« Previous | Main | Next »

The new weather forecast.

Post categories:

Eddie Mair | 16:00 UK time, Monday, 12 October 2009


Once you've heard it, click on Comments on the right, just above the map, to let us know what you think. We're testing the new-style weather for two weeks and your opinion will help shape what happens to it.

If you want to read more about why we're doing this, click here.

If you're looking at the map and thinking - "I'm on the line between two areas!" - click here, where you'll find a handy list showing where you are exactly.

The controller of Radio 4 writes about the changes here.


  • 1. At 5:18pm on 12 Oct 2009, Septic wrote:

    Typical.... No Isle of Man

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 5:20pm on 12 Oct 2009, Septic wrote:

    Sorry - just looked at the enlarged one and it's just about visible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 5:28pm on 12 Oct 2009, fgtrdyiio wrote:

    Does it follow county borders if not why are the "borders " jagged and not straight like the shipping forecast map?

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 5:35pm on 12 Oct 2009, cha0tic wrote:

    Seems like a good idea to me. I've had a printout of the shipping forecast areas on the kitchen cupboard for years so I know where they're talking about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 5:42pm on 12 Oct 2009, crunchycrispanddry wrote:

    I can understand some people "switching their minds off" if a report, such as the weather, is not that relevant to them or they don't understand.
    May be changing the forecast will help people engage and understand it better, but please don't trivialize it! Just imagine if the travel news had horns and motors in the background! For that matter the same could apply to any news bulletin.

    I get the general impression that few people find that weather matters all that to their everyday life. To me it is very important possibly more important to travel news (which can be influenced by the weather conditions). The weather conditions for a day or week can change my schedule - it is vital!

    It would appear many people are not very aware of weather conditions, where our weather is coming from and how that may influence our weather in the next few days.

    How many people don't understand isobars, weather fronts or the influence the direction of the wind can have on what weather we may be getting?

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 5:48pm on 12 Oct 2009, ValeryP wrote:

    Fortunately I'm bang in the middle of a segment, but I clicked on the "handy list" anyway, and found a typo ;o)

    Clackmannanshire, not Clackmannenshire. Thanks.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 5:50pm on 12 Oct 2009, Septic wrote:

    Do people still believe that 'back to square one' rubbish?

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 5:53pm on 12 Oct 2009, Mike Souter wrote:

    I am amused that Peter Gibbs uses his Sunday name these days; when he was on my programme in his Norwich days, we knew him as Pete! Anyway, my view is that the British weather is just too localised to have the whole of a region lumped into one. As Pete! will agree, such is the lot of an island.

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 5:53pm on 12 Oct 2009, SproutGhost wrote:

    ValeryP, are you down to your bottom Dollar?



    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 5:53pm on 12 Oct 2009, Helena-Handbasket wrote:

    Five minutes to go!

    Hurry uuuuuppppppp!


    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 5:54pm on 12 Oct 2009, SuperFritter wrote:

    It makes sense! It is much easier to maintain attention when your region comes at the same point in each broadcast. I would disagree with your contributor's suggestion that "a big storm in Scotland would obviously change the order" - people can surely wait 20 seconds if it means they'll not be caught unawares.

    New Zealand's National Radio has been doing this for years and it works perfectly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 5:54pm on 12 Oct 2009, needsanewnickname wrote:

    Valery - you're fab

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 5:59pm on 12 Oct 2009, crunchycrispanddry wrote:

    It was fairly good. With a overview then regional breakdown - not bad.
    Better than I feared it could be.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 5:59pm on 12 Oct 2009, SproutGhost wrote:

    SE dry, highs in London.
    SW fog clearing
    Wales & Mids chilli start.
    E & NE bright sunny spells.
    NW, it's grim up north.

    Very good!

    Clear and concise.


    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 6:00pm on 12 Oct 2009, Anne P. wrote:

    That's much more like it - clear concise and I know just where I am!

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 6:00pm on 12 Oct 2009, harryrjh wrote:

    Spot-on - clear and consistent

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 6:01pm on 12 Oct 2009, Hawk wrote:

    I'm sorry, but I couldn't tell anything different. Just the same drull blah, blah, blah. I was so looking forward to something more vibrant that would make me sit up and listen. It was only minutes ago that it finished and I still can't tell you what the weather will be like tomorrow.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 6:01pm on 12 Oct 2009, Helena-Handbasket wrote:

    Great weather!
    Love the almost-shouty area-change announcements.
    Well done everyone!

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 6:01pm on 12 Oct 2009, T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:

    why start with the south east when the south west is further south than the south east. Also south west is the EU region. The south west is the westcountry which is just devon and cornwall.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 6:01pm on 12 Oct 2009, David wrote:

    First hearing was a positive experience, lets see how it progresses.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 6:01pm on 12 Oct 2009, florencefirst wrote:

    Yep, I liked it, nice and clear. Not so poetic/mesmeric as the Shipping Forecast, but that is fine. Good for all concerned for listening and trying to make it all more accessible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 6:02pm on 12 Oct 2009, cherrytree wrote:

    Excellent! Thank you very much. I knew exactly where I was and now I know the order I shall be even better attuned tomorrow. Is there a chance that your colleagues on "Today" can take up this format instead of the gabbled hasty muddle that precedes the 7 and 8 o'clock news?

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 6:02pm on 12 Oct 2009, franquinn wrote:

    Much better than the old style. You can listen to your bit and then ignore the rest. And I like that you did a brief summary of tonight (not of interest to too many people by this time), and kept it separate from tomorrow's weather, which is what most of us are interested in.

    Personally I still don't see the need to mention severe weather upfront, unless it's an actual hurricane or similar. The weather is a forecast, not a news report, so I don't need to know what's happening elsewhere. If it's that extreme, it'll be on the news anyway.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, Penny Bun wrote:

    I live in Flintshire - I think it is missing entirely from the correct list!

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, Elizabeth Alway wrote:

    Yes, I liked it!

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, Martin Smith wrote:

    I like the approach - name the area, then give the forecast for that area, in a logical order.

    Unfortunately, the first item in the first forecast failed to do that!

    It said something like "In the whole country, raining in Scotland overnight, elsewhere clear".

    It ought, to be clear have said:

    "Scotland, rain overnight"
    "Everywhere except Scotland, clear overnight"

    I'm not being pedantic - if this is to work it has to be strictly kept to naming an area, giving a forecast for that (or those) areas, then naming the next area. The shipping forecast is a great model.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, ValeryP wrote:

    Excellent, and so well enunciated too! Sounded like he was trying really hard to impress ;-)

    Seriously, yes, it worked for me, I listened to it all, didn't drift off, heard my bit, everything. Terrific. The weather sounded quite nice for here tomorrow too, which was a bonus.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, warriorrichardblog wrote:

    excellent weather forecast tonight-real improvement, long may it continue.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 6:03pm on 12 Oct 2009, jlkingswood wrote:

    I liked it. Listened until they got to the midlands - focussed on what I wanted to hear, then tuned out again for the rest of it. great.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, weatherforecastfan wrote:

    Thank you for giving such thought to the new-sound weather forecast. I think that having a map and a pattern for delivery will help to focus people's attention, though an interesting voice and bags of inflection helps too. Sometimes the forecast seems rushed and far too brief, squashed between an interview and the news. In the olden days we had the 'general forecast' followed by the 'regional forecast' and the whole thing appeared to last a delicious amount of time!

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, euronerd wrote:

    Great improvement. Just adding to the numbers if anybody's counting

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, Culverton wrote:

    It is still a dumbed down forecast. Where is the windspeed and direction?
    Apart from no mention of wind, the forecast for tomorrow is reasonable, but the forecast for this evening is too general and does not give minimum temperature.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, BarcodeUK wrote:

    Great stuff, I like it but could you please start in Scotland and work down the country in the same way that you broadcast traffic reports.

    I live in the middle so weather either way works for me but it would be nice if the BBC could be consistent.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, valdownes wrote:

    I much preferred the 'shipping forecast' style

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, alphabigrob wrote:

    Excellent, but the clear, moderated enunciation was the key. Can the other forecasters manage this delivery?

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, Dapperchap wrote:

    Yes, nice and clear and precise, but is it another nail in the Counties' coffin? Your list of English counties doesn't include poor ol' Middlesex or Rutland. And don't tell me they don't exist, they do!!!!
    But yes, good report.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 6:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, pushpit wrote:

    Specific area forecasts are clear to listen to; a preferred format for me.
    (Could any wind information be added? Eg, light/medium/strong?)
    At any rate, specific and concise - please keep!

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, francismh wrote:

    Brilliant new weather forecast - quite a few "In" s could be axed by just going straight to the region in question

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, poshSaraceno wrote:

    Sorry. What was that? I was on the other line.

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, J Williams wrote:

    I heard my area come up ,I listened, I've still forgotten what he said! Must be my age !!

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, corvedalelad wrote:

    Grteat, clear, concise, easy to follow, just enough information

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, secretFB wrote:

    Finally a weather forecast with logic

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 6:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, Pierremont wrote:

    New weather forecast style - EXCELLENT. No more gimmicks please. Stick to clear sensible presentation aka today's.

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 6:06pm on 12 Oct 2009, Nick_Handley wrote:

    Found it incredibly difficult to tell any difference - sorry!

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 6:07pm on 12 Oct 2009, flyingBillyCutts wrote:

    It's great! I always want to know what the weather's going to be like, but I seem to switch off when the forecast comes on. I now know it's going to be sunny in my area! Or was that wet and windy...? Oh dear.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 6:07pm on 12 Oct 2009, mstones0 wrote:

    That's the way to do it. Much easier to pay attention. If you'd done it years ago I would have spent less of my life getting wet.
    Well Done.
    Mike Stones

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 6:07pm on 12 Oct 2009, tigerauntie wrote:

    OK but no cigar. I didn't really notice any difference - probably because I had tuned out as usual - or perhaps because I was SO irritated by the reader pronouncing "a" as "ay" like an Americal folk singer. Was he entered in a "Speaking Nicely" competition?

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 6:08pm on 12 Oct 2009, elsaudek wrote:

    If you want to improve the radio 4 general weather forecasts start mentioning the wind. Not just "it will be breezy tomorrow" but something like "light Easterly winds are expected in the South West". The strength and direction of the wind is much more significant in planning outdoor activities than detailed temperatures. Who cares if it is 14 or 17 degrees? Yet you spend precious seconds talking about smaller variations in temperature than this and frequently never mention the wind at all. Astonishing!

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 6:08pm on 12 Oct 2009, BeccaJenkins wrote:

    I thought it was clearer, but I think it could be even more clinical and clipped of waffle, more like the shipping forecast. Could you start by reminding me to get a pen and paper so I can write down the details? I really think that's the only way I'm going to remember them!

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 6:08pm on 12 Oct 2009, Truenewsnut wrote:

    My son offered what I thought was a useful refinement to what you propose - that different sections of the forecast are read in an appropriate regional accent. Those of us in Yorkshire might not be able to distinguish between different Scottish accents, but then, we wont need to.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 6:08pm on 12 Oct 2009, heyhomaggie wrote:

    Living in a place where our lives are ruled by the wind strength I was surprised that there was no mention of the wind in the whole forecast in pm. (I must admit that it was a nice change not to have the word "breeze" used to describe a force 8 gale - which is what has happened in the past. Could it not be possible to say wind Force 2 to 3 for example for each area? Or wind speed 25 to 35. (Maximum and minimum for each area. This would warn we people who are very affected by the wind and we could investigate further. This would only take 3 seconds to do. This does not seem unreasonable to me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 6:09pm on 12 Oct 2009, sesamemyth wrote:

    Great weather forecast tonight - clear and easy to follow. Thank you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 6:09pm on 12 Oct 2009, mromalley wrote:

    much clearer than current format

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 6:10pm on 12 Oct 2009, goodgillybee wrote:

    My husband and I listened eagerly whilst looking at the map. We think it seemed very clear and we tested each other to see if we could remember the weather for our region. We passed the test. The trick is to stop listening once you have heard the weather for your region!

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 6:11pm on 12 Oct 2009, tigger6665 wrote:

    I hear the shipping forecast through a dull morning haze, so this will suit me. Life can become but a dream

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 6:12pm on 12 Oct 2009, Chris Ghoti wrote:

    It worked very well as far as I was concerned, after I had recovered from an initial burst of laughter.

    "We will always take it in the same order, starting in the south-east" he said, or words to that effect, "except obviously if there is some really dramatic weather in say Scotland, in which case that would have to be mentioned first."

    So what was the first area he went straight on to mention by name?


    And the dramatic weather there?

    Well, it's been a bit rainy...

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 6:13pm on 12 Oct 2009, cha0tic wrote:

    Bugger! I zoned out as I was turning my bottles of Sloe Gin. I'll just have to check the met office site to find out what the weather is going to do tomorrow.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 6:13pm on 12 Oct 2009, Beantown_Tom wrote:

    Definitely an improvement - but please can all Fahrenheit temperatures be consigned to history?

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 6:13pm on 12 Oct 2009, wildWarmfront wrote:

    Trouble is, all they do these days is just read what the weather's going to be without much reference to why it's happening, that's to say, with little reference to pressure systems, weather fronts etc, and that makes it all less memorable. It's much more logical and meaningful to describe the weather in the direction it's moving. So, if for example, it's coming from the south-west, you should explain that a front, say, is going to move across the country eastwards, and then give the weather for the South West first; and so on.

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 6:14pm on 12 Oct 2009, caluap wrote:

    I think the new format is fantastic. I could follow areas being reported on and remember them all. Most important I can remember the report for my area. Good work.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 6:14pm on 12 Oct 2009, downinlondon wrote:

    Yes I liked it, clearly giving out the names of the regions. Could be made more dramatic though, at least there's room for development.

    As for the whingeing from the Isle of man - what are they doing listening to our weather forecasts anyway? They don't pay a licence fee to the BBC, or any taxes to the UK government for that matter.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 6:14pm on 12 Oct 2009, caluap wrote:

    I presume you check before posting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 6:15pm on 12 Oct 2009, ZuluPapa wrote:

    The New Weather forecast > Good style but spoilt by starting with South East. Rather like ready a book chapter by chapter but starting with the last chapter & finishing with the first. Top to Bottom; left to right, ie North to South, West to East would be better but that wouldn't be London Centric would it BBC ? !

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 6:15pm on 12 Oct 2009, Poverty wrote:

    At last, a weather forecast that delivers the information in a meaningful way. You only have to see the map once and from then on you know where you are. Excellent format too, with the area mentioned before its forecast. I hope this is the format of the future.

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 6:15pm on 12 Oct 2009, MartinC44 wrote:

    The new format worked quite well, but I prefer the narrative style. The identification of the areas on a map is useful and would provides a helful reference even if the narrative style were retained. A big omission is wind strength and direction. This is a very significant element of the weather and should be included in all forecasts. Finally, the BBC needs to allocate an extra minute to the forecast if the new format is to be used.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 6:16pm on 12 Oct 2009, triplechoccookies wrote:

    I thought the weather forecast was very clear and I actually followed it, when previously, when I wanted to hear a forecast and it was introduced, I would then find, 5 mins later that I couldn't remember what it said, thank you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 6:17pm on 12 Oct 2009, EnglishintheBorders wrote:

    I'm sure I'm not alone in living right on the border of 2 new weather regions. In the old-style forecasts we were also often between 2 regions mentioned ('Northern England/ Southern Scotland) and had to guess - or usually wait - to see which one applied to us. However if a particular weather system affects a large area, we can usually tell if it means us. Weather doesn't stick to geographical boundaries so you always have to interpret the info given with your own local knowledge. My overall impression is that the forecast might take longer but give no additional information - most people know where they live in weather terms.
    Still love the shipping forecast though!

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 6:18pm on 12 Oct 2009, justvisitingonce wrote:

    Why on earth did I have to sign on to comment on a weather forecast? Please
    delete my details after reading this.

    Passing note: I had to miss the shipping forecast to listen to this one and
    in the process I discovered the only maritime news item of the day, one that
    might be assumed to be of most interest to those following the shipping
    forecast, was broadcast at the same time; so only landlubbers got to hear

    OK, on to the forecast:

    So far so good.

    I think you will need more granularity in the weather facing areas.
    I suggest:

    Split the far South West peninsula from a Central Southern region.

    Divide Wales N/S.

    Move Cheshire into the midlands section (with the rest of the Welsh mountain weather-shadow.)

    Split Northern Scotland and South-West Scotland into three, or at least
    treat the Islands separately.

    Please preface the forecast with a brief synopsis of the positions & vectors of the main weather systems - NOT a rain prediction.

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 6:18pm on 12 Oct 2009, Deepthought wrote:

    I've just popped in to say Great! - for a change I know what the weather will be tomorrow in my area. I noticed, unlike the shipping forecast, that two areas had the same weather tonight, but then the forecast bifurcated for tomorrows weather - that's fine for me, but perhaps had better be flagged up?

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 6:19pm on 12 Oct 2009, auntMargaret-Anne wrote:

    Enjoyed it.. but rather like 'Dora Explorer'
    You need the map :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 6:20pm on 12 Oct 2009, Pierremont wrote:

    Re comment by Chris_Ghoti. If i remember correctly, he mentioned Scotland first only in the context of what had happened today. The actual forecast for tomorrow started with SE, as he indicated would be the case.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 6:20pm on 12 Oct 2009, U14138029 wrote:

    Yep, I'll settle for that format.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 6:21pm on 12 Oct 2009, Nancybristol wrote:

    I thought tonight's forecast with the map was better than many but the overall problem with forecasts these days is lack of time. Now we're all supposed to be walking, cycling, waiting for buses more, we need forecasts of the length they used to be. Then there'd be time for giving the general situation using the proper terms and if it were to cloud over and start to rain earlier than forecast, it would be understood that, although that front arrived a bit earlier than expected, the overall forecast was right.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 6:21pm on 12 Oct 2009, lostmartinc wrote:

    Seems simple and clear tome. But while you're about it, PLEASE ask the forecaster to stop saying 'morning time' etc (as he did just now). We know that morning is morning and evening is evening - to say 'morning time' sounds patronising, as if talking to little children. PLEASE STOP DOING IT! And you might also remember that a very large number of people know something about meteorology, and can cope with terms such as 'cold front' - which you now tend to call, for no good reason, a 'weather front' - a meaningless term. End of rant.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 6:22pm on 12 Oct 2009, jools888blog wrote:

    The new weather forecast this evening was great! No meandering waffle - hooray.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 6:24pm on 12 Oct 2009, rainFarquhar wrote:

    It's a welcome development, especially when away from home, but probably doesn't offer a more accurate forecast than those available online (from BBC, Met Office, Metcheck, etc.) where you can search by postcode.

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 6:28pm on 12 Oct 2009, PeterTS wrote:

    A chatty narrative is fine for TV, but for radio the new style is much better. With no map visible behind the presenter, it helps to have well defined regions so you know when he is talking about the area you are interested in. Covering the regions in a fixed order means you know when you should be concentrating. Altogether a great improvement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 6:28pm on 12 Oct 2009, Mrs Effingham wrote:

    Eddie - it was alright - but it would be better if Tomasz Schafernaker did it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 6:28pm on 12 Oct 2009, iamrichardcanin wrote:

    This is a huge improvement. I do not recall the Midlands being mentioned previously in a national weather forecast. A pity that the time allowed does not permit information regarding weather fronts and in particular air pressure readings: and whether pressure is rising or falling.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 6:28pm on 12 Oct 2009, cotonhenry wrote:

    For me the new weather forecast failed on the F-word. Why do some weather forecasters feel it necessary to sometimes give some temperatures in Fahrenheit? Can anyone not now know that 16C is 61F?

    It will soon be 50 (Yes fifty) years since we adopted System International (SI aka Metric) for measurements. Perhaps forecasters could standardise and give ALL temperatures in Celsius and Fahrenheit, why not throw in degrees Kelvin for good measure? Then we could have rainfall in inches and millimeters. Wind could be given in MPH and KPH and for completeness add beaufort numbers too.

    You see where this is going. Stop tripping us up with random values from another system. Given that we have adopted SI then STICK TO IT .

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 6:30pm on 12 Oct 2009, colinbawden wrote:

    Where's Central Southern England gone? The weather in Southampton is surely unlikely to be the same as in Dover or northern Bedfordshire. Central Southern has always been used in the past - please can we have it back?

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 6:31pm on 12 Oct 2009, Thehonestman wrote:

    The forecast changes werent radical enough. They are still rubbish. I live 20 miles from John O Groats and still have no idea if the weather is going to improve tomorrow (drier) or gets worse (continued rain/wind direction??). NO IDEA. I couldnt give two hoots about the temperature in Birmingham or Aberdeen - they tell nothing anyway - so what if they are 2 degrees different!! Waste of time.
    Why dont you quickly overview the important positions of any highs or low near the UK (ie a "mild" depression off Ireland etc) and any fronts coming in (from the north west etc) and when they might start passing over the country. From this, any educated idiot can work out the sort of weather over the UK (and Orkney and ~ Shetland) for the next 24 hours. And anyway, why start with the south? What wrong with starting from the North? If you did, I could turn off my radio quicker....

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 6:32pm on 12 Oct 2009, urganda1746 wrote:

    Yes. It's better.
    What really annoys me about radio 4 weather forecasts is the patronising tone. Very few of your listeners are primary school children.
    We want the facts with NO feeling.
    Weather isn't good or bad.
    I feel brainwashed after hearing Laura Tobin. She's the worst but all are guilty of playing on the emotions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 6:34pm on 12 Oct 2009, Tobyjugger wrote:

    That was perfect. Please keep it up.

    I would not however agree with the comment in pm tonight that the map on TV is particularly useful, because of the way the camera scans over it. Most of the viewers for most of the time are looking at areas in which they have no interest. If you could see all of the map all of the time (with symbols)then a glance at any time during the broadcast would be convenient for everybody, even if the commentary was missed (which in my case it often is, in much the same way that radio listeners have referred to).

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 6:37pm on 12 Oct 2009, MuddyMeldrew wrote:

    I wouldn't say it was 'great' or 'brilliant' but certainly better. At least there's no risk of an entire area being missed out as has happened recently with certain forecasters who have been too interested in giving out flowery nonsense.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 6:38pm on 12 Oct 2009, robjar wrote:

    Yes, very straightforward, I like the format. I like the summary at the beginning and then the detailed area-by-area forecast. I would be happy for this to be the format of all future radio forecasts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 6:44pm on 12 Oct 2009, bucksfourfan wrote:

    The new weather forecast format is a huge improvement. I always found the shipping forecast easier to take in than the chatty land forecasts.Please adopt it permanently for all weather bulletins.

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 7:00pm on 12 Oct 2009, crunchycrispanddry wrote:

    I agree with Culverton it is still a dumbed down forecast, without a proper look at the whole picture.
    Personal I am happy with how it was.

    Wind speed and direction was missed out! Is it going to be a cold N or a warm wet SW wind.

    Min temperatures? Could there be a ground frost? If so I would consider getting some frost sensitive plants in from outside.

    "franquinn" doesn't see the need to mention severe weather upfront! How odd! Strong winds, heavy rain can have a very serious impact on what many people do for a living, their day to day lives and any events which may be planned!
    The need to mention severe weather upfront IS VERY important it also gives the listener an idea of the whole picture.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 7:04pm on 12 Oct 2009, Septic wrote:

    downinlondon @61
    We certainly do pay the licence fee on the IoM - and receive a very poor service in return. Hardly any local TV news and no local radio.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 7:05pm on 12 Oct 2009, intelligentead wrote:

    MUCH better. I could actually work out which bit applied to me. Often it is not at all obvious. However PLEASE can you rethink having the south east always first. This area is always given more emphasis than other areas and this trend seems to be continuing in spite of a brief attempt to change this a while back

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 7:14pm on 12 Oct 2009, Lady_Sue wrote:

    I didn't notice that much difference. I even 'listened again' as I was a bit distracted during the 'real thing'. However, it was clear and the chap reading it made a nice job of it. Perhaps it's just that I'm always willing it to be hot and sunny.

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 7:24pm on 12 Oct 2009, seedy-bee wrote:

    Much, much better!
    I think the Shipping Forecast model is the way to go. I also like the way that major cities within each Region get a mention, it helps with the localisation (if there is such a word!)

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 7:31pm on 12 Oct 2009, MrTakeitorleaveit wrote:

    The new format is certainly a great improvement. I have for a long time disliked the descriptive approach covering the whole country, made worse by some forecasters who confuse me by running sentences together and drawing breath in mid-sentence, presumably because there is insufficient time to do it properly. Now we have a clear statement of the area in question, followed (tonight, anyway!) by carefully-enunciated information about that area.

    Having said that, I must agree with several others who have complained about a dearth of wind information, and with those who think there is a strong case for a revival of "Central Southern" England. The "South-West England" and "South-East England" areas are too big.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 7:34pm on 12 Oct 2009, EddieforPM wrote:

    Much better. Still more structure would be good, eg - night low temps, night precipitation, day hightemps; day cloud and sun, day precipitation, day wind and direction. Alter day/night according to time of forecast.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 7:37pm on 12 Oct 2009, quackers-j wrote:

    Great, simple and concise with just enough detail eg. Anglesey differing from South Wales. Please include wind speed and direction. Thank you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 7:41pm on 12 Oct 2009, Big Sister wrote:

    Much much better. And having the map is so much better as it avoids doubt about regions when they come up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 7:42pm on 12 Oct 2009, teyene wrote:

    A dramatic improvement. I think a radio presentation should be just like this: concise, clear and structured. I don't even think the verbose, patronising narrative works on the television.

    If I need a more detailed forecast complete with with approaching fronts, accurate wind speeds, barometric pressures and the like, I can look elsewhere.

    Lose the farenheit temperatures and I think you're just about there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 7:42pm on 12 Oct 2009, reulsebravery wrote:

    Yes, an improvement, you can listen to your area or border area and not worry about the rest. However why not list a few more main towns in the area. Also the wind speed in mph would be useful as well as temperature, rainfall, cloud cover and visibility.

    Well done

    Mike B

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 8:14pm on 12 Oct 2009, claireinlincoln wrote:

    I am impressed - I have often been unsure if the forecast was including Lincolnshire when the weather for the 'East Midlands' or 'Northern' or 'Central' England was mentioned - it is nice to have a proper place on the map - it gets my vote even after just one day

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 8:21pm on 12 Oct 2009, Mister-Trick wrote:

    Well done. This is a great improvement. I listened to the forecast while driving; paying attention to what's happening on the road always has to be higher priority than listening to the radio. I thought the new style makes it far more likely that I will remember the forecast as wel as navigating safely through the traffic. Thanks again - hope the trial is successful

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 8:32pm on 12 Oct 2009, dragonaer wrote:

    A much better format, confined to the facts. Useless words and phrases, such as 'risk' of rain, 'it'll feel warm', 'lovely autumn sunshine', and 'spits and spots of rain' were absent, thank goodness. Unfortunately, any mention of wind was also absent.

    Well done!

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 8:48pm on 12 Oct 2009, fidelma10 wrote:

    I thought the new style weather forecast to be precise and very understandable, almost as good as the Shipping Forecast.

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 8:57pm on 12 Oct 2009, TonyTelford wrote:

    Over the years I do feel that the weather forecast has been simplified to no good effect, and I did think that today's presentation was a step in the right direction.

    Surely I am not alone in wanting a brief synoptic description to set the scene for the regional weather forecast. A brief statement, for example, that an Atlantic depression will move east across the British Isles speaks volumes. Many will know why it is raining and, perhaps, for how long.

    Fahrenheit temperature figures should have been phased out years ago. The little time saved could be used for something else. Wind gust speeds might be more useful.

    Presentation is always important and on the radio voice production and modulstion are important. Nevertheless, the forecaster is describing the physical state of the atmosphere; this might mean the occasional meteorological concept is introduced with explanation. We seem to be happy with frost hollows but dare not utter the fohn effect.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 9:10pm on 12 Oct 2009, Looternite wrote:

    #63. ZuluPapa
    No problem starting with the Southeast region as that is where most licence payers live.
    There is a saying "He who pays the piper calls the tune".

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 9:30pm on 12 Oct 2009, Anne P. wrote:

    Having mulled over the above I agree wholeheartedly with dropping fahrenheit, adding wind speed, and adding the wind chill factor would be useful on occasions when the effective temperature is significantly reduced.

    I'll leave others to decide about the division of the regions - now I know I'm in the Midlands that's fine, before I could never tell if Derbyshire was Midlands, north, east or what. Once it's finalised a permanent location online for the map with its list of counties would be useful for reference.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 9:31pm on 12 Oct 2009, ZuluPapa wrote:

    #104 Looternite

    Point well made and I'm sure the BBC would share your view point completely. However three quarters of the population don't live in the south-east, we are just thinly spread over the rest of the UK !

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 9:37pm on 12 Oct 2009, newsbean wrote:

    The idea is a good one, but here in the Northwest there are wide variations in weather. The Lake District, Howgills and the Dales are very different to Cheshire and the areas around Manchester and often to each other. Can you try to give some indication of this? A big ask in a 3 minute broadcast covering the whole UK I know.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 9:54pm on 12 Oct 2009, Aeoleus wrote:

    At last! Plain,unvarnished facts in an easy-to-assimilate manner. Just what is needed - please keep it up!

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 10:23pm on 12 Oct 2009, Keith Benbow wrote:

    Trial weather forecast is an improvement but have the weather boys got the areas correct. We live in North East Cheshire and we are in the NW weather area. We get similar weather to North Wales which in turn gets very different weather to South Wales. They seem to have used political boundaries rather than rather than Geographic. Still need ssome more work on presentation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 00:03am on 13 Oct 2009, rapidstubbers wrote:

    I was disappointed with the trial weather forecast as there was no mention of likely wind conditions. Groups such as gardeners, dinghy sailors, cyclists, microlight pilots and balloonists find such information vital.

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 00:09am on 13 Oct 2009, bamburghtory wrote:

    Big improvement - but is it necessary to mention the cities? They presumably are the same (more or less) as the region. Also, not sure if its sensible to combine regions (ie Eastern and North East England tonight)if the idea is to be consistent. But keep this approach, please.

    PS - also it was good to hear Fahrenheit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 00:22am on 13 Oct 2009, Dr_Bear wrote:

    Much better and a real step forward, but I think there is more room for improvement.

    What was really missing was an opening general synopsis – using the real terminology to describe the current situation – ie. where are the current influential pressure systems (and associated fronts) and their direction/speed of travel & predicted position in 24hrs – pretty much shipping forecast style. This would give the listener a clear mental picture of the overall situation which then helps to make clear sense of the regional forecasts – so making them more memorable.

    If a system slows down/speeds up/changes direction the subsequent forecast could quickly use this to explain why the actual weather was not exactly as forecast.

    I totally agree with comments posted earlier by ‘wildwarmfront’, ‘just visitingonce’ and others re general synopsis, refinement of the regions used and some meaningful information about wind speed and direction. There is a tendency to talk down to the listener by not using ‘real’ terminology – this should change! We live in a country regularly swept by weather systems and their associated fronts; empower us by using the correct vocabulary – most of us understand it already and are fed up with the dumbed down waffle, & regular usage will help others to learn the terminology. You could add a glossary of terms (along side the map of weather regions) or even during the initial period schedule a little extra time for explaining the basics . . . .

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 00:43am on 13 Oct 2009, cprobinson wrote:

    Uhmmm… I find myself a part of a minority who still find the new forecast fairly unmemorable; is the matter settled, are we cast aside?

    Could it be one of life’s cruel jokes that those who have the qualities to divine the weather have been deprived the appropriate voice to present their work themselves, and that all the glory should be unfairly passed to another? I think the lady from the Northeast was good.

    However, I would still like to hear a real weatherman; perhaps at the beginning mystifying us with highs, depressions, and fronts; and at the end, gardening, swallows, hurricanes; yes all still much appreciated.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 07:20am on 13 Oct 2009, DanSatterfield wrote:

    I've worked as an on air Meteorologist here in the States for nearly 30 years, so I was very keen to hear the "new style" of weather presentation. I give it an A. One thing though. I would receive many complaints for omitting the overnight low temperature, but otherwise well done.

    Nice of you to continue to include the old Fahrenheit as well. Quite a few people on this side of the pond are still convinced that celsius is a "commie plot", but we will switch too someday. Sooner the better.

    Oh, and Peter Gibbs, my crazy email beats your's, but lunch is on me if you find yourself in Huntsville Al. ;)

    Dan Satterfield
    Chief Metr.
    Huntsville Alabama

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 07:37am on 13 Oct 2009, corfucheryl wrote:

    I'm afraid that I haven't read all the comments so far (poor you for having to do so!) so I don't know if I'm repeating.
    However, maybe you could take a few pointers from our Greek tv station "Star". Look up "Petroula" on You Tube". She certainly has our local kafenion taking notice of the weather......

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 08:55am on 13 Oct 2009, Big Sister wrote:

    re 112, How about reserving any general description for the end of the forecast? Speaking for myself, it is the point at which I start to drift off and thereby miss the forecast for my region, but putting it at the end would keep it in (yes, it can be very useful) without risking losing the key information for your own area?

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 09:19am on 13 Oct 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

    ZP 106, Thinly spread; like Marmite?

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 09:22am on 13 Oct 2009, IanDenton wrote:

    This seems a vastly better system and might actually convey information about the weather in Scotland. But - and you'll expect this - the boundaries don't make sense. Eastern Scotland comes most of the way to the west coast and the Cairngorms National Park is split in two. Also, Orkney and Shetland need a category of their own - these maritime islands just don't have the climate, never mind the weather, of the Highlands.
    The MetOffice website has six regions for Scotland, eight for England, and one each for N Ireland and Wales. It makes weather sense and can more or less be relied on.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 09:33am on 13 Oct 2009, CyclingBob wrote:

    A big improvement, the new format works, please keep it!

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 10:30am on 13 Oct 2009, CarolineOfBrunswick wrote:

    I heard it before seeing the map, and was surprised when the weather for Eastern and North-East England included the temperature for Leeds.
    Obviously it would take a bit longer, but is there any chance of going from 6 to the 8 standard government office english regions (assuming London is combined with the South-East). I already know where these are, rather than having to try to remember your unique classification.

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 10:44am on 13 Oct 2009, lynnstevenson wrote:

    Love the new weather forecast. For years I've been listening from Norfolk and never knowing whether I'm in the Midlands or East Anglia or "The East", often getting to the end and not being any the wiser!

    Now all you need is the poetic rhythm of the Shipping forecast and a nice bit of music like Sailing By and you'll have it nailed!

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 10:59am on 13 Oct 2009, Andy wrote:

    The new forecast on PM yesterday was a big improvement in clarity.
    Also, on this morning's 'Today' programme, during the forecast just before 8 a.m. I heard "The Midlands" mentioned twice!
    This was a real bonus as we usually have to guess whether we're lumped in with the North of England or the South of England.

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 11:33am on 13 Oct 2009, PhilGrimley wrote:

    The idea of using the same sequence of areas for reporting the weather is a great improvement - i actually understood the forecast last night !

    However, I live on the borders of Midlands and Eastern and yet again RUTLAND is missing from the list of counties, so I don't know which area to listen to. This seems to be a consistant problem at the BBC. Rutland has only existed for 10 years, so please can someone update the BBC's Atlas of Great Britain.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 1:06pm on 13 Oct 2009, pauljam20 wrote:

    It works! I caught the relevant forecast for the first time for years on Monday.

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 1:28pm on 13 Oct 2009, Rutlandeye wrote:

    I totally agree with comment 112 by Dr Bear when he writes

    "What was really missing was an opening general synopsis – using the real terminology to describe the current situation".

    The general synopsis creats a framework for the area forcasts and any warnings or doubts as to what might happen can be mentioned at this point. Adding to this, your new fangled format should keep everyone happy.

    Please however, could you bring back the wind, warm fronts, cold fronts and Rutland. (see post 123, we are 100 miles north of London, just follow the A1)

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 1:47pm on 13 Oct 2009, EGGMAN1889 wrote:

    I like the new style, however after mentioning the three biggest city's in England ie London, Birmingham and Manchester, the forth biggest is completly ignored, instead of using Sheffield in the North-East England you use Leeds and Newcastle. Why??

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 1:58pm on 13 Oct 2009, shppingforecastfan wrote:

    I think the reason why the wind wasn't really mentioned in the forecast yesterday afternoon was because there is no wind (at least not here in SE). You can't get more concise than that!
    However I think it should still be mentioned as wind has a marked effect on temp. (both night and day). I was glad to be warned of a 'chilly start' so I could remember to put a blanket on the bed (we are still central heating free at the moment).
    The delivery was nice and clear which helped - sometimes I miss what is said because the forecaster has to speak quickly and continuously in the time allowed. Perhaps we could have a slight pause (no speech) in between regions to allow us time to think?!
    I'm glad there wasn't any 'let's have a look back at the day just gone'!
    It would be good to have a 'general situation' of the pattern of highs and/or lows at the beginning and an 'outlook' at the end.
    Thanks for the opportunity to comment again. (Nothing like the weather to get people communicating!)

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 3:18pm on 13 Oct 2009, CatsDogsandRabbits wrote:

    Oh drat! Slap bang between Midlands and North West. So I still have to listen to two lots of weather and guess which one is going to be relevant to me!

    Eddie, or Peter, couldn't we have just one extra section - including Cheshire and Derbyshire together in one square?

    Go on, course we can!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 3:18pm on 13 Oct 2009, davetelendos wrote:

    Oh dear! By the time it got to the North West of England I had forgotten why I was supposed to be listening and then in the panic I missed the forecast. I must do better.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 3:43pm on 13 Oct 2009, James-H3 wrote:

    Congratulations on the new weather forecast format. The nearer it gets to the shipping forecast the better. It may amuse listeners who have not heard any of the various musical parodies of the weather forecast over the years to play one of them e.g. the forecast set to Anglican chant. Sounds exactly like the King's Singers. Radio 3 might like it too.

    Link http://marguerite.ca/images/mastersingers.mp3

    Best wishes,

    James Harper

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 4:42pm on 13 Oct 2009, JacquesEGH wrote:

    Dear Met Office: if I want a fire-side chat about the weather, I'll phone my 87 year-old mother.

    If I want a forecast, lets have one like the shipping forecast; succinct, does the job in the minimum of time, and is flexible enough to accommodate changes in the pattern of weather.

    I know that some of the "forecasters" are wannabee actors or bloggers, in which case the weather slot is wrong place for them.


    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 5:33pm on 13 Oct 2009, Cookienews wrote:

    Fantastic new weather forecast - Straight forward, easy to understand and follow. Same sequence each time menas you know when to listen to the bit you want.

    No need to tell the wife yet again I drifted off and missed the weather forecast but that I do remember it was going to be a nice day in Scotland.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 5:43pm on 13 Oct 2009, ilove4blog wrote:

    This is an improvement but I will still have to listen to Eastern Scotland and North-East England and then guess at which weather I will get. I am with the person who asked for Fahrenheit to be dropped, Celsius is so much easier. Why does the forecast start in the south? Most documents are read left to right(West to East) and top to bottom (North to South). London-centric again (sigh).

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 5:59pm on 13 Oct 2009, Anne P. wrote:

    Hey - what happened to working systematically round the regions?

    Did no-one tell this evening's forecaster??????

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 6:09pm on 13 Oct 2009, victoriajp56 wrote:

    Love it. Much easier to follow, I don't need to concentrate so hard! Even my husband will be able to remember the relevant bits! Thank you!

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 6:28pm on 13 Oct 2009, jillfc wrote:

    Monday's was pretty good: clear, straightforward, free of gabble, did what it said it was going to. But as Anne P points out, by Tuesday - though the clearer language remains - we've already lost some of the systematic approach: the order in which the regions were dealt with was different, for no obvious reason. If you're trying out something new, for goodness' sake stick with it for the trial period.

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 6:38pm on 13 Oct 2009, crunchycrispanddry wrote:

    Tuesdays was a bit of a muddle but okish.
    What about the wind? Direction, strength?
    Again it was not mentioned!

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 6:56pm on 13 Oct 2009, Manric06 wrote:

    I heard the new weather forecast for the first time tonight (I listened to it on yesterday's PM through iPlayer). I think it is an improvement. It would be even more of an improvement if the weather forecast could go back to its [very] old time on Radio 4 at five minutes to the hour and give us about three or four minutes of forecast. At least the new forecast is spoken more factually without any daft comment. Now to get Dan C and most of the TV presenters to follow suit!

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 7:25pm on 13 Oct 2009, aeroTonyC wrote:

    Monday night the forecast was just about right with Peter Gibbs following a logical sequence around the UK. Easily understood with my region NW England being mentioned which is unusual as it normally isn't. Tonight the forecast was more jumbled and confusing with a different sequence of regions used. This time NW England was not mentioned only all of Northern England was given a forecast. From living here for many years there is normally a diffrence in the weather between NW and NE England. Please if it is a trial keep to the same format so people know what to expect. Keep it like the shipping forecast, same format every day.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 8:12pm on 13 Oct 2009, macboff wrote:

    Yippee! I've been waiting for this to happen for years. One further tweak would make it even better for those of us in regions low down the batting order. At present we still have to listen to every word so that we can tell when our region is announced. It is so easy to lose concentration and miss your part of the forecast. If there was a non-speech sound (eg a beep) before each new group of regions was read out, we'd only need to pay attention to the words briefly at every beep, to see if it's our turn yet. If it is our turn, we keep listening, and if it isn't, we switch off (mentally) until the next beep. Maybe even a definite pause before each group of regions would do the job.

    An end to Rob's Random Ramblings!

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 10:25pm on 13 Oct 2009, Swanny wrote:

    Yes, liked the new forecast format, reminded me of the shipping forecast. I have a lot of family and friends around the country and I got a much better idea of their weather as well, Thanks

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 10:38am on 14 Oct 2009, sandyandpatch wrote:

    Are all your weather forecasters educated in China? Why else would they start at the bottom right and work up? In English we start at the top left and work down, so why not the weather forecast as well. I would also hope that they know that the weather in the Orkneys an the Scottish borders can be totally different most of the time. Why are they in the same area?

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 1:19pm on 14 Oct 2009, pause111 wrote:

    Still too waffly and judgemental but an improvement. I'm on the border of two regions in Scotland so my weather will still be guesswork.
    My main complaint is giving a 'headline' at the beginning if there is any severe weather. This makes the whole idea invalid as the Met Office has, in the last few years, decided that a heavier than usual shower of rain deserves a 'severe weather warning' - crying wolf - I take no notice of severe weather warnings any more as they are meaningless. The weather forecast should forecast the weather - full stop. It should not give the weather forecasters' judgements about what constitutes a 'beautiful' day or 'better' weather - they rarely coincide with my views. Can we please have the simple shipping forecast style weather forecast?

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 1:46pm on 14 Oct 2009, Poverty wrote:

    Oh dear, last night (Tuesday) we seem to have had a relapse. I do not remember ever hearing about Nortn East England. To mention a large area and then give exceptions is a no go. Let's get back to ther Monday night format.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 2:42pm on 14 Oct 2009, shppingforecastfan wrote:

    Just a thought - this is following the lunchtime forecast in which the words 'around about' were repeated at least twice - why not have the new shipping forecast format in the style of 'Just a Minute', only it would be three minutes instead of one. There would be no hesitation (except between regions where a pause would be essential), repetition (except the words in the subject) or deviation. The subject would be 'rain, wind, sun, cloud, temperature,' and other strictly meterological and geographical terms!
    Otherwise, I agree it may be useful to extend the length of the forecast by a minute.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 2:43pm on 14 Oct 2009, rainboondocks wrote:

    I have not yet managed to receive the "new" format but I am hoping very much that it will be as Peter Gibbs suggested, shipping forecast style, with clear concise information. I am in a very remote rural area and weather is vital, particularly in the winter. Very important is that those reading the weather forecast do so in a clear, well-articulated voice without the swoops and peculiar intonations that make Robert Peston an instant turn off.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 6:54pm on 14 Oct 2009, TallDaveBristol wrote:

    I have been frustrated about the attempt over recent years of forecasters to try to 'entertain' us when I want facts, clearly presented. This is a tremendous step forward. Thank you. (When can we expect a similar improvement on the (dire) TV weather?)

    If I may say so, the national road an traffic reports could learn from this. By following numerical (which is largely geographical)road numbers it would be much clearer whether or not you will be affected. Even if there are big and small events this is till the right sequence. David

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 9:50pm on 14 Oct 2009, ribbleway wrote:

    I don't know what the fuss is about - I found it generally helpful and in Scotland they have been giving forecasts for different regions for years. The only bits that concerned me tonight were references to "northern England" and "Scotland" as regions, when in fact the weather in both is usually very differnt on the east and west sides - but at least the map does show they will be subdivided. I hope there will always give an overview of the general situation before the regional details.
    Someone asked earlier why them boundaries aren't straight as in sea areas. Well, weather on land is often strongly influenced by topography, ie by hill or mountain areas and proximity to coast!

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 04:29am on 15 Oct 2009, dennisjunior1 wrote:

    good idea!!!!!!!!

    ~Dennis Junior~

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 08:53am on 15 Oct 2009, Peachyschnapps wrote:

    Not managed to catch the'new' weather so far but just listened on iPlayer and I think it is much clearer. I'll give it 5 ....

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 1:58pm on 15 Oct 2009, langleybaston wrote:

    About time too! I retired as a Principal Scientific Officer in 1998 after 41 years as a Met Office weather forecaster and scientist. Until the cult of personality became rampant [encouraged, I suspect, by the BBC] there was strict guidance regarding the presentation of a forecast to the public. The rules were much as the current experiment: an overview, followed by any warnings, then, most importantly, location first, weather second, and a logical geographical sequence. Terms like 'warm', 'mild', and 'sunny intervals' were defined. Nasty modernisms like 'misty murky' and 'spits and spots' would have been laughed out. The only fogey-ish rulings which I am glad to see overcome were that 'gust' was a noun and had no verb, and that 'sleet' had to be 'rain and snow'.
    All power to the modernisers who have reverted to past best practice.

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 6:16pm on 15 Oct 2009, janerunner wrote:

    I really like the new weather format - clear, concise and memorable. Please dont go back to "spits and spots of rain" and "organised showers".

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 7:05pm on 15 Oct 2009, bloghag wrote:

    The new weather forecast format on PM (RADIO 4) is a refreshing wind of change, free of pseudo-comic remarks and non-meteorological vocabulary (e.g. the spits and spots that have been scattered randomly in previous forecasts).
    The sooner all radio and TV switch to the new format, the clearer it will be for everyone. The grouping of regional information, the succinct descriptions and the clarity of the message - what's not to like?

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 8:27pm on 15 Oct 2009, fedibus wrote:

    I fully support the new format for the new style weather forecasts on PM; can they be extended to all R4 bulletins. Much easier to follow and remember.

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 1:47pm on 16 Oct 2009, Mrsscunge wrote:

    I really like the new weather forecast. It enables me to focus far better on my own area without my attention wandering off. Please keep it!

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 6:14pm on 16 Oct 2009, sparklers1 wrote:

    Better format, giving scope for a more concise forecast, but please give the forecasters sufficient time to give detail. All too often the allocated slot is not long enough for this - for example, with an incoming weather front or showery air stream, the forecasters need time to elaborate on expected time for arrival of rain and clearance, frequency of showers etc, for each of the regions. 3 minutes please.

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 6:40pm on 16 Oct 2009, edwardrichmond wrote:

    Well done. At last a logical forecast whereby you can ready yourself to listen to the part which is relevant to you rather than than being taken on a randon mystery tour of the uk with no indication as to when your area ( if you are lucky )will be addressed........

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 8:12pm on 16 Oct 2009, youngdiddle wrote:

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 11:08am on 17 Oct 2009, cjseed wrote:

    forecast much asier to follow

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 5:41pm on 19 Oct 2009, glowingrosa wrote:

    At long last have got round to making a comment on the change in weather forecast. I think it is a vast improvement. When are they going to do all the weather forecasts in the same format?

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 6:13pm on 19 Oct 2009, PierreMaxted wrote:

    It is remarkable how much easier it is to remember the forecast with the new style of presentation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 6:26pm on 19 Oct 2009, Kernow_Otter wrote:

    Huge improvement, thank you.

    Two comments.

    1. Can we have a brief description of the Synoptic Situation at the begining of the forecast as standard practice - some of us still understand such things.

    2. If the format is to be from South to North as a rule, why is the first region not the South West, as we have the most Southerly Point of the UK in Lizard Point ?

    Love it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 6:35pm on 20 Oct 2009, donigers wrote:

    The South of England is very wide and the weather doesn't very often divide into just 2 patterns. Please can Central Southern England have its own forecast?

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 6:57pm on 20 Oct 2009, newwinston wrote:

    I like it. Short, sharp and to the point, PM to a T. Even better if EM read it out: Paxman, with less attitude.

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 7:01pm on 20 Oct 2009, fourowls wrote:

    I am turning into a weather nerd! I have never blogged in my life but here goes...... Love the new approach to the weather, I instantly tuned in to and understood the shipping forecast style and I liked the weather area forecast tonight. I don't need musical notes or jingles to tell me a new area is about to come up and I can do without an overall summary if time is of the E. After all I don't live over the whole of the British Isles...and if I'm travelling I am travelling to and through other smaller regions. The map is fine. We only really have to look at it once. Keep the running order the same every night and I may never forget the forecast again!!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 7:15pm on 20 Oct 2009, taycast wrote:

    I think it has potential but needs refined. Why always start with the south east as this area already receives more prominence in national forecasts on BBC TV and radio. Where I stay in Eastern Scotland has several different weather trends, especially considering the influence of the mountains. I just dont believe this area can be forecast accurately unless the forcaster is given more time. I always have believed both TV and radio forecasts are too short.

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 11:15pm on 20 Oct 2009, jamespester wrote:

    A review of the ‘New Style’ weather forecast for Great Britain and Northern Ireland.


    Fog clearing slowly, visibility improving.


    Mostly fine, some gusty and unsettled spells.

    Regional Format:

    Fine, and bright at times with occasional murky periods

    Language and Vocabulary:

    Unsettled at first, becoming clearer.


    Established depression gives way to incoming high.


    Mostly fine and bright with some early fog.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 3:34pm on 21 Oct 2009, brianwullie wrote:

    I don't think there is much difference from the forecasts given at other times of the day on Radio 4. The clearest and most concise forecasts were immediately after they were re-introduced following World War II. Then they started at 5 minutes to the hour, thereby allowing plenty of time and not as now, where they don't begin until 3 minutes to the hour and the BBC still want to play trailers for future programmes before the news. The forecasts to which I refer, began with any Gale, Snow or Frost warnings. Not 'Severe Weather Warnings' which we get now ad infinitum if there is to be a heavy shower or a bit of fog in the South of England. Then followed the General Situation, which gave the situation of Depressions and Anticyclones that were significant. This was followed by the Forecast for Farmers, which was a very detailed district forecast and finally the Shipping Forecast which was,and still is very useful to many listeners formulating their own area forecast (but what has happened to the Weather Reports from Coastal Stations?). Unfortunately now, for some reason, we only get the Shipping Forecast on Radion 4 FM before the 6 o' clock news on Saturday & Sunday. Is it possible to dig out one of these vintage forecasts from the Archives and play it on PM to see what other listeners think?

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 8:04pm on 21 Oct 2009, Slowprof wrote:

    I like the new style but agree with those who want a synopsis at the start and wind directions for each region. Even if some people haven't learned the terms used at school living with the weather and hearing the expressions repeatedly educates one rapidly! What I really like is the lack of highly subjective adjectives; NICE and sunny? HORRIBLY wet?? It depends whether you want the washing to dry or the plants to grow!

    Please keep the format.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 6:44pm on 23 Oct 2009, gillblogs wrote:

    The map is a great help, also the information that the forecast always starts in the SW and the'direction of flow' that we were given this evening. I also like the weather forecast style.

    However my favourite weather forecast medium is Ceefax on the television. Number 402 for your own region. It gives everything: temperature, wind direction and speed and whether sunshine, dull, rain or showers for the different times of day. This is my ideal and I look at it after 6pm every day. I realise that this is a bit too detailed for the radio and it's fine to give wind speeds and direction when it's significant i.e a strong north wind.

    Ceefax isn't foolproof however. Too often it gets itself in a mess and you get two night time forecasts and no day. I think they need to smarten up their act.

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 09:11am on 24 Oct 2009, wollix wrote:

    very much improved format - I realise that I was one of those who wanted to listen to the weather but then my mind drifted. I think the key thing is that it is as short and punchy in style as possible - I like the new headings and the idea of copying the shipping forecast.

    To sum up, and curiously, the LESS flow and smoothness in the delivery, and the more punchy headings, notes the BETTER. There will always be a tendency for the forecaster to want to be smooth as a good broadcaster, but in this case the opposite is true!

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 11:36am on 24 Oct 2009, diamondWoodville wrote:

    The new format is an improvement but style is only part of the story. What about accuracy? Perhaps the forecasters could be awarded marks out of ten each week for their performance in this area. As a farmer,the accuracy of the weather forecast is very important to our everyday decisions - so vital in fact that I suggest a new regulatory body is formed - could we call it Offcast?!

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 5:13pm on 24 Oct 2009, Moppettrio wrote:

    Dear Sir
    I think the new forecast is a big improvement. The particularly valuable aspects include; predefined areas, a fixed format (eg time period, rain, temperature). These aspect are like the shipping forecast from which it is very easy to get the information relevant to oneself.

    Possible improvements could include wide publicity for the map. There are many options for how this could be done but the web is not adequate.

    Also the meteorologist must be dissuaded from deviating from the format. For instance he must say "north west and north east England", not "northern England".

    In general the shipping forecast is an exemplar.

    It should be remembered that the weather forecast is an information transmittal system, not part of the entertainment output,valued though the entertainment programmes are.

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 09:44am on 29 Oct 2009, Lord Fred wrote:

    Superfritter made a good point about New Zealand's format. I don't know about now, but it used to start at the North and work down, referred to main towns and cities, and grouped them appropriately - I used to love listening to it as a kid, some of the place names had great alliteration - Taranaki, Taupo, Taihape, Taumarunui - and I never missed Wellington because I'd lost interest.

    Is there now a slight trend to refer to factors that generate weather conditions? I was pleased to hear recently on R4 and see on BBC1 reference to the current SW airflow, as an explanation for the mild unseasonal weather. As the BBC is there to inform, entertain and EDUCATE, I think you should take this a step further and explain, albeit in simple terms, the current weather conditions every time. They do this on US TV - a warm moist air mass from the Gulf of Mexico conflicting with a cold dry air mass from Canada for example. Jim Hickey the popular NZ TV presenter does it too.

    The R4 presenters might even begin to understand the difference between rain and showers ;-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 6:02pm on 29 Oct 2009, Idcam wrote:

    No weather forecast for me again. I'm in Edinburgh, which is Eastern Scotland. Which wasn't mentioned. Western Scotland was, but not Eastern. Oh well. Just have to take my chances, I guess. Or tune in to ITN.

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 6:11pm on 29 Oct 2009, Anne P. wrote:

    175, I noticed that too although I'm not in your region. If only they would actually write it down in the format of the Shipping Forecast these slips wouldn't happen. But overall it is generally much, much better.

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 6:14pm on 29 Oct 2009, rixlondon wrote:

    The new weather forecast is better but please use the syntax LOCATION+TEMPERATURE and not TEMPERATURE+LOCATION. When the forecaster says it will be 35 degrees in Aberdeen, Plymouth and Newcastle, and I am in Newcastle, I jerk awake to the realisation that I have missed the temperature. This obviously has a bigger impact at 0600 or 0700 than the PM forecast (when I am marginally more awake). Thanks for listening to us though.

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 9:17pm on 24 Nov 2009, Anand Prasad wrote:

    The only thing that really matters (even more important than making Orkney and Shetland minute) is to stop the unnecessary pauses and downward inflexion at the end of every sentence of the weather(wo)man which is a sure sign that the speaker has to use artificial mean to try to sound interesting when in fact they have no heart in what they are saying.

    Sounding yourself and natural and interested in your subject is what makes people interested in what you are saying eg. Attenborough.

    The worst of the very watch-able Kate Humble is when she uses these terrible pauses and now there is that geographer Nicholas Crane whose every sentence is laden with the downward inflexions.

    Listen to Rob McElwee reading the weather and you here someone with no artificial tricks, who obviously love his subject and it is infectious.

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 5:09pm on 08 Jan 2010, David Rolph wrote:

    Having just read the PM's reaction to preserving salt stocks i think the man is more of a fool and is playing with people's lives at his incompetence at running the finances of this country.

    If you want to know at Frinton-on-Sea today we have received no gritting today, so much for Essex County's promises about no more misery on county's roads- short lived the responsibility is the governments.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 5:53pm on 28 Jan 2010, dorothy gough wrote:

    I always sleep in the buff. What are my chances of the doing the weekly shop at Tescos?

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 10:05pm on 23 Jul 2010, nesta vipers wrote:

    this is great - on your map, but I live in the very north of East Riding almost in North Yorkshire, we get the weather for Hull & Lincolnshire on bbc look North - it`s rubbish. we have to rely on seaweed in a jam jar

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS


Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.