The Wacky World of Weather Stations: No. 183- Swanbourne (WA)

Monday 28/10/2019

Please refer back to my first post for site specifications and to No. 92- Logan City for 2018 specifications.  If you wish to check on this (or any) site for yourself, go to my post on how to check for yourself.

Station: Swanbourne 9215

Opened: 1985

Daily Temperature data from: 1993

Data used to adjust Acorn sites at: Perth Airport, Geraldton,

Location:   Co-ordinates -31.9558 115.7619

9.2km west of Perth CBD.

BOM site plan 2016:

BOM site plan 2014:

Google satellite image 2019:

The 2016 site plan is either inaccurate or the vegetation has regrown remarkably quickly since then. The screen is very close to and almost surrounded by 2.5 metre bushes, with bare dirt tracks and carparks and buildings far too close even if the site was cleared.

This station is non-compliant, with temperatures reported at Latest Weather Observations and used to adjust data at Acorn sites.


Percentage of all Australian sites not compliant: 25.28%.

Tags: , , , , ,

23 Responses to “The Wacky World of Weather Stations: No. 183- Swanbourne (WA)”

  1. Bill In Oz Says:

    Ken this BOM site is really problematic in a number of ways
    1 : I just looked at the satellite image via Chrome for this site. I cannot see the screen at all.It is completely obscured by shrubbery & small trees.

    That has a major impact on the temperatures recorded as winds are all deflected..

    2: There are areas of bare sand which get quite hot under sunlight and thus raise the temperature of the air above the sand. Again affecting the temperatures recorded.

    3: The BOM site plan shows that the excessive native vegetation as removed ~2015-6. With nothing left. But the image for 2019 shows lots of native shrubs.

    I doubt that new native shrubs could grow so much in such a short period of time. So I suspect that the BOM site plan for 2016 is not accurate or honest with the facts.

  2. Al Says:

    Hi Ken and Bill, the picture you have used is a generated 3d photo from a very old google maps image. Try using google earth, with the 3d buidlings layer turned off. This will then allow you to look at the most recent satellite image, dated 14/11/2018 which shows the site is completely cleared of ALL vegetation.
    Your methodology when using google maps for evidence is deeply flawed. The map you have used in your description is copywrited 2019. Not taken in 2019. In fact its a photo from 2017 which has had a 3d process applied to it. In future, please use google earth, with the 3d layer turned off. This will provide you with the latest satellite pictures and the actual day/month/year it was taken.

  3. Al Says:

    Correction – I think your photo is actually pre 2016.

  4. Al Says:

    Correction, I think the photo you are using is actually pre 2016

  5. Al Says:

    Sorry I didnt realise the first comment had posted. In google earth pro, you can actually look at the historical satellite images. It appears your photo could be from as far back as 2011. every photo from 2016 onwards has all of the vegetation completely cleared.
    If you are going to keep going with this nonsense, you may as well use accurate images. Get yourself google earth Pro. Being critical of BOM while putting out wildly innacurate images just makes you look bad hey.

  6. Al Says:

    Hi Bill, you didnt uncheck the 3d buildings layer mate. Youre looking at a very old photo that has been rendered over. Look at the historical photos and go to the latest one from 2018. No scrub. No trees since 2016. Very simple to do.

  7. Al Says:

    Mate I was referring to Swanbourne. The Mt barker photos are out of date too, but what has that got to do with Swanbourne?

    • Bill In Oz Says:

      You are saying the image is out of date. So bloody what ! I’ve just goen and looked at it. It’s the same as the Google Earth satellite photo. So just where the hell are you to verify the reality on the ground here at Mt Barker.

      Or is your purpose just to troll ?

  8. kenskingdom Says:


    I am well aware that 2019 is the copyright date and the images are from some time prior to now, however I think you are missing the point. I use satellite image, street view, and site plans together to work out what has been happening. You will note in my post I said “bare dirt tracks and carparks and buildings far too close even if the site was cleared.” This site has been appalling, and even if the vegetation is cleared it would still be very poor. And does the Bureau refrain from using data from when it is appalling? Not likely.

    Bill: Please try to use more temperate language, I try to keep this site civil- even with frustrating commenters.

    • Al Says:

      Yes but I see you haven’t updated swanbourne, even though your description is completely incorrect. It is nice and cleared

    • Al Says:

      It’s an almost ideal site. I wouldn’t expect to7 to understand, not having any meteorological qualifications, but trust me, it is a very good site.

      • Bill In Oz Says:

        Al, this project of examining the BOM’s entire network of 700+ weather stations, has been going since July. Ken has found that 25% of them are NOT compliant with the BOM’s own guidelines.

        And yes everyone of these BOM stations are all being ‘managed’ by BOM staff with meteorological qualifications !

        And those staff been proved to be incompetent at the job despite their bits of paper saying they are ‘qualified’.

        Usually that would lead to the people involved being sacked.

        But I suspect that BOM will never do that. The rot is too deeply entrenched !

      • kenskingdom Says:

        “Trust me” eh? We’ve heard that before.

  9. Bill In Oz Says:

    Apologies Ken !

  10. Bill In Oz Says:

    Al has made a number of ‘claims’ here for this BOM weather site. That the Google Earth satellite photo is old & does not accurately show the current situation which can be seen on “Google Earth Pro” which he has access to.

    Ummmm ? Well that is A’s claim.

    But Al where is your evidence ? You have provided no image taken from Google Earth Pro, to prove your claims.

    Lets see it or them and verify with our own eyes !

    Mind you the site is non compliant for other reasons apart from native scrub. All those bare dirt tracks and carparks and buildings are all far too close !

  11. billinoz Says:

    Ken you & i have both been hacked.I did not write the comment about. And I suspect that you did not write the one attributed to you.

  12. Bill In Oz Says:

    And I see that I was changed slightly to billinoz instead of Bill In Oz

  13. kenskingdom Says:

    AI is now blocked. Pretty dumb attempt. A pity we won’t see his/her/its pathetic comments anymore, as AI anyway.

  14. Bill In Oz Says:

    My intuition is that Al was a bloke.Probably based in WA as that is when he started his comments. And he claimed with specific knowledge of Swanbourne & Bridgetown via his use of Google earth Pro.

    That indicates someone with professional, employee access to Google earth pro. And knowledge of BOM weather stations.

    So is Al an employee at BOM in Perth ?

  15. William in Oz Says:

    test !

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: