Windchill measurements

[Brad]

As an alternative, could MWO post their 15-min readings online in a csv (or similar) format? Then those of us who want to calculate wind chills on a somewhat real-time basis could do so if we wished. Also, that way it wouldn't look like MWO was espousing wind chill in any way.

This is one reason I archive the Conditions image every 15 minutes (when it works - wishing it would work better). Then at least we can go back and see what those readings were.

[treant985]

Although the windchill equation holds together at windspeeds of 50-100mph I'd seriously argue its accuracy. Quite often, MWO puts out some incredibly low windchill readings. -70F to -100F. But, do you honestly think a 100mph wind makes it feel any colder than a 50mph wind? I sure don't. 50mph winds easily and thoroughly get the job done.

I almost forgot....

Windchill sucks, dewpoint rules!

I agree that wind chill isn't as meaningful at the most extreme values, where the research used to determine its formula wasn't as exact. Based on what I've read, the 'new' wind chill formula was based on studies about how much heat a 5ft human body loses at certain temps/wind speeds, but I doubt they bothered to do much research on what those values are at -40F and an 80mph wind.

However, I do think there are other categories on an F6 that are--at most--as meteorologically useful or interesting as wind chill values...cooling/heating degree days, I'm looking at you!

While we're on the topic, does anyone know why the noaa still recommends that automated stations report the average temp for a day to be the average of min/max? Seems like that value would be essentially useless if you've got 24 readings (at 1-hour intervals) that could be averaged instead...

[Brad]

While we're on the topic, does anyone know why the noaa still recommends that automated stations report the average temp for a day to be the average of min/max? Seems like that value would be essentially useless if you've got 24 readings (at 1-hour intervals) that could be averaged instead...

I agree with you on this question. The result is not a very meaningful number. When I was creating the F-6 form in Excel I was surprised at that math.

[Bill O]

While we're on the topic, does anyone know why the noaa still recommends that automated stations report the average temp for a day to be the average of min/max? Seems like that value would be essentially useless if you've got 24 readings (at 1-hour intervals) that could be averaged instead...

Consistency. Not that it is the right way to do it, but its the consistent way to measure average temperature. I'm not sure how it would affect soccer moms, but it doesn't seem like the best idea to have automated stations integrating temperature over 24 hours while volunteer observers in Chad are doing high+low divided by 2.