ill 1954 compared with normal or average values where available. 

 In this table as well as in subsequent tables, figures and discussion, 

 the units are as follows: volume of flow, 1 million cubic meters per 

 second; mean temperature and minimum observed temperature, 

 degrees C; heat transport, 1 milhon cubic meter degrees C per second. 



From table 1 it will be noted that, in spite of the considerable 

 diversion of Labrador Current water eastward north of Flemish 

 Cap, the volume transport past section T was above normal during 

 the first survey and that past section U was nearly normal and the 

 mean temperature was decidedly colder than normal. During the 

 second survey the normal seasonal increase in volume of flow did 

 not occur and the transport past sections T and U dropped below 

 normal. As the Labrador Current was not rounding the Tail of the 

 Banks to the westward, the transport past section W was small. 

 The mean temperature at section T was nearly normal, but that at 

 section U held its early season value so that it was more than a degree 

 colder than normal. By the time of the tliird survey the transport 

 past section T was still below normal, but at section U a slight increase 

 instead of the seasonal decrease brought the volume well above 

 normal. The mean temperature rose at each of these sections to 

 bring that at section T above normal and leaving that at section U 

 about a half degree below normal. The minimum temperatures, 

 which had been close to normal at both sections during the first two 

 surveys, rose to 0.3° and 0.6° above normal during the third survey. 

 The interpretation of the tabulated values in table 1 and the surface 

 topography shown in figures 15, 16, and 18 is that the larger volume 

 transport at section U compared with section T represented con- 

 tributions of waters from the northward west of section T during the 

 first and second surveys and that during the third survey some of 

 this additional volume transport was contributed by a closed cir- 

 culation over the Grand Banks. 



Figure 20 shows the dynamic topography found during the post- 

 season cruise at the Bonavista triangle. This is separated in point of 

 time by about 2 months from the occupation of the triangle during 

 the fourth survey. Also, its date in the latter part of August is later 

 than the season of the year covered by the normal seasonal variation 

 relationships given in bulletin No. 39. The normals with which it 

 has been compared are therefore of doubtful applicability. Table 1 

 shows tlie volume transport as below normal past sections NW. and 

 SE. and above normal past section SW. at the time of the fourth 

 survey. The tabulated values are for the net transport past each of 

 the sections. Usually the offshore corner of the triangle is close enough 

 to the line of zero velocity between the Labrador Current and the 

 northward flow oft'shore of it so that the net transport for the section 

 is a good measure of the Labrador Current at the triangle. At the 

 time of the fourth survey, however, the offshore corner was well into 



91 



