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.
Shepparton gets only half of the rainfall that Khancoban receives. Khancoban is relatively wet, getting 900mm of annual rain and 149 rain days. So of course the latter would be naturally oceanic, considering its wetness. Shepparton is pretty much semi-arid (or at least a transitional form) with its 441mm annual precipitation and rain days just around 99. You can't simply call it a bona fide oceanic climate. Whereas, for Khancoban, you can argue for that.
There is nothing to concede, considering that Shepparton and Khancoban are still two different climates with only a few similarities. I don't apply the same climatic standards for these two.
True, I guess "highland oceanic" is an oxymoron, because highland climates have high diurnal ranges and are prone to extremes. Oceanic climates have a more narrow temperature range (something that "oceanic" climates like Albury, Wagga Wagga and Dubbo fail to do). So maybe Khancoban is a subtropical highland climate with wetter winters.
Oceanic climates can get annual rainfall totals lower than Shepparton's total and Shepparton only has about 12 more rain days of Motueka at >0.1mm, as well as more total rain days than the drier locations in my region. Shepparton's aridity is a feature of rain shadow, rather than dominant high pressure in any season.
With Khancoban's hillier terrain, there is more chance of convective buildup, which might be considered a Cfa trait. Shepparton's rainfall (even during summer) is almost all from cold fronts - it essentially has an Oceanic weather pattern, but is much warmer, as would be expected given it's latitude and inland location.
Khancoban has an average min/max of 7.3C/21.4C, while Shepparton has 8.6C/22.4C. Seasonal averages only show about the same level of difference, with nothing to indicate a fundamental difference between the two locations.
Khancoban is clearly Cfa under Koppen, so introducing the notion of Subtropical highland, is just more confusion. However, to best understand Khancoban's climate, it has the cause/patterns characteristics of Cfb climates, but a great seasonal range due to it's inland location.
Oceanic climates can get annual rainfall totals lower than Shepparton's total and Shepparton only has about 12 more rain days of Motueka at >0.1mm, as well as more total rain days than the drier locations in my region. Shepparton's aridity is a feature of rain shadow, rather than dominant high pressure in any season.
Even if Shepparton and Motueka share a similar rainfall figure, the former would city would always be more "drier" because of the higher evaporation rate, due to hotter summers. For instance, Broome and London have an annual rainfall averaging at around 600mm-something, but because Broome is so hot it will be a steppe climate. Same reason why Alice Springs is an arid climate, even though its rainfall pattern is clearly reminiscent of a semi-arid climate.
So I wouldn't compare a cool NZ city with a warmer Australian one. They're two different ingredients, despite their similarities.
C+
Winter is just a bit too warm, especially with the record lows, to receive a B-. I'd prefer winters a solid 10-15 F colder (20-30 F colder on the record lows), with summer nights a bit warmer. January-May should be wetter as well. Record highs are solid but I don't want possible freezes 9 months of the year and a record low of only 19 F.
Even if Shepparton and Motueka share a similar rainfall figure, the former would city would always be more "drier" because of the higher evaporation rate, due to hotter summers. For instance, Broome and London have an annual rainfall averaging at around 600mm-something, but because Broome is so hot it will be a steppe climate. Same reason why Alice Springs is an arid climate, even though its rainfall pattern is clearly reminiscent of a semi-arid climate.
So I wouldn't compare a cool NZ city with a warmer Australian one. They're two different ingredients, despite their similarities.
I'm not interested in comparing Shepparton and Motueka only in understanding why they have the climate they do. Shepparton and Motueka don't really have similarities as climates, other than being exposed to southerly fronts year round, although Shepparton sees a much greater percentage of it's rainfall from cold fronts, than Motueka does.
You're also wrong about Motueka looking different to Shepparton if they had the same rainfall - the drier parts of my region have a rainfall higher than Shepparton, but a look that is very similar to Shepparton, and where I spend about 4-6 weeks a year down south, looks drier than Shepparton, with about the same rainfall. Aridity index works well as a mathematical formula, but it's an imperfect tool for predicting the look of a place.
Not meaning to be offensive, but your interest in climate seems to be less about understanding what causes a place to have it's particular climate, and more about confirming obvious and easily shown differences ..... and you often use faulty/contradictory logic to do this..Thats common though, as Koppen (arguably the most influential climatologist ) made the fundamental mistake( imo) of drawing lines through climates that clearly shared the same genetics, by the use of rigid temperature thresholds -perhaps he wasn't comfortable with the intertwining mature of climate types and sought the comfort of rigid groupings?
I'm not interested in comparing Shepparton and Motueka only in understanding why they have the climate they do. Shepparton and Motueka don't really have similarities as climates, other than being exposed to southerly fronts year round, although Shepparton sees a much greater percentage of it's rainfall from cold fronts, than Motueka does.
Doesn't make it more of an oceanic climate than Motueka though. You're forgetting how cool, drizzly and cloudy Motueka is in comparison. The wind direction (or whatever you criteria you base it on) and whatnot isn't the only "oceanic" trait in here. How could you forget the other factors? And you say my ideas are faulty.
Quote:
You're also wrong about Motueka looking different to Shepparton if they had the same rainfall - the drier parts of my region have a rainfall higher than Shepparton, but a look that is very similar to Shepparton, and where I spend about 4-6 weeks a year down south, looks drier than Shepparton, with about the same rainfall. Aridity index works well as a mathematical formula, but it's an imperfect tool for predicting the look of a place.
Is there a source for that? I will still stand by what I said, that Shepparton will always be drier, and thus less oceanic, because it has a higher evaporation due to its hotter summers. Above all, Shepparton has much hotter summers and probably has around 2700 hours. Amazed that you're ignoring that.
Quote:
Not meaning to be offensive, but your interest in climate seems to be less about understanding what causes a place to have it's particular climate, and more about confirming obvious and easily shown differences ..... and you often use faulty/contradictory logic to do this..Thats common though, as Koppen (arguably the most influential climatologist ) made the fundamental mistake( imo) of drawing lines through climates that clearly shared the same genetics, by the use of rigid temperature thresholds -perhaps he wasn't comfortable with the intertwining mature of climate types and sought the comfort of rigid groupings
And I think you're clearly biased, where you base your thresholds and criteria on your own subjectivity and narrative. You try hard by categorizing the NZ climates with the Australian ones because you want them to. You personally prefer relatively warm, dry places in inland NSW to be like your drizzly oceanic climates because you feel as if, "inferior" (oceanic) climates like London and Brussels are a bad match to NZ, since the two are always compared. But no, NZ still has more in common with western Europe, than with Wagga Wagga, Albury, Shepparton, Dubbo, etc. Spare me the "genetic" train of thought, honestly. Being too technical isn't always a proper way to classify climates.
Sorry if I sounded too blunt or personal, but I really have had enough.
Doesn't make it more of an oceanic climate than Motueka though. You're forgetting how cool, drizzly and cloudy Motueka is in comparison. The wind direction (or whatever you criteria you base it on) and whatnot isn't the only "oceanic" trait in here. How could you forget the other factors? And you say my ideas are faulty.
Is there a source for that? I will still stand by what I said, that Shepparton will always be drier, and thus less oceanic, because it has a higher evaporation due to its hotter summers. Above all, Shepparton has much hotter summers and probably has around 2700 hours. Amazed that you're ignoring that
Shepparton gets virtually all it's rainfall from cold fronts -a very oceanic trait. Shepparton is much more drizzly than Motueka. The only rain I saw in 6 weeks there was light rain or drizzle. Last night here had as much rain as I saw the whole time there, and in only two hours. Remember that my climate gets more rain than the wettest parts of Sydney, and on less total rain days -it's an area of heavy rainfall. the wettest day this year so far was 132mm, which fell over 9 hours and coastal areas have had 24 hr totals of 400mm-it's not a drizzly climate, but Shepparton is.
Shepparton is sunnier by 230 hours, a difference for sure, but not a huge one considering Motueka gets 3.5 times the rainfall on only 12 more days. Summer is much sunnier in Shepparton, but then it doesn't get the frequent towering cumulus that Motueka sees in summer, Shepparton does see more featureless stratus than here does though, which I hadn't expected.
Quote:
And I think you're clearly biased, where you base your thresholds and criteria on your own subjectivity and narrative.
I don't have thresholds, and don't believe in thresholds. My criteria are pretty standard throughout climatology, but I don't agree with putting a single criteria (temperature during summer) ahead of criteria (genetics) that better explain, and provide understanding of why an area has the climate it does. Any clown can can choose a number threshold out of a hat to be climate A, B, 0r C, but attempting to show a model of how every climate on the planet is a result of geography, Coriolis effect, Hadley cells etc, is far more interesting.
Quote:
You try hard by categorizing the NZ climates with the Australian ones because you want them to. You personally prefer relatively warm, dry places in inland NSW to be like your drizzly oceanic climates because you feel as if, "inferior" (oceanic) climates like London and Brussels are a bad match to NZ, since the two are always compared. But no, NZ still has more in common with western Europe, than with Wagga Wagga, Albury, Shepparton, Dubbo, etc. Spare me the "genetic" train of thought, honestly. Being too technical isn't always a proper way to classify climates.
I hope they're not teaching that in schools these days.
You've missed the whole point from the start. The point being that Shepparton etc look to have a climate that is more Oceanic in cause,/pattern, rather than subtropical -Not that they share the same climate as Motueka. Climate is simply the average of weather, and if you want that, then wiki can give you that in a few seconds - no discussion required
Quote:
Sorry if I sounded too blunt or personal, but I really have had enough.
I'm cool with that, I'm here to talk weather/climate, not to be Mr Popular.
Shepparton gets virtually all it's rainfall from cold fronts -a very oceanic trait. Shepparton is much more drizzly than Motueka. The only rain I saw in 6 weeks there was light rain or drizzle. Last night here had as much rain as I saw the whole time there, and in only two hours. Remember that my climate gets more rain than the wettest parts of Sydney, and on less total rain days -it's an area of heavy rainfall. the wettest day this year so far was 132mm, which fell over 9 hours and coastal areas have had 24 hr totals of 400mm-it's not a drizzly climate, but Shepparton is.
Shepparton is sunnier by 230 hours, a difference for sure, but not a huge one considering Motueka gets 3.5 times the rainfall on only 12 more days. Summer is much sunnier in Shepparton, but then it doesn't get the frequent towering cumulus that Motueka sees in summer, Shepparton does see more featureless stratus than here does though, which I hadn't expected.
Regardless of that, Shepparton still receives much less rainy days than Motueka. It's pretty much a semi-arid climate. Motueka is rather wet in comparison, receiving 970mm of rain in 133 days. Despite the similar "genetics" and whatnot, I wouldn't compare it to a place that gets 441.6mm of annual and 99 days of rain. Perhaps it was just one time that Shepparton had bouts of stratus clouds, considering it has decently high sunshine hours. Every city has a summer that's "weak" in some years.
Most importantly, Motueka's narrow temperature range is akin to the oceanic places in Tasmania and southwestern Europe. Last time I checked, Motueka doesn't get arid heat from the desert, whilst Shepparton does in many days. You can see that Shepparton is clearly much hotter in the summer and, as such, should not be compared.
Say, Sydney gets heat from the Australian desert. Should it be a semi-arid climate now? Now just because Shepparton receives oceanic fronts at times, doesn't mean they dominate, and that we should tag it under the oceanic climate umbrella. Boston and Vladivostok also get oceanic influenced weather. Are they not continental climates now? Nearly every climate, besides the inland deserts of Sahara and Asia, have a maritime influence, either way. So technically, most of the world is "oceanic", even the wet tropics.
Regardless of that, Shepparton still receives much less rainy days than Motueka. It's pretty much a semi-arid climate. Motueka is rather wet in comparison, receiving 970mm of rain in 133 days. Despite the similar "genetics" and whatnot, I wouldn't compare it to a place that gets 441.6mm of annual and 99 days of rain. Perhaps it was just one time that Shepparton had bouts of stratus clouds, considering it has decently high sunshine hours. Every city has a summer that's "weak" in some years.
Most importantly, Motueka's narrow temperature range is akin to the oceanic places in Tasmania and southwestern Europe. Last time I checked, Motueka doesn't get arid heat from the desert, whilst Shepparton does in many days. You can see that Shepparton is clearly much hotter in the summer and, as such, should not be compared.
Say, Sydney gets heat from the Australian desert. Should it be a semi-arid climate now? Now just because Shepparton receives oceanic fronts at times, doesn't mean they dominate, and that we should tag it under the oceanic climate umbrella. Boston and Vladivostok also get oceanic influenced weather. Are they not continental climates now? Nearly every climate, besides the inland deserts of Sahara and Asia, have a maritime influence, either way. So technically, most of the world is "oceanic", even the wet tropics.
That is incorrect. Motueka has 1450mm on 112 days. Motueka has a narrow seasonal range (9.9C), but a reasonably large diurnal range (11.8C) -only one other coastal region in the world has a larger range,and it's still a larger range than most continental, Cfa and Csa climates see.
Shepparton does get frequent stratus cloud (I've spent 4 summers there). There isn't enough moisture for much serious convectional cloud, and the stratus cloud comes from southerly flows off the southern ocean. Shepparton is sunnier by about 230 hours - a difference, but not that big. Climate patterns have nothing to do with being weak, they are what they are.
Who's saying Motueka and Shepparton have the same climate? - not me. Remember, classification has nothing to do with actual climate. No one looks at a classification to see what sort of weather a place has -that's what wiki is for.
You still don't seem to understand what I'm saying. - I'm just saying that Shepparton's rainfall pattern is classic Cfb, as are the resultant airflows that follow.
Vladivostok and Boston's patterns are different all year -understand that Cfb climates aren't just climates on the coast, and things might become clearer for you.
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.
