#NameOurStorms: is it a good idea?

[Thunderbolt_]

We've already seen three named storms of the so-called "2015-16 UK and Ireland windstorm season", that was trialled this year by the Met Office and the Met Eireann. With some more to come over the next few weeks and months, we can look forward top some more named storms.

 

So what are your thoughts on it so far? Has it been a nice addition, or have you generally considered it to be rather pointless? Should we keep using it from here-on in?

 

I personally think we should keep it. It kind of makes them seem a bit more exciting when we give them a name, and adds a new talking point to the weather.

[Nick L]

I didn't like the idea initially but I'm warming to it now. Makes it easier to refer to past storms when they're named, rather than the [insert date here] storm.

[alexisj9]

I didn't like the idea initially but I'm warming to it now. Makes it easier to refer to past storms when they're named, rather than the [insert date here] storm.

Agree nick. 

[DisruptiveGust]

I personally think we should keep it. It kind of makes them seem a bit more exciting when we give them a name, and adds a new talking point to the weather.

 

 

I didn't like the idea initially but I'm warming to it now. Makes it easier to refer to past storms when they're named, rather than the [insert date here] storm.

 

Agree, I do like the named storms idea, it's more exciting and makes for a good discussion, I also think it helps raise awareness and as Nick says it's much easier to make reference to a storm with a name. Windstorms do get named when they affect Europe and some of the UK's historic windstorms actually have names given by other European Met agencies, but all we have is a date named storm, not any more

[Mark Neal.]

Not too bothered tbh, but starting to warm to it. The public however are thinking these Low pressure systems are much more severe now named and ex hurricanes keep getting mentioned!

[AdamStorm7891]

Well when we finally get a proper storm and not just Gales then it'll definitely make the most of it's purpose. Something comparable to the October storms in 2000 and 2002 and of course 1987 we could almost warrant the title Super Storm ........ << followed by the name!

[MP-R]

Nice idea and a bit of fun but there have been a few storms with comparable gusts to today with no name given which has already got it off on the wrong foot. Equally, I'll always be more interested in finding out 'when' the storm was rather than what it was called. 

[DisruptiveGust]

Is that an IMBY perspective? Today's storm has been arguably the strongest storm of the season so far, with gusts comparable to quite a strong winter storm, gusts around some coasts were into to mid 70's mph and even well inland across the north gusts were around 60-70mph and up to 80mph in Manchester for a short time, that's quite unusual and obviously caused some chaos... And a few weather stations in North Wales recorded gusts between 85-95mph for a 2 hour period. 

Edited November 29, 2015 by *Sub*Zero*

[William Grimsley]

I quite like it, it makes people more aware that there is the potential of severe weather on the way. I also like it because I'm very for Americanism and support Americanism in the UK so I really like this new introduction. It makes storms better than they already are!

Edited November 29, 2015 by William Grimsley

[matty40s]

I quite like it, it makes people more aware that there is the potential of severe weather on the way. I also like it because I'm very for Americanism and support Americanism in the UK so I really like this new introduction. It makes storms better than they already are!

completely off topic, if you like americanism, Go off over there, it's consumerist rubbish.

 

back on topic, it is a good idea, and may be a way of heightening the general publics awareness of a major storm, but unfortunately, our Mirror/Express and Mails over sensationalising of any rustle of leaves in the New Forest as a major catastrophe and a drop of sleet as worst snowstorm in 100 years probably outweighs the effectiveness with the cry wolf syndrome.

Edited November 29, 2015 by *Sub*Zero*
Removed attempted swear words

[DiagonalRedLine]

Agree with some of the above responses. I think it's an amusing idea and it sounds cool giving storms various names. However, do feel Mark N raises a point about how giving all these storms names can make them seem as though they're really intense, despite the fact some of these storms may not produce particularly strong gusts of wind or do much mayhem. As a result, reckon only the Low Pressure systems that have the capability to produce disruptive wind speeds (say around 50 to 60mph or above) should be given names.

Examples of possible random personal names to give to some of the future monstrous storms such as: Jaws, Bruce, Nuclear Cyclone, CBOT (Cyclonic Ball Of Terror), Twirlywhirly, Thrust, Lady Gagale (pronounced as Lady Gar-gale), and Le Farty.

[alexisj9]

Agree with some of the above responses. I think it's an amusing idea and it sounds cool giving storms various names. However, do feel Mark N raises a point about how giving all these storms names can make them seem as though they're really intense, despite the fact some of these storms may not produce particularly strong gusts of wind or do much mayhem. As a result, reckon only the Low Pressure systems that have the capability to produce disruptive wind speeds (say around 50 to 60mph or above) should be given names.

Examples of possible random personal names to give to some of the future monstrous storms such as: Jaws, Bruce, Nuclear Cyclone, CBOT (Cyclonic Ball Of Terror), Twirlywhirly, Thrust, Lady Gagale (pronounced as Lady Gar-gale), and Le Farty.

lol, those are some good names. I think where you say only naming storms that they think will cause disruption is the idea, and I think all three named storms have done so, so far, todays dropped some trees on train lines for instance. 

[MP-R]

Is that an IMBY perspective? Today's storm has been arguably the strongest storm of the season so far, with gusts comparable to quite a strong winter storm, gusts around some coasts were into to mid 70's mph and even well inland across the north gusts were around 60-70mph and up to 80mph in Manchester for a short time, that's quite unusual and obviously caused some chaos... And a few weather stations in North Wales recorded gusts between 85-95mph for a 2 hour period. 

 

I think Barney affected more southern regions more than northern regions? Barney brought gusts between 70 and 80mph here; the nearest highest official gust was at Avonmouth at 75mph. The following day also brought a gust of 70mph from what I'll call 'Barney's twin'. Today, although very squally at times, didn't top 60mph.

 

On a side note, not that I would advocate watching I'm A Celebrity... I think they were missing a trick not calling this storm 'Lady C' - from what I've seen she is a walking hurricane!

[Weather-history]

Here is where I have an issue. The centre of the low that was named Desmond came nowhere near the UK. It tracked near Iceland.

For me, it's not the classic vicious low that tracks just to the north or across the UK such as with the Burns Day and October 87 storms.

It was a tight pressure gradient and a stationary front that have caused this. 

[alexisj9]

2 hours ago, Weather-history said:

Here is where I have an issue. The centre of the low that was named Desmond came nowhere near the UK. It tracked near Iceland.

For me, it's not the classic vicious low that tracks just to the north or across the UK such as with the Burns Day and October 87 storms.

It was a tight pressure gradient and a stationary front that have caused this. 

True, but that tight pressure gradient and stalled front were both associated with that storm, so the question really is where do you draw the line. 

[Weather-history]

15 minutes ago, alexisj9 said:

True, but that tight pressure gradient and stalled front were both associated with that storm, so the question really is where do you draw the line. 

The other flaw in this system was exposed this year. Abigail was followed by Kate, ex hurricane reminants. 

Hurricane reminants that effect the British Isles have always be named after the hurricane itself. Charley, Debbie, Flossie etc. Get a couple of these next Autumn, that will really screw up the naming system.

[Weather-history]

It's absolutely garbage this system.

You have ex hurricanes that will screw this system up, the flooding in Cumbria was seen by the media as storm Desmond when infact it was a quasi stationary system that was the cause of the problem. 

The worst weather event is the season thus far, the northern England flooding was also a quasi stationary front but this was not named or it's parent low. 

If the Met Office's purpose is to make people more aware of weather related problems then they should have named the last system. 

 

 

[four seasons in one day]

In answer to the question, not entirely fussed.

But I am also warming to another idea or if we equally started to name big fat areas of high pressure that sit around for a few weeks, hardly budging, providing decent warm and of course tonnes of sunshine. Any thoughts on that one 

[BornFromTheVoid]

I think it's working well. I've noticed a lot more people discussing potential storms around here now that they're named. 

Of course, there will be some aspects people don't like, some technicality they don't agree with and so on. Despite that, if the naming system increases awareness and preparation, then it's doing it's job IMO. From my own experience so far it seems to be working.

[Weather-history]

4 minutes ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

I think it's working well. I've noticed a lot more people discussing potential storms around here now that they're named. 

Of course, there will be some aspects people don't like, some technicality they don't agree with and so on. Despite that, if the naming system increases awareness and preparation, then it's doing it's job IMO. From my own experience so far it seems to be working.

Derrick Ryall, Head of the Public Weather Service at the Met Office, said: "The aim of this pilot is to provide a single authoritative naming system for the storms that affect UK and Ireland. 

"We have seen how naming storms elsewhere in the world raises awareness of severe weather before it strikes. We hope that naming storms in line with the official severe weather warnings here will do the same and ensure everyone can keep themselves, their property and businesses safe and protected at times of severe weather."

So why wasn't the Boxing Day system not named going off the above? It would be ironic if the weather event of the winter, the one that caused the greatest damage and impact was infact unnamed. 

 

Edited December 28, 2015 by Weather-history

[BornFromTheVoid]

1 minute ago, Weather-history said:

Derrick Ryall, Head of the Public Weather Service at the Met Office, said: "The aim of this pilot is to provide a single authoritative naming system for the storms that affect UK and Ireland. 

"We have seen how naming storms elsewhere in the world raises awareness of severe weather before it strikes. We hope that naming storms in line with the official severe weather warnings here will do the same and ensure everyone can keep themselves, their property and businesses safe and protected at times of severe weather."

So why wasn't the Boxing Day system not named?  It would be ironic if the weather event of the winter, the one that caused the greatest damage and impact was infact unnamed. 

 

I can only assume it didn't warrant an amber wind warning, which is the level required for the naming system to be applied (in Ireland at least).

[Ed Stone]

21 minutes ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

I think it's working well. I've noticed a lot more people discussing potential storms around here now that they're named. 

Of course, there will be some aspects people don't like, some technicality they don't agree with and so on. Despite that, if the naming system increases awareness and preparation, then it's doing it's job IMO. From my own experience so far it seems to be working.

I agree, Sam - and I was very sceptical to begin with.

[I remember Atlantic 252]

On 11/29/2015 at 8:21 PM, Nick L said:

I didn't like the idea initially but I'm warming to it now. Makes it easier to refer to past storms when they're named, rather than the [insert date here] storm.

what makes some named and others not?, cos Wed 9th March affected many areas with gales and flooding, affected here more than all named storms, as did 17th Feb

[March]

It's a good thing that needs a bit of refining. I have also noticed that more people are talking about weather events as a result. Ultimately if it makes even a few people each season drive with more awareness or put off a trip that wasn't needed and a few injuries or even lives are saved as a result then it's working. It's not like it's costing us huge amounts. 

[Nick L]

On 11/03/2016 at 8:50 PM, I remember Atlantic 252 said:

what makes some named and others not?, cos Wed 9th March affected many areas with gales and flooding, affected here more than all named storms, as did 17th Feb

No idea, you'd have to ask the Met Office. I agree there does seem to be a lack of consistency regarding what is deemed "nameworthy".