Jump to content

Talk:2008–09 Australian region cyclone season

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Post season

[edit]

Weak Tropical Low

Perth STWOs

All Outlooks 2009-05-10 to 2009-05-19

Season summary

[edit]
ID Date (ACST) TC Name Original Basin Source
01U 2020-11-17 *Bernard Indian Ocean TCWC Perth
02U 2008-11-17 Anika Indian Ocean Database
03U 2008-12-15 Billy NW Aus Database
04U 2008-12-21 -- GoC TCWC Darwin
05U 2008-12-23 -- Coral Sea TCWC Brisbane
06U 2009-01-10 Charlotte GoC Database
07U 2009-01-11 *05F Coral Sea TCWC Brisbane
08U 2009-01-24 Dominic W Aus Database
09U 2009-01-31 Ellie Coral Sea Database
10U 2009-02-03 Freddy Indian Ocean Database
11U 2009-02-04 -- Coral Sea TCWC Brisbane
12U 2009-02-11 -- WA TCR
13U 2009-02-18 *Innis Coral Sea TCWC Brisbane
14U 2009-02-25 -- GoC TCR
15U ?? ?? ?? ??
16U 2009-02-28 Gabrielle Indian Ocean Database
17U 2009-03-05 Hamish Coral Sea Database
18U 2009-03-15 Ilsa Indian Ocean Database
19U 2009-03-19 -- Coral Sea TCWC Brisbane
20U 2009-03-23 Jasper Coral Sea Database
21U 2009-03-23 -- GoC TCWC Darwin
22U 2009-04-11 *15F Solomon Islands TCWC Brisbane
23U 2009-04-17 Kirrily Arafura Sea Database
24U 2009-05-10 -- Indian Ocean TCWC Perth

Location Of Advisories

[edit]
Tropical Cyclone Three Day Outlook Jakarta \\ Perth \\ Perth \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Tropical Cyclone High Seas Warning Jakarta \\ Perth Cyclone 1 \\ Perth Cyclone 2 \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Tropical Cyclone Technical Bulletin Perth 1 \\ Perth 2 \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Main Pages Jakarta \\ BoM \\ JTWC
Archives BoM \\ Jakarta

JTWC:

ABIO10 \\ ABPW10
Cyclone 1 \\ Cyclone 2 \\ Cyclone 3
Unisys Archives
Best track
Archives

Dates (DD/MM)

[edit]

The DD/MM date format should be used since the area this article covers uses the same dating format. Per WP:DATE "Strong national ties to a topic" Articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that nation. Bidgee (talk) 19:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No - In certain subject areas the customary format may differ from the usual national one: Jason Rees (talk) 19:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And how is the Australian cyclone season customarily wedded to US date formats ?. I've changed this back....changing one set of dates and leaving the rest (the majority) in a different format breaks MOS rules (consistency) anyway and looks silly. I do suggest that you try to seek consensus here for this contested change - Peripitus (Talk) 10:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Peripitus - this is an article with strong ties to Australia, thus Australian formatting and spelling should be used. Textbook application of WP:ENGVAR. Please stop changing the dates to other formats. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]
I can see no reason for US over international dates apart from the fact that they were already here. But, the logical conclusion to that argument is that any improvement to an article is invalid as it wasn't there at the start. --Merbabu (talk) 03:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So they actually list the number on the Technical summary now?

[edit]

I notice with the technical summary for the latest low, they have issued a number identification with it. Example Identifier: 17U

All I can say is, thank goodness. Hopefully they keep doing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclonica (talk • contribs)

Edit: Sorry, I didn't notice they did it with 16U as well. I guess they do plan to keep doing it. Nevermind. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclonica (talk • contribs)

Not to worry Cyclonica - Im personally glad they have started to use it within their technical bulletins. Jason Rees (talk) 19:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Season impact section

[edit]

Could anyone please convert the wind speed measurements is this section from 'mph' to 'kph'. This is an Australian article, and Australians won't give a care about any imperial measurements. I realise templates are used to create the table, which is why I can't change them myself. 123.2.177.50 (talk) 11:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a km/h section but also think mph section should be kept. Bidgee (talk) 13:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, mph should be kept, sorry I was misleading. I fully support both units used throughout. However, the season impact section does not, which is just not right. Hopefully, someone with programming knowledge can fix this problem. 123.2.177.50 (talk) 14:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ask someone who knows how to work with the template to see if he can add a km/h field to it. Cyclonebiskit 15:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hamish – differences in forecasts by BoM and JTWC

[edit]

I wonder wether the differences between the forcasts between the BoM and the JTWC origin in different calculations or are due to different times of issue. However, the time gap between the issues of JTWC 08 and BoM 33 is marginal. --Matthiasb (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The JTWC issues a warning every 12 hrs, while the TCWC when there a warning is effect issues a forecast issuance every 3 hours. - グリフオーザー (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Tropical Low 21U

[edit]

TCWC Brisbane's latest 3 day forecast for the Southwest Pacific indicates two Tropical Lows in the forecast area.

The monsoon trough extends across far northern Cape York Peninsula and the northern Coral Sea. A small low is embedded in the trough just south of Port Moresby, and is not expected to develop significantly. Another broader low lies over the northeast Coral Sea near 13S 157E. Environmental conditions may gradually become more favourable for the development of this low late this week, however the probability of it becoming a tropical cyclone in the next three days is low.

Tropical Low 20U (or what we believe is 20U) is the low located near 13S 157E, due to the development potential in the long term. However, as has happened previously with this article, weak lows are sometimes included in the U identifier list and missed. I'm not adding it to the article, because in the long term 20U is likely to develop, and it may shed some light on the U number with the Technical Summary, but I'm making a reference of it here. It formed on March 17. There is also the possibility that Tropical Low 19U isn't even included in the identifying U chart, in which case 20U would obviously need to be subtracted to 19U.

If only they listed them when the numbers were given out, not just on Technical Summaries! Would make it a lot easier.

What was 19U I have also subtracted to 18U based on the Technical Summary for Tropical Low one in the Indian Ocean. This could possibly indicate that what is listed as 19U (west of TCWC Perth's forecast area) wasn't given an identifier at all, hence my above comment. Sorry about the large block of text. :P Cyclonica (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is just my guesswork here but i think it fits in - The TL in the SWIO will have been designated as 19U -however it was mistaknely refered to as 18U as 19U was first mentioned in the Perth TWO at the same time as 18 was reffered to in Darwins TWO. As for 21U it will be needed to be added in at some stage but it might be worth waiting and seeing wat happens over the next 24 hours Jason Rees (talk) 17:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's odd that they didn't count the Perth tropical low after they continued to monitor it as one west of 90E. -- グリフオーザー (talk) 19:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Numbering issues

[edit]

According to one of the recent technical bulletins issued by the BoM, what we thought was 20U is actually 19U. I don't know what to do with the original 19U so I've just removed the numbering for the time being. Cyclonebiskit 12:47, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh this is the second time in a week that this has happened (turned out 19U was 18U as well). Thank goodness for the Technical Summaries.Cyclonica (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless Jakarta issued a number on the low i suggest that we remove it Jason Rees (talk) 13:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Low (91S) probably would have been numbered by Jakarta since it was ID at 10S as a Tropical Low by BOM Perth -- グリフオーザー (talk) 14:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is some discrepancies here, which I can't ignore anymore. Unless there is a source that confirms the BoM numbered a low by a number, I propose their designation be stripped. I see guesswork has been done, which is definitely not encyclopediac. It's also very bad to have logs say 

Tropical Low 06U [1002 hPa] from TCWC Darwin 2009-01-08, 0400z @ 17.0ºS 139.0ºE.

when the link provided doesn't include a number. If adequate links can't be found within the next week, I will remove the numbers. That said, it is likely the BoM will have a list after the season is over. If you can refrain from your guesswork until then, we should be good. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:32, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose - Hink As u will remember i sent an email to BoM the other week during the Christmas pierod which came back as saying Anika was 01U - Bernard 02U etc - Now i went through the logs the other week when we got told that 16U had formed which we all thought it was 13U and double checked the logs and whilst its unsourced i checked which low was which and it was quite straight forward to workout which one was which. Also it is not likely that the BoM will have a list after the season as if they did wheres last seasons? as they have used the U for several years now.
Wouldn't it be a good idea to just email the BoM again? -- RattleMan 17:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An email is not a webcite, that is my biggest qualm with the numbering. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tropical Weather Outlook never reveal the number so the 06U was implied in that webcite. The number came from what number came after the last number used in the archive discussion with BOM noting a tropical low has formed. -- グリフオーザー (talk) 01:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unnumbered Tropical Low

[edit]

I can't quite understand why this is in the article at all. On top of that, it's been listed in the time graph thing that it's been there for almost half a month, which it hasn't, it's been west of 90e, which isn't in Australia's region, and it wasn't even assigned a U designation. I personally think it should be removed entirely, it's not the least bit noteworthy.Cyclonica (talk) 03:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It probably should be in the other storm section like Wpac. Hurricane Typhoon Cyclone 04:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. If it had of went into the Australian region it would have been numbered. Bidgee (talk) 04:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the unnumbered tropical low since there has been no opposition to it. Cyclonebiskit 21:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ilsa (Izilda?)

[edit]

Could there be a chance that Ilsa will crossover and be renamed Izilda before it weakens even more? --Yue of the North 20:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep almost certainly - Update or maybe not Jason Rees (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where has Jasper come from ? Jason Rees (talk) 20:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Low 19U --Yue of the North 21:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Except Brisbane have now labbeled Jasper as 20U - on a side note im surprised Reunion arent issuing advisories yet Jason Rees (talk) 22:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ilsa has weakened to below TC status, so it would likely be Ilsa-11R. update: 11R has been designated to another area of disturbed weather, so it may be Ilsa-12R.125.240.29.218 (talk) 00:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is still 0.1 degree of latitude from the SWIO.--Yue of the North 01:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mauritius Meteorological Services FQIO25 FIMP 240000 

AT 24/0000UTC, EX-TROPICAL CYCLONE 'ILSA' (AUSTRALIA) 1005HPA WAS
CENTRED WITHIN 25NM OF 19.3S 90.1E.

MOVEMENT WEST-SOUTH-WESTERLY 14 KT.

-- グリフオーザー (talk) 01:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Tropical Disturbance" now, 20.7S 87.8E (no designated number) - グリフオーザー (talk) 16:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a policy on the U designation numbers now?

[edit]

The reason I ask is due to a current Tropical Low in the northern region which is very likely already labeled 21U (and probably was when Darwin identified it in capital letters). Obviously, we should wait until Technical Summaries are released to name designate them their numbers (as what has happened in the past has been very wrong with this article).

My question: Despite things being pretty obvious that this system IS already 21U, should we always wait for Technical Summaries, which would in my opinion, provide a more consistent article? Cyclonica (talk) 02:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

21U or **J? - but anyway i think thats the general consensus Jason Rees (talk) 02:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think all of the numbers need a source, and we should not do any guessing. If only five storms in the season have their numbers confirmed, then only the five should get the numbers. Guessing is a bad thing, especially if we missed something. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you mean 21J? It's not in Jakarta area of responsibility until it gets at 125E.. The low formed at 129E.

Anyway if this low does get a name it would probably be Hibu or Ila from Papa New Guinea list. - グリフオーザー (talk) 05:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its definatly not going to get a name from Papua New Guineas list and according to the TCOP for the region Jakarta have responsbilty for the land areas that are above 10S Jason Rees (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. Then I am confused when the Jakarta's Tropical Cyclone Outlook states that its AOR is from 90-125E north of 10S. The Tropical Low's current location is 8.5 129.3E. - グリフオーザー (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically primary warning responsibilty is remaining with Darwin for now but jakarta has warning responsibilty for the islands that are to the north of Australia which are a part of Indonesia. Also its probbably going to be named Kirrly 16:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused, if the Tropical Low is above 10S, shouldn't it be in Jakarta's AoR? --Yue of the North 19:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think this could clear the problem:
  • BOM will monitor all tropical cyclones that form between 90°E and 160°E, issuing special advisories when a cyclone forms in either TCWC Jakarta's or Port Moresby's area of responsibility.
So the IP above (there's no sign, just date & time) is right. It will be named by the BOM, because TCWC Jakarta monitors 90~125E north of 10S, and TCWC Port Moresby monitors 141~160E north of 10S. Weatherlover819 (talk) 06:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, the BoM will issue special advisories on all tropical cyclones in TCWC Jakarta and TCWC Port Moresby.--Yue of the North 13:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Irmela - Consider TCWC Jakarta as NMHSS untill from 125E to about 130/135E - personally i think Jakartas and Morsebys aors should be extended out to cover darwins aor
@ Weatherlover819 yep thats wat happened during GUBA & DURGA last year. Jason Rees (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well 21U formed within TCWC Darwin's AOR, I also believe that the TCWC Darwin is still helping out TCWC Jakarta but don't know if it's still happening. Just incase some may not know the AOR map can be viewed here. Bidgee (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gabrielle

[edit]

According to Gary Padgetts Tracks for March 2009 Gabrielle has been downgraded to a Tropical low due to it not meeting the critera for the SEIO & SPAC. [1].Jason Rees (talk) 00:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People missing

[edit]

It dosen't show any people missing in the area, I wan't the total, thanks. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 20:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused, can you clarify what you mean by this? Cyclonebiskit 22:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I mean death, indirect death and the ones are missing and not found. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 03:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still confused? Sources, where, when ect would be helpful. Bidgee (talk) 03:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There aren't any people missing according to the information I've seen. Cyclonebiskit 03:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This basin is not like Wpac? Wpac has so many people missing. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 18:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fatalities are very rare in Australia as a result of Tropical Cyclones. The WPac gets a lot of fatalities due to the population density, the quality of homes, and the geography. Each basin is different. Cyclonebiskit 18:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You make me think about Haiti, where storms devastate there. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 22:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Us

[edit]

With thanks to Gary Padgett & BOM i have been able to get a full list of which disturbance was which, though it is unclear as of this moment weather Jakarta or PNG issue any designations.Jason Rees (talk) 19:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disturbance ID, Date TC Name Originating TCWC Originating Basin Lat (S) Long (E)
01U 17/11/2008 Bernard Perth Indian Ocean 8.5 77.5
02U 18/11/2008 Anika Perth Indian Ocean 8.5 90
03U 15/12/2008 Billy Darwin Timor Sea 10 129
04U 21/12/2008 N/A Darwin Gulf Carp 13 139
05U 23/12/2008 N/A Brisbane Coral Sea 9 155
06U 08/01/2009 Charlotte Darwin Gulf Carp 16 139
07U 11/01/2009 05F Brisbane Coral Sea 14.0 155.5
08U 25/01/2009 Dominic Perth Indian Ocean 18 120
09U 31/01/2009 Ellie Brisbane Coral Sea 16 148
10U 02/02/2009 Freddy Perth Indian Ocean 16 130
12U 10/02/2009 N/A Perth Timor Sea 13 128
13U 17/02/2009 Innis (Fiji) Brisbane Pacific Ocean 22 164
14U 19/02/2009 N/A Darwin Gulf Carp 12.5 139
16U 25/02/2009 Gabrielle Perth Indian Ocean 10 101
17U 05/03/2009 Hamish Brisbane Coral Sea 12 146
18U 13/03/2009 Ilsa Darwin Arafura Sea 8 139
19U 19/03/2009 N/A Brisbane Coral Sea 13 153
20U 22/03/2009 Jasper Brisbane Coral Sea 14 151
21U 23/03/2009 N/A Darwin Gulf Carp 10 140
22U 08/04/2009 15F Brisbane Coral Sea 7 162
23U 18/04/2009 Kirrily Darwin Arafura Sea 7 132
Notes
Tropical Low 22U formed on 2009-04-08 according to BOM near 7S 162E. Allowing for a couple of degrees either side (since its a weak Cyclone) its in the same postion as Nadi reported 15F to be.Jason Rees (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on 2008–09 Australian region cyclone season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 38 external links on 2008–09 Australian region cyclone season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2008–09 Australian region cyclone season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Who came first?

[edit]

I'm really confused. Based on 2008-09 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season, the remnant disturbance of Bernard entered the basin on 21th of November, which is redesignated as Tropical Low 01U before dissipating on the same day.

"The remnants of Bernard entered the Australia region, where it was briefly designated as Tropical Low 01U before dissipating".

But when it comes to 2008-09 Australian region cyclone season, Tropical Low 02U (Tropical Cyclone Anika) formed on November 17, 4 days ahead of "Tropical Low 01U, or Bernard.".

"During 17 November TCWC Perth and TCWC Jakarta reported that Tropical Low 02U had developed within the monsoon trough about 925 km (575 mi) to the northeast of Cocos Islands"

Can someone clarify this? Thanks. BrownieKing talk 03:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the BoM [almost certainly] designated Bernard as 01U well before it entered the Aus Region for TC warnings which is their right since they issue high seas warnings out to 80E if not further eastwards. Jason Rees (talk) 06:39, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:2008–09_Australian_region_cyclone_season&oldid=1211190355"