Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To be honest, that seems to be the biggest advantage to London over Seattle…London is closer to the better climates; A 2.5 hr flight can get you to the hot/dry Mediterranean like Italy, Spain, the French Riviera…etc. A 2.5 hour flight from Seattle/PNW gets you at best to San Francisco, which while an improvement over Seattle, is not often associated with warm/sunny weather. Although Hawaii is out in the Pacific 2100 miles away…London is just as close (maybe closer) to the eastern Caribbean islands and Bermuda.
I would take London any day. Maybe it’s just because the Spice Girls come from London (lol).
Sorry, I couldn’t resist that.
You've still got to live somewhere the majority of the time!
I don't see that as an advantage.
It's like living in an isolated small country town, because it's only a couple of hours or so to a big town.
Chances are - you'll get there no more than a handful of times a year - and then that's not having to pay for airfares, that may be prohibitive for some.
Airfares down here are exorbitant compared with overseas, but it is still going to cost every time you go away.
I think what we should also consider is that the last few years in Seattle have been horrendous for weather and I don't think this is a fluke, this is in responce to climate change. London on the other hand has seen an improvemnt in weather. I think we can expect to see these trends continue in the years to come. Furthermore if you are stuck in a rainy or cloudy day in London almost every museum is free and there is a plethora of indoor activities that far outnumber those available in Seattle. Not to mention Paris is a 2 hour train ride away. In Seattle you need to take a 2.5 hr flight to San Francisco for any sort of relief and in London if you wanna do a 2.5 hr flight you have all of southern Europe at your disposal and Spain and Italy are WAY better in the weather Dept than SF. For me, these are things that should be considered in the equation of weather in these cities.
Wrong. The flight time on a non-stop flight from Seattle to San Diego is 2 hr and 40 mins. The flight time from London to Seville, Spain is 2 hr 40 mins. The flight time from Seattle to Honolulu is 5 and 1/2 hours. The flight time from London to Cyprus is 4 and 1/2 hours. Non stop flights.
In San Diego the avg high in Jan is 66 and low of 50 and has 3000 hrs of sun. In Seville, Jan averages are 61/41. San Diego is warmer. Also, in Jan San Diego has 240 hours of sun vs 179 in Seville. I'm not even going to compare Cyprus in winter to Honolulu. It's not even close. The bottom line is that people in Seattle don't have to escape in summer, because they get more sun than london in summer. If they want even more sun in summer, they can just hop over the coast ranges into the interior and it's sunny and hot every day. People in London don't have that option. This is a completely bogus arguement. Seattle has been having bad weather, and London is having way beyond their normal weather. It will even out. Btw, right now on the supposed sunny southern coast of England it is 57 and mostly cloudy in Brighton at 5pm. Yeah, that's summer alright!
Wrong. The flight time on a non-stop flight from Seattle to San Diego is 2 hr and 40 mins. The flight time from London to Seville, Spain is 2 hr 40 mins. The flight time from Seattle to Honolulu is 5 and 1/2 hours. The flight time from London to Cyprus is 4 and 1/2 hours. Non stop flights.
In San Diego the avg high in Jan is 66 and low of 50 and has 3000 hrs of sun. In Seville, Jan averages are 61/41. San Diego is warmer. Also, in Jan San Diego has 240 hours of sun vs 179 in Seville. I'm not even going to compare Cyprus in winter to Honolulu. It's not even close. The bottom line is that people in Seattle don't have to escape in summer, because they get more sun than london in summer. If they want even more sun in summer, they can just hop over the coast ranges into the interior and it's sunny and hot every day. People in London don't have that option. This is a completely bogus arguement. Seattle has been having bad weather, and London is having way beyond their normal weather. It will even out. Btw, right now on the supposed sunny southern coast of England it is 57 and mostly cloudy in Brighton at 5pm. Yeah, that's summer alright!
Few people would think of Seville as a place for guaranteed winter sun/warmth though, they'd go to the Canary Isles or somewhere like Sharm el-Sheikh. Both 4-5 hours away, can't be bothered looking up their averages.
If I lived in Seattle I doubt I'd be complaining about lack of sun as that clearly beats London, and the temps are too similar to notice much difference, and I wouldn't be complaining about low sun angle/short winter days because 47 degrees latitude is nothing IMO, but I wouldn't like the 150 rain days as opposed to our 106, particularly having some winter months with twice as high a number of wet days compared to here. Overall I suppose I'd just about pick Seattle for the near-perfect summer for my tastes and at least some snow (or even in a snowless winter at least having it on my doorstep) but it's a pretty close thing.
And only 57/cloudy in Brighton? Here it's 66 and sunny at 6pm, and was 63 and mostly cloudy at 10am...10 degrees warmer than Seattle now at the same time
I wouldn't have either place, but Seattle's definite sunshine advantage despite the dismal winters settles it for me.
BTW, the 150 days precip. for Seattle is at the 0.01" level (0.2mm roughly), whereas the 106 for London is obviously at a higher threshhold, probably 1.0mm. No way is the difference as great as implied here.
Few people would think of Seville as a place for guaranteed winter sun/warmth though, they'd go to the Canary Isles or somewhere like Sharm el-Sheikh. Both 4-5 hours away, can't be bothered looking up their averages.
If I lived in Seattle I doubt I'd be complaining about lack of sun as that clearly beats London, and the temps are too similar to notice much difference, and I wouldn't be complaining about low sun angle/short winter days because 47 degrees latitude is nothing IMO, but I wouldn't like the 150 rain days as opposed to our 106, particularly having some winter months with twice as high a number of wet days compared to here. Overall I suppose I'd just about pick Seattle for the near-perfect summer for my tastes and at least some snow (or even in a snowless winter at least having it on my doorstep) but it's a pretty close thing.
And only 57/cloudy in Brighton? Here it's 66 and sunny at 6pm, and was 63 and mostly cloudy at 10am...10 degrees warmer than Seattle now at the same time
I'd still pick Hawaii. Plus we don't have to change countries to go there.
I just had to post that bit about Brighton. Sooner or later averages are going to catch up with Britain, and they will revert to their more normal sun levels and temps. Also, certain posters on here would have you think England was a tropical paradise growing olives, avacadoes, etc. with inland rivers being in the upper 70's. I call bulls.... on that. Right now on the cusp of June they are in the 50's on their south coast. I doubt if that is anything unusual. And sooner or later Seattle will start getting warmer and more sun. I pick Seattle over London. London doesn't have a 14,000 plus feet snow capped mountain visible in the distance.
I'd still pick Hawaii. Plus we don't have to change countries to go there.
I just had to post that bit about Brighton. Sooner or later averages are going to catch up with Britain, and they will revert to their more normal sun levels and temps. Also, certain posters on here would have you think England was a tropical paradise growing olives, avacadoes, etc. with inland rivers being in the upper 70's. I call bulls.... on that. Right now on the cusp of June they are in the 50's on their south coast. I doubt if that is anything unusual. And sooner or later Seattle will start getting warmer and more sun. I pick Seattle over London. London doesn't have a 14,000 plus feet snow capped mountain visible in the distance.
Lol why oh why do you, and only you, have to get so aggressive on virtually every thread, whether it's coconut palms in Texas (honestly, that whole thread sounded like you actually wanted those trees to die for some reason!), where's subtropical and where isn't, which London sun data is most valid, etc, etc? Don't get me wrong, I like reading what you post, just wonder why you're so argumentative about things that don't matter to you at all.
Anyone with half a brain and any experience of our weather knows that our record warm/dry/sunny April wasn't going to last forever and we know we have a less than ideal climate, we're surrounded by water and our entire country is further north than Winnipeg for goodness' sake! I said myself I'd prefer Seattle's climate for the better summers, better summers which somewhere four degrees further south on a massive land mass should have. Living here I'm really not that fussed either way if somewhere 6,000 miles away gets more predictable summer sunshine or if they are slightly nearer in winter to somewhere slightly warmer without needing a passport, what difference does it make to my life? I don't wake up expecting to see snow-capped mountains from my bedroom window!
Though saying all that, I do think it's impressive how somewhere on the same latitude as some virtually unliveable hellish sub-arctic climates genuinely can support vineyards and palm trees and occasional snow-free winters (and yes, even olives/avacadoes too: Know your Olives - East of Eden Plants Guide to Olive Trees , Growing Avocados - Fruit Expert ). Reading on these forums about deadly tornadoes and unbearable heat and blizzards have made me appreciate the benign climate we have.
Few people would think of Seville as a place for guaranteed winter sun/warmth though, they'd go to the Canary Isles or somewhere like Sharm el-Sheikh. Both 4-5 hours away, can't be bothered looking up their averages.
If I lived in Seattle I doubt I'd be complaining about lack of sun as that clearly beats London, and the temps are too similar to notice much difference, and I wouldn't be complaining about low sun angle/short winter days because 47 degrees latitude is nothing IMO, but I wouldn't like the 150 rain days as opposed to our 106, particularly having some winter months with twice as high a number of wet days compared to here. Overall I suppose I'd just about pick Seattle for the near-perfect summer for my tastes and at least some snow (or even in a snowless winter at least having it on my doorstep) but it's a pretty close thing.
And only 57/cloudy in Brighton? Here it's 66 and sunny at 6pm, and was 63 and mostly cloudy at 10am...10 degrees warmer than Seattle now at the same time
You live in a heat island. It's apparent looking at the Met Office site that London and SE England are the absolute warmest parts of the country. On top of that London, a huge urban area with millions of people, is a heat island. It seems that everywhere else in SE England today had high temps ranging from 13 and 14 along the S. coast to 19 outside of London. Sooner or later Seattle will get at least their normal summer temps of highs around 75/76 in July and August.
But I hope you do enjoy those 50's along the English Riviera.
You live in a heat island. It's apparent looking at the Met Office site that London and SE England are the absolute warmest parts of the country. On top of that London, a huge urban area with millions of people, is a heat island. It seems that everywhere else in SE England today had high temps ranging from 13 and 14 along the S. coast to 19 outside of London. Sooner or later Seattle will get at least their normal summer temps of highs around 75/76 in July and August.
But I hope you do enjoy those 50's along the English Riviera.
As a matter of fact I was on the so-called 'sunshine coast' (don't laugh!) just a week or so back only about ten miles from Brighton, and it was a very normal summer day for that part of the world, just the right mixture of sun and clouds to make it interesting, and in the low 70s, perfect weather IMO for doing a hiking trail, you can keep your boring featureless predictable 100% blue skies and suffocating summer heat
As a matter of fact I was on the so-called 'sunshine coast' (don't laugh!) just a week or so back only about ten miles from Brighton, and it was a very normal summer day for that part of the world, just the right mixture of sun and clouds to make it interesting, and in the low 70s, perfect weather IMO for doing a hiking trail, you can keep your boring featureless predictable 100% blue skies and suffocating summer heat
Actually, I have posted numerous times about the positives of Britain's climate, and there are quite a bit of positives. I'm having a bit of fun now as it is the only time we can. In winter your weather is much better than ours. As for the south coast, all joking aside, and I was being tongue in cheek, it is beautiful. My actual fav part is not Brighton at all, but Torquay. Now that is the English Riviera. I love the scene in Top Gear where they roll the car off the cliff near SW England. Beautiful area and the show is hilarious.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol why oh why do you, and only you, have to get so aggressive on virtually every thread, whether it's coconut palms in Texas (honestly, that whole thread sounded like you actually wanted those trees to die for some reason!), where's subtropical and where isn't, which London sun data is most valid, etc, etc? Don't get me wrong, I like reading what you post, just wonder why you're so argumentative about things that don't matter to you at all. 
