The Oxford site is in a walled garden, so would probably not fit the best category and is also sited near to the centre of the city. But is has advantages in that the data are easily accessible, and are unadjusted. They also go back to the beginning of the 18th century. The city around the site has not changed over time, and the urbanisation is some distance away. So any increase in UHI would be slight.
I still have the data and graphs available, if they are of interest I can let you have access.
Hi Paul, thanks for your offer of assistance.
however, if you are referring to the Botanic Gardens site in Cambridge, it was actually removed from the CET in 1931 due to known UHI.
Click to access Parker_etalIJOC1992_dailyCET.pdf
The site has got notably worse since with major constuction works of new buildings (Sainsbury Laboratory) with multiple air con exhausts.
I have challenged the Met Office to defend using such a site which they themselves (effectively) ruled out on grounds of inaccuracy.
Regarding the RAF sites (those are Paul’s words above not mine) they are indeed nearly all by taxiways not runways and I have made that point in my report to the met office. Ironically though, being by the taxiway is possibly even worse as the aircraft are moving slower and any exhaust effect may last longer.
When I say Oxford, I do not mean Cambridge.
One other thing to consider for airport higher temperatures is that the areas adjacent to the runways and taxiways are short cut grass.
The area is also well drained, and in dry conditions the ground surface temperature will not be much different to that of the tarmac. I would call that untypical of local terrain. In the daytime and sunny conditions in summer like sand on the beach. Try using an I/R gun around your property and you will be surprised at the difference between surfaces.
Sorry Paul – I must learn to read better!!! Got too fixated on my own investigations to properly consider what you wrote. Thanks for the polite correction and points taken!
Who cares? We’re doomed!
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk-weather-heatwave-five-more-hottest-day-year/
Hello Ray. Being somewhat pedantic, it is not the runway, which is over 200m to the south of the observation point. It is a taxiway which enables the acft to get to the NE end of the runway for take-off in a SW direction. But your point is entirely correct, because acft going along the taxiway at 10-20mph will still produce enough hot air to affect the readings significantly.
It’s Monday morning and the BBC weatherman (woman) is still quoting Coningsby as if it were a perfect weather station (which it is for their propaganda purposes).
As I’ve said before here, I was in the local Coningsby area on the day in question and my car reading got to 41C in the late afternoon, but mainly 40C. So I doubt we’re talking massive errors in this case.
I would slightly disagree on that point. The 1911 heatwave recorded the then highest UK record simultaneously at Raunds, Northants and Canterbury, Kent. The latter being close to where I live. Neither sites now have official stations.
In the days prior to both the 2019 and 2022 alleged records the Met Office were predicting almost exactly where the records would be set – rather suspicious. It is notable that the record sites do not have regular public access and therefore close scutiny.
In my case here near Canterbury, my recording systems (consisting of car sensors, Six thermometer and rather aged thermocouple) regularly exceed the met office stated figure, but despite the latter two being well positioned I really cannot claim they are representative of anything other than my back garden and driveway.
Was that after you’d been driving for half an hour or so? In my experience it takes a while for the temperature to stabilise after being parked in the sun. I always assume that being placed somewhere inside a large metal box with unknown airflow and calibration the readings will be a bit on the high side
Yes, I was on the road soon after 5pm (time of pic below is 5:37). But what I’m trying to say is that focussing on certain temperature readings isn’t likely to change anything. It felt distinctly hotter than any previous day in England as far as I’m concerned, and same for the people I was with that day!
The issue is surely that you are comparing a somewhat poorly sited instrument (your car sensor) registering on an artificial environment (the road) with a poorly sited instrument by an aifield. Hardly surprising they do not differ. I regularly go to race tracks (mostly Brands Hatch) and the track side temperature is always significantly higher than the surrounding countryside but that does not make it representative.
My rear garden is on a south facing gentle slope in what was originally a walled garden to the local manor house and is surrounded by many hectares of vinyards. I have regularly recorded over 40 even in the shade but these temepratures only record a deliberately artificial location.
I understand what you’re saying. However I’d owned the car for about 3 years at the time, and never seen a temperature anywhere near that before. I don’t recall any hotter days in the UK and I do remember 1976.
If I remember correctly, the four highest recorded ‘temperatures’ on the Tuesday of the two day heatwave last July were the airfields at Coningsby, Heathrow, Northolt and Hawarden (Chester). I had to drive from Ramsgate to Wimbledon twice on the Monday and yes it was hot for a northerner, but both days were very pleasant. I also remember the delights of 1976, back in the days before ‘records began’
The Hawarden site really is a gem. The site was actually relocated between 2015/2017 to move it closer to the taxiway link directly to the runway!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/53°10'29.0“N+2°59’15.0″W/@53.1754283,-2.986578,49m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d53.1747222!4d-2.9875?entry=ttu
That this is considered a record site is straight fraud.
Isn’t it amazing how opinions can differ…
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2022/record-high-temperatures-verified
Opening words…
The UK’s new record-high temperature of 40.3°C at Coningsby, Lincolnshire, has been confirmed by the Met Office, following a rigorous process of analysis and quality control.
The confirmation comes as quality control testing, including physical inspections, cross-checking of stations and sites and further testing of equipment was carried out on a number of sites where records were provisionally broken. These quality control measures are in accordance with the internationally-agreed World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) standards, which are required to be accepted as official records.
Yes I am challenging that as well. Amusingly they compared the Coningsby data to the nearby Cranwell data. Isn’t it rather odd that they conveniently omit the prefix “RAF”. Here is Cranwell smack bang next to a sewage settlement tank (typical of the area???) and of course the odd fighter jet, taxiway, runway buildings etc.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/raf+cranwell/@53.0312892,-0.5038127,98m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu
Why would the Ministry of Truth need a weather station, at Coningsby or anywhere else?
They will tell you what the record is. You can doubt it. For now.
‘This clearly means that the so-called record of 40.3C should not have been accepted by the Met Office.’
Exact same thing happened with the allegedly new South Carolina state record in 2012, from a CRN Class 3 (at best) station. It was crystal clear that the giddy participants in the certification WANTED a record. It’s not science; it’s politics. There is no greater accomplishment for a climate warrior than establishing a new record high temperature.
Is Julian Flood picking up on this issue? A former Vulcan Bomber Captain could offer some good insight into RAF sites and weather conditions.
Ray, I get the distinct impression that the BBC is taking the mickey of you as, just now on R4’s weather forecast prior to WATO they quoted Coningsby again with a high temp. They do like to rub our noses in it!
To quote my old accounting boss, “It may be wrong, but it’s official.”
The authorities lie about everything now and don’t care that some people know as the vast majority just swallow the story dictated to them by the MSM.
Oh dear; just when 3 Squadron’s finest have been putting in some practice to set a new record for this summer…
‘3sqn “Nightmare” Performance takeoff – 2 3SQN RAF Eurofighter Typhoons’:
Thankyou for that. Noticed the weather station being blasted as the aircraft taxiid by.
You may find this of interest, if not seen already…
‘Exclusive: Three Typhoon Jets Landed Next to Thermometer When Britain’s ‘Record’ Temperature of 40.3°C Was Recorded’ [28th. June 2023]:
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/06/28/exclusive-three-typhoon-jets-landed-next-to-measuring-device-when-britains-record-temperature-of-40-3c-was-recorded/
I wonder whatever became of the old ‘Air Ministry roof’?
” It only qualifies as a poor quality Class 3 site, which the WMO say may overstate temperatures by 1C. ”
Therefore no upper limit to the possible overstatement of temperature. If the maximum overstatement is 1C then the words should read:
” It only qualifies as a poor quality Class 3 site, which the WMO say may overstate temperatures by a maximum of 1C. “
Agreed. The potential for overstatement is several degrees. Concrete pads and runways and jet blast don’t just raise the temperature 1 degree.
The smoking jet exhausts
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/06/28/exclusive-three-typhoon-jets-landed-next-to-measuring-device-when-britains-record-temperature-of-40-3c-was-recorded/
It is worth noting as well that both last year and this year the spikes at Coningsby were during periods with a strong wind out of the south, i.e., directlt off the hot runway onto the weather station.