Earliest meteorological readings in San Fernando (Cádiz, Spain)
Abstract. Cádiz and San Fernando are two nearby towns with a wealth of meteorological records due to their connection with the Spanish Royal Navy officers and enlightened merchants. Several previous works have already recovered a significant amount of meteorological records of interest in these localities. However, unnoticed previously more than 40,000 daily meteorological observations recorded at the Royal Observatory of the Spanish Navy (located in San Fernando) during the period 1799–1813 remained neither digitized nor studied. Here, we have carried out this important task describing the different steps undertaken to achieve it as well as the results obtained. The dataset is composed by different meteorological variables such as atmospheric pressure, air temperature, precipitation, or state of the sky. As a first step a quality control was carried out to find possible errors in the original data or in the digitization process. Moreover, the antique units were converted to modern units. Also, the metadata and an analysis of the data have been described. Finally, we study in detail the meteorological conditions in October 1805, during the Battle of Trafalgar and to check the possible local effects of the unknown volcanic eruption of 1809. The dataset is freely available to the scientific community and can be download at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7104289.
Nieves Bravo-Paredes et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
CC1: 'Comment on cp-2022-75', Michael Chenoweth, 15 Oct 2022
- AC3: 'Reply on CC1', José M. Vaquero, 16 Jan 2023
RC1: 'Comment on cp-2022-75', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Nov 2022
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', José M. Vaquero, 16 Jan 2023
RC2: 'Comment on cp-2022-75', Anonymous Referee #2, 07 Dec 2022
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', José M. Vaquero, 16 Jan 2023
Nieves Bravo-Paredes et al.
[Data] Earliest meteorological readings in San Fernando (Cádiz, Spain) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7104289
Nieves Bravo-Paredes et al.
Viewed (geographical distribution)
A number of minor changes are offered here to improve the grammar in the English text:
Line 7 - change download to "downloaded"
Line 9 - insert the word "are" between "previously more" to read "previously are more"
Line 12 - change "composed by different" to "composed of different"
Line 15 - change "data have been described" to "data are described"
Lines 22-23 - change
Line 36 - change "from 18th century" to "from the 18th century"
Line 36 - change "focused in 19th" to "focused on 19th"
Line 62 - change "San Fernando in the Bay of Cadiz" to "San Fernando on the Bay of Cadiz"
Line 69 - Reword the sentence to read: "The data compiled in SF1799-1813 came from data generated by a plan to carry out astronmical....."
Lines 74 & 75 - Change the first two sentences to: "The ROA observations were made using different instruments and different units. A total of 45862 discrete observations were made from 1799 to 1813."
Line 81 - change "provokes" to "means"
Line 92 - change "There is not station elevation..." to "There is no station elevation..."
Line 94 - change "100 feet from sea level" to "100 feet above sea level". Is this Burgos feet or unknown?
Lines 143-144 change "instead of the real number of the original document" to "instead of the actual number in the original document"
Line 236 - Insert the word "the" ahead of each instance of "dashed gray line" .... "solid gray line"
Line 238 - THE black line ...
Line 238-239 - THE dashed black line
Line 239 - This LINE corresponds to the
Lines 261-262 - as above, insert the word "the". THE daily average air temperature for 1997-2021 is depicted by the solid black line. THE dashed black....
Line 263 - change "Just like pressure data" to "Just like the pressure data"
Lines 308-309 - change "months there is not rainfall data" to "months there is no rainfall data"
Lines 20-23 - The authors discuss the importance of the creation of long-time series of meteorological variables. However, as this paper does not have continuous data to append to a Cadiz-centered series then I do not think this is pertinent to the discussion. Perhaps a focus on data search and rescue that can direct searches for other data that might fill the remaining gap.
Lines 94-96 - I do not agree with the reasoning for the choice. The same instruments could just have easily been moved to another site. It is best to leave this unknown or without reasonable uncertainty bounds.
Line 99 - do we have any reason to believe it is the same George Adams barometer in both periods?
Lines 113-114 - since this is an English language paper, it is better to convert the WpSW to WxSW and so forth, while noting it is "p" in Spanish. That is, reverse the usage as presently presented.
Line 117 - what level of precision were the prevailing wind data given in 1812-13?
Lines 119-121 - How were the wind force terms converted into a numerical value?
Line 122 - Are the wind force terms in 1812-13 consistent with the earlier series?
Lines 139-141 - if the basic quality control steps are identical to those done with other records, a reference to the source could be included here.
Lines 143-148 - I think this section could be removed without losing any information as to the checks described after these lines.
Line 182 - can remove "The density of the mercury changes with temperature." This is redundant as the other sentences say the same.
Lines 190-191 and 198 - There are two bold-faced notes that begin with Error. The note is in Spanish. If the authors need to provide additional information then this should be done as I am not sure what their intention is concerning the notes.
Line 193 - change Pascal to hectoPascal
Line 210 - change "the coefficient of determination" to "the correlation coefficient between"
Line 225 - how were the adjustments made to compare them - were the same times of observation available in both periods? Were these adjustments only made to monthly average values or to the original readings?
Lines 235-239 - the usefulness of this figure hinges on the questions concerning line 225.
Lines 249-250 - change "Due to this fact, it has been added 0.22 inches of pressure to the original pressure observations" to "Due to this UNDER-READING, 0.22 inches ARE ADDED to the original pressure observations"
Figure 4 caption - you need to state what the black line is, which you do in the text.
Lines 256-259 - Given the different observation times, and the lack of details on the correction procedure with respect to these differences, I am not clear on why I should believe the data shows similar "behavior", by which I think the authors mean the average annual, monthly, and diurnal ranges of pressure. The gridded data may or may not be accurate but I have no way of comparing them based on the information as presently provided.
The authors need to note that the data are not directly homogeneous or part of a continuous time series, so its usefulness is limited until and unless other data and/or methodologies can allow the construction of such a time series. Some internal checks on some of the subsets of data might be useful - compare day versus night diurnal ranges of temperature in 1799-1801 with modern data to see if unusual patterns exist, which might reveal information about the exposure of the thermometer. This might lead to a more accurate way to adjust these isolated series.
Lines 433-436 - The understanding of the weather of the battle of Trafalgar was not really significantly improved. The data is broadly consistent with what is known but the single record itself cannot do this - more data over a larger region is required as mentioned earlier.