From                                           Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
001 "Ben Tichborne" [tich at netaccess.co.nz]         Lightning strikes Auckland Skytower
002 John Woodbridge [jrw at pixelcom.net]             RE: aus-wx July rainfall - Mt. Crosby wx	
003 Michael Scollay [michael.scollay at telstra.com.  Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...
004 Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]        Deluge hits Melbourne!
005 Paul_Mossman at agd.nsw.gov.au                    Deluge hits Melbourne!
006 Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]        Lightning strikes Auckland Skytower
007 Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]        Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...
008 Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]        Melbourne July monthly rainfall
009 Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au]    Strahan Wx
010 Keith Barnett [weather at ozemail.com.au]         Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
001

From: "Ben Tichborne" [tich at netaccess.co.nz]
To: [aussie-weather at world.std.com]
Subject: aus-wx: Lightning strikes Auckland Skytower
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 09:46:11 +1200
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

 As a thunderstorn struck central Auckland yesterday, the city's highest
building, The Skytower, not surprisingly took the most hits. Go to
www.tvone.co.nz/news/ now for a better look at this event. Sydney viewers
might be familiar with such a scene.

 Less spectacular, but thick fog has been affecting Christchurch over the
last few days - disrupting the Airport at times. The ground moisture left
over from last weekend's rains has helped contribute to the fog. BTW a very
cold southerly outbreak is expected over NZ early next week, with one model
suggesting thickness levels of 522 or even less over the eastern South
Island. 

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
002

From: John Woodbridge [jrw at pixelcom.net]
To: "'aussie-weather at world.std.com'" [aussie-weather at world.std.com]
Subject: RE: aus-wx: RE: aus-wx July rainfall - Mt. Crosby wx	
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:29:32 +1000
Organization: Pixel Components
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

Well in fact it wasn't, only down to 8C due to a Westerly which cranked up 
in the early hours.  Looks like we are in for the 6th day running of 0/8 
cloud cover.  Humidity now well down as one would expect in this Winter 
pattern.  Looks like it will break by the weekend though and return to a SE 
regime with showers.

John.

-----Original Message-----
From:	John Woodbridge [SMTP:jrw at pixelcom.net]
Sent:	Wednesday, 21 July 1999 22:40
To:	'aussie-weather at world.std.com'
Subject:	aus-wx: RE: aus-wx July rainfall	

Hi Anthony,

Responding to this, 54mm so far this July at Mt. Crosby, of which a large
percentage was recorded on the first day or the month (32mm).   Good rain
for this time of year!!

Winter is back...  Ipswich (read Amberley) was reported as min 1C last
night, I recorded 6.5C.  Tonight will be a bit cooler with 0C forecast.

John.

>snip
Subject:	aus-wx: Weak line of Showers + T'storms yesterday evening

Did anyone receive anything nice?  So far, I've had 97.4mm for July -
well above the July average of 62mm, but nowhere as much as our NE NSW
counterparts.

Anthony from Brisbane

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
003

Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:46:54 +1000
From: Michael Scollay [michael.scollay at telstra.com.au]
Organization: Telstra Strategy & Research
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4m)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

Blair Trewin wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 17:34:26 +1000 (EST):
> 
> Michael Scollay wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:29:07 +1000
[snip]
> > ... Bugger-all snow accumulates in most snow guages 
> > during strong SW/W/NW winds. Drop the wind speed to 
> > below say, 20kph and the snow guage starts working 
> > properly.
> 
> Cabramurra is a very exposed site as well.
> 
> Snow measurement is a MAJOR problem everywhere where there is
> significant snowfall, not least because separating falling and
> blowing snow becomes very difficult in some situations. There's
> quite a bit in the scientific literature regarding the impact of
> changes in snow gauges on the precipitation record, especially in
> Russia (I can dig out references if anyone is interested). I'm
> also aware of an experiment in Finland where a large number (20-30?)
> of different types of snow gauges were set up in a single level
> field and the differences in snow catch between some gauges were
> upwards of 50%.

Unfortunately, knowing that there is a problem makes any
reasonable historical trend analysis or precipitation 
problematic or even invalid. At the end of the day, the
standard set-out snow-depth measurement course with snow
guages at each location is the only way.

I can testify in my analysis of such data and specific
knowledge of the locale of Spencers Creek that much more
rigour is needed. Some examples are that snow-years vary
considerably. While maximum accumulation is predominantly 
on the SE slopes this can vary considerably effectively
skewing the record over the course from year to year. An
average depth of 300cm might mean 50cm in the open and
over 500cm in sheltered areas like in 1981/92. Other years
might see 120cm in the open and 200cm in sheltered areas.
The average is less, but I would argue that more snow has
fallen overall leaving the latter example as the better
year. This is caused by the nature of predominant weather
systems that bring snow in any particular year. Knowing
how the snow fall came about is as important as the snow
fall itself, particularly if we are looking at future
green-house induced scenario analysis. But one can't do 
any of this without reliable base historical met data in 
the first place.

My very point about the Charlotte Pass obs anomaly is
that it's all very well to postulate as to how it came
about, but what can be done to correct the error and
better guarantee reliable and precise met data from
these areas? 

I have my ideas but I don't think that many people are
interested enough. We have an incredible resource in
our mountains, both in terms of its natural beauty, the
pleasure it brings to people who use (and abuse) it and
the water resource it stores and releases. If climate
and weather forecasting could be good enough to predict
the quantity of snowfall in anticipation of a seasonal
release of melt water to flush our western river systems
at the right time of year (instead of the wrong time), 
huge bonuses are possible in the areas of native fish 
stock regeneration and proper salination management. 
We could also put some water back into the Snowy River. 
All dreams, not of severe weather, I know, but I
believe this would be a benefitial future outcome for
all involved today and our children who are destined
to inherit responsibility for our legacy...
(End Soap-box:-) There's a genuine concern herein...

Michael Scollay       mailto:michael.scollay at telstra.com.au
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
004

From: Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]
Subject: aus-wx: Deluge hits Melbourne!
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com (Aussie Weather)
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 11:38:37 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

Melbourne was swept by a deluge this morning. In some areas rain
fell continuously for more than five minutes, and some ants were 
forced to flee their homes as numerous small puddles broke their
banks. Rainfall totals in some suburbs are believed to have 
exceeded a millimetre.

(Seriously, the weather in Melbourne recently has been so boring 
that even the brief approximation of a heavy shower that unloaded
itself upon my place around 6 this morning is worthy of comment.
The city got the princely sum of 0.4 millimetres).

Blair Trewin
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
005

From: Paul_Mossman at agd.nsw.gov.au
X-Lotus-Fromdomain: NSW_AG
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 12:10:00 +1000
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Deluge hits Melbourne!
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com



You go Blair!!!

The weather here is much the same with that beautiful deep blue sky just going
on & on...........

At least the water has evaporated....... and its not windy like Sydney.

Bring on the next weather event.

Paul at Port.






Blair Trewin  on 22/07/99 11:38:37

Please respond to aussie-weather at world.std.com

To:   aussie-weather at world.std.com (Aussie Weather)
cc:    (bcc: Paul Mossman/LCO/NSW_AG)
Subject:  aus-wx: Deluge hits Melbourne!




Melbourne was swept by a deluge this morning. In some areas rain
fell continuously for more than five minutes, and some ants were
forced to flee their homes as numerous small puddles broke their
banks. Rainfall totals in some suburbs are believed to have
exceeded a millimetre.

(Seriously, the weather in Melbourne recently has been so boring
that even the brief approximation of a heavy shower that unloaded
itself upon my place around 6 this morning is worthy of comment.
The city got the princely sum of 0.4 millimetres).

Blair Trewin
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
006

From: Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Lightning strikes Auckland Skytower
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 16:35:50 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

> 
>  Less spectacular, but thick fog has been affecting Christchurch over the
> last few days - disrupting the Airport at times. The ground moisture left
> over from last weekend's rains has helped contribute to the fog. BTW a very
> cold southerly outbreak is expected over NZ early next week, with one model
> suggesting thickness levels of 522 or even less over the eastern South
> Island. 
> 
All of the models I've seen (GASP, ECMWF, UKMO) are supporting this
for Sunday/Monday. Should be interesting...

Blair Trewin
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
007

From: Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 16:51:53 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

> 
> Blair Trewin wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 17:34:26 +1000 (EST):
> > 
> > Michael Scollay wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:29:07 +1000
> [snip]
> > > ... Bugger-all snow accumulates in most snow guages 
> > > during strong SW/W/NW winds. Drop the wind speed to 
> > > below say, 20kph and the snow guage starts working 
> > > properly.
> > 
> > Cabramurra is a very exposed site as well.
> > 
> > Snow measurement is a MAJOR problem everywhere where there is
> > significant snowfall, not least because separating falling and
> > blowing snow becomes very difficult in some situations. There's
> > quite a bit in the scientific literature regarding the impact of
> > changes in snow gauges on the precipitation record, especially in
> > Russia (I can dig out references if anyone is interested). I'm
> > also aware of an experiment in Finland where a large number (20-30?)
> > of different types of snow gauges were set up in a single level
> > field and the differences in snow catch between some gauges were
> > upwards of 50%.
> 
> Unfortunately, knowing that there is a problem makes any
> reasonable historical trend analysis or precipitation 
> problematic or even invalid. At the end of the day, the
> standard set-out snow-depth measurement course with snow
> guages at each location is the only way.
> 
> I can testify in my analysis of such data and specific
> knowledge of the locale of Spencers Creek that much more
> rigour is needed. Some examples are that snow-years vary
> considerably. While maximum accumulation is predominantly 
> on the SE slopes this can vary considerably effectively
> skewing the record over the course from year to year. An
> average depth of 300cm might mean 50cm in the open and
> over 500cm in sheltered areas like in 1981/92. Other years
> might see 120cm in the open and 200cm in sheltered areas.
> The average is less, but I would argue that more snow has
> fallen overall leaving the latter example as the better
> year. This is caused by the nature of predominant weather
> systems that bring snow in any particular year. Knowing
> how the snow fall came about is as important as the snow
> fall itself, particularly if we are looking at future
> green-house induced scenario analysis. But one can't do 
> any of this without reliable base historical met data in 
> the first place.

I agree with everything you say here.

> My very point about the Charlotte Pass obs anomaly is
> that it's all very well to postulate as to how it came
> about, but what can be done to correct the error and
> better guarantee reliable and precise met data from
> these areas? 

My comments here:

- the snowfall measurement problem is probably intractable. As I
mentioned in a previous message, countries with far more experience 
in dealing with snow than us (like Finland and Russia) have tried and
failed to come up with something adequate. The basic problem is that
if the measurement is of snow fallen, it is difficult/impossible to
separate falling and blowing snow; if it is of snow on the ground,
then this is highly susceptible to drifting, as Michael says, and
the amount of snow on the ground at a specific location may not be a 
good indicator of the amount that has fallen during the season.

- it is obvious from the historical record that the recruitment of
good observers at alpine sites is a major problem - in particular,
ski resort staff have a rapid turnover. Places like Perisher and
Falls Creek just don't have many (if any?) people who stay there
12 months a year for 10+ years. I can't see a solution to this 
problem, short of the Bureau staffing an office itself, which isn't
going to happen. 

- as a result of this, it is likely that most observations in the
alpine area are likely to be done by automated stations - good for
temperature and pressure, good for wind as long as the equipment
doesn't ice up, lousy for frozen precipitation, no good for visual
observations (cloud, visibility, snow/rain transition etc.). 

- much as we'd like to (a recurring fantasy of mine is to be able to
retrieve daily temperature data for Australia from the time of the
last Ice Age :-) the historical data is history and the fragmented
historical records are a fact of life. I think that in 30 years'
time we'll have a reasonable climatology from the automated sites
established in the first half of the 1990's, but it's pretty
limited now.


> I have my ideas but I don't think that many people are
> interested enough. We have an incredible resource in
> our mountains, both in terms of its natural beauty, the
> pleasure it brings to people who use (and abuse) it and
> the water resource it stores and releases. If climate
> and weather forecasting could be good enough to predict
> the quantity of snowfall in anticipation of a seasonal
> release of melt water to flush our western river systems
> at the right time of year (instead of the wrong time), 
> huge bonuses are possible in the areas of native fish 
> stock regeneration and proper salination management. 
> We could also put some water back into the Snowy River. 
> All dreams, not of severe weather, I know, but I
> believe this would be a benefitial future outcome for
> all involved today and our children who are destined
> to inherit responsibility for our legacy...
> (End Soap-box:-) There's a genuine concern herein...

Agree with all of this too. There's some work at the back-of-the-envelope
stage by someone in BMRC on seasonal snowfall forecasting, which 
hopefully will become refined with time.

Blair Trewin
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
008

From: Blair Trewin [blair at met.Unimelb.EDU.AU]
Subject: aus-wx: Melbourne July monthly rainfall
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com (Aussie Weather)
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 17:02:44 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

Melbourne's currently sitting on 11.8mm for the month, with the 
progs suggesting that little, if any, rain is likely in the next
week.

This won't be a record - the current record is 9.4mm in 1979. We are
currently in second place (1994 had 12.0mm). There have been ten
Julys with less than 20mm. The cutoff for decile 1 (bottom 10% of
totals) is 24.1mm.

Blair Trewin

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
009

Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 18:10:31 +1000
From: Anthony Cornelius [cyclone at flatrate.net.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Strahan Wx
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

Hi Chas,

I have a friend down in Tassie (not sure exactly whereabouts) he said there
were about 4-5 homes unroofed, and a few large trees down.

Anthony from a COLD Brisbane

Chas & Helen Osborn wrote:

> Hello  Everyone
>
> Just in from the airport 2pm  WSW 33G53KT  QNH0997 Temp 9C.
>
> Chas
> Strahan Tasmania
>
>  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>  To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
>  with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
>  message.
>  -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
010

Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:51:51 +1000
From: Keith Barnett [weather at ozemail.com.au]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: aussie-weather at world.std.com
Subject: Re: aus-wx: Charlotte Pass 3pm Obs of 20/7/1999 suspect...
Sender: aussie-weather-approval at world.std.com
Reply-To: aussie-weather at world.std.com

It's a noble thing to be concerned about improving the environment and
to be willing and active enough to do something to that end, but,
despite all the endeavours in the world to that end, there is still the
need for clerical accuracy in the taking of weather readings.
The skills of the humble pen-pusher remain paramount even in the highest
of scientific endeavours. That goes without saying when the data are
used for research.
I really think clerical ineptitude, or just plain carelessness, has let
the ship down here, rather than any scientific or technical cause.

Michael Scollay wrote:
> 
> Blair Trewin wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 17:34:26 +1000 (EST):
> >
> > Michael Scollay wrote on Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:29:07 +1000
> [snip]
> > > ... Bugger-all snow accumulates in most snow guages
> > > during strong SW/W/NW winds. Drop the wind speed to
> > > below say, 20kph and the snow guage starts working
> > > properly.
> >
> > Cabramurra is a very exposed site as well.
> >
> > Snow measurement is a MAJOR problem everywhere where there is
> > significant snowfall, not least because separating falling and
> > blowing snow becomes very difficult in some situations. There's
> > quite a bit in the scientific literature regarding the impact of
> > changes in snow gauges on the precipitation record, especially in
> > Russia (I can dig out references if anyone is interested). I'm
> > also aware of an experiment in Finland where a large number (20-30?)
> > of different types of snow gauges were set up in a single level
> > field and the differences in snow catch between some gauges were
> > upwards of 50%.
> 
> Unfortunately, knowing that there is a problem makes any
> reasonable historical trend analysis or precipitation
> problematic or even invalid. At the end of the day, the
> standard set-out snow-depth measurement course with snow
> guages at each location is the only way.
> 
> I can testify in my analysis of such data and specific
> knowledge of the locale of Spencers Creek that much more
> rigour is needed. Some examples are that snow-years vary
> considerably. While maximum accumulation is predominantly
> on the SE slopes this can vary considerably effectively
> skewing the record over the course from year to year. An
> average depth of 300cm might mean 50cm in the open and
> over 500cm in sheltered areas like in 1981/92. Other years
> might see 120cm in the open and 200cm in sheltered areas.
> The average is less, but I would argue that more snow has
> fallen overall leaving the latter example as the better
> year. This is caused by the nature of predominant weather
> systems that bring snow in any particular year. Knowing
> how the snow fall came about is as important as the snow
> fall itself, particularly if we are looking at future
> green-house induced scenario analysis. But one can't do
> any of this without reliable base historical met data in
> the first place.
> 
> My very point about the Charlotte Pass obs anomaly is
> that it's all very well to postulate as to how it came
> about, but what can be done to correct the error and
> better guarantee reliable and precise met data from
> these areas?
> 
> I have my ideas but I don't think that many people are
> interested enough. We have an incredible resource in
> our mountains, both in terms of its natural beauty, the
> pleasure it brings to people who use (and abuse) it and
> the water resource it stores and releases. If climate
> and weather forecasting could be good enough to predict
> the quantity of snowfall in anticipation of a seasonal
> release of melt water to flush our western river systems
> at the right time of year (instead of the wrong time),
> huge bonuses are possible in the areas of native fish
> stock regeneration and proper salination management.
> We could also put some water back into the Snowy River.
> All dreams, not of severe weather, I know, but I
> believe this would be a benefitial future outcome for
> all involved today and our children who are destined
> to inherit responsibility for our legacy...
> (End Soap-box:-) There's a genuine concern herein...
> 
> Michael Scollay       mailto:michael.scollay at telstra.com.au
>  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>  To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
>  with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
>  message.
>  -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 To unsubscribe from aussie-weather send e-mail to:majordomo at world.std.com
 with "unsubscribe aussie-weather your_email_address" in the body of your
 message.
 -----------------------jacob at iinet.net.au------------------------------