Lossiemouth WMO 03068 and Kinloss WMO03066 Foehn Effects and modern Jet Streams in very close proximity.

57.71134 -3.32336 Met Office CIMO Assessed Class 4 Installed 1/1/1941 Archived temperature records from 1/1/1959.

57.64558 -3.56346 Met Office CIMO Assessed Class 4 Installed 1/1/1950 Archived temperature records from 1/1/1957

“For example, official weather stations are often located at airports as they have plenty of open space making them a good place for observations to take place. However, the observation equipment is set an internationally-agreed distance from the runway to ensure no external factors can influence readings in any way.” https://weather.metoffice.gov.uk/learn-about/how-forecasts-are-made/observations/weather-stations

So says the UK Met office. For my part I prefer to trust my own eyes. Details of more Foehns and novel Jet Streams

RAF Lossiemouth is a major active military airfields that is just 10 miles from Kinloss on the north east Scottish coast. RAF Kinloss whilst designated a former airfield is still a standby site and in occasional use. Banff weather station lies just 20 miles east of Lossiemouth.

Firstly I feel it is important to, yet again, scotch the Met Office absurd claims of being an “internationally agreed distance from the runway” – if the pictures above do not paint a thousand words then nothing probably will. As former senior Met Office manager John Maynard explained in his excellent post on Metrology ” For example a site on an airport may present no problems for a MiG; the quicker response of the Pt may catch a quick burst of an aeroplane’s exhaust as it passes en route for take-off or landing.   This will result in a higher Maximum Temperature recorded for that day.”

In the cases of both Lossiemouth and Kinloss it is visually self evident that incidences of jet engine exhausts being specifically directed at the Stevenson screens are likely to be very common or have been in the recent past. In the Kinloss example, how on earth did that aeroplane get to and from its parking/turning place? For Lossiemouth that image is just one of many available showing gas turbine exhausts pointing straight at the temperature sensor. There are no indications of Jet Blast screens as per Dyce and, after all, why should there be, I doubt the RAF are concerned – their priorities understandably lie elsewhere.

I feel it is important to repeat the guest post comments of former USAF Jet fighter pilot and member of the US Meteorological Society “HiFast” – “If the Met Office is including aerodrome temperatures in its climate assessments, that’s worthy of ridicule.  The transient spikes in temperatures associated with aircraft operations or zephyr-advected pavement-heated air render those readings unfit for climate use. “

Another point to note is that the aircraft using these sites on installation would have been nowhere near as powerful as those using the site in modern times, Wellington bombers are nothing like Boeing Poseiden P-8.

As discussed in my review of Aultbea No 2 there are regular instances of Scottish sites recording “freak” weather effect highs in winter and spring. Lossiemouth has just recorded yesterday’s regional high only narrowly beating Kinross.

It is worth pointing out that both sites are ranked Class 4. It is also notiable that the CIMO regulations take no account at all of issues such as Jet Blast despite the astonishing powerful effects it has as I highlighted in my reports on Brize Norton and Coningsby. Presumably those developing the regulations automatically assumed that no reputable national meteorological organisation would consider such sites, a demonstration of the inadvisability of assuming.

In addition to both sites being compromised by the obvious extensive buildings, tarmac/concrete areas and vehicles there are also affected by the same “weather event issues” of Foehn Effects. The Met Office is naturally an international authority on such phenomena as they most certainly should be and they often produce detailed analysis of such events.

Note how it has become almost “de rigueur” for the Met office to have added in “the UK’s climate continues to warm…..” in discussing a weather event.This is despite the fact that it is the wrongful inclusion of such weather events into the crude meteorological averaging system that is a contributing factor partly indicating such warming.

This is how one person described a Foehn event on an online forum. “Have experienced it in Banff. It feels wild man. Absolutely freezing all day, end my shift, go out for a smoke in my ski jacket and im just sweating buckets. Go out a few hours later and its freezing again.”

So far in January and February of 2025, likely Foehn Effects have recorded national daily highs on 14 days with Banff, Kinloss and Lossiemouth accounting for 4 of those instances from the Scottish east coast.

In summary both Lossiemouth and Kinross are poorly sited weather stations that are likely to over record temperatures due to general poor aviation siting, being receptive to their PRTs picking up frequent transient heat bursts from aircraft and motorised vehicles and will also record brief rare weather events.

This is the generally poor data source standard that the Met Office is now happy to run through its antiquated statistical representation model to produce seriously distorted and predetermined end results.

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2025/10/05/lossiemouth-wmo-03068-and-kinloss-wmo03066-foehn-effects-and-modern-jet-streams-in-very-close-proximity/