Talk:2008–09 Australian region cyclone season/Archive 1

Subtropical Low[edit]

Gary Padgett during his Summuary has mentioned that there was a Subtropical Low in TCWC Perths AOR during July. Is it worth adding it to the article??? Jason Rees (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, that link is to a forum, which is uncitable, and second, unless an agency monitored it/said it was something, then we can't mention it. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) Whoops wrong link this is the one i meant to put down 2) Padgett says that BOM did monitor and release warnings for it but im not sure weather they designated it as a Subtropical low or anything so ill check it out via WX Tropical in a bit Jason Rees (talk) 00:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update Ive now Checked and theres nothing on WX Trop Jason Rees (talk) 00:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from Billy's TC technical remarks: The future motion of the system may be determined by the development and movement of a low currently in the Gulf of Carpentaria. This system is expected to track steadily west over the base of the Top End of the Northern Territory and reach the NT/WA border on Tuesday night. NWP portrays this sytem as having enough strength to erode the peripheral ridge to the east of 03U/05S and this is likely the primary reason for the change in model forecast motion to west southwest on Wednesday and Thursday.

They're saying this is the third system this season.. - グリフオーザー (talk) 17:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So i wonder wats the second system - Bernard???? Jason Rees (talk) 20:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is this way:

1-Subtropical Low
2-Anika
3-Billy

--क्षेम्य Tranquility 20:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think its that way round Irmela but just so we can clairfy the situation ive sent an email to the BoM asking about the Tropical Cyclone Numbering.Jason Rees (talk) 00:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Forecasts[edit]

I have added Boms predictions to the article after webciting them. Jakarta on their website say they will issue one but im not sure as to when they will issue it. Do TCWC MORSEBY issue one at all? Jason Rees (talk) 03:28, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TCWC PERTH UPDATE Jason Rees (talk) 10:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TC System Numbers[edit]

From BoM

Hello Jason,

Sorry about the delay in my reply - we have been busy with warning centre operations.

You are correct that for this season, tropical depressions in the Australian region have been numbered as follows:

01U - Bernard

02U - Anika

03U - Billy

04U - Gulf of Carpentaria low

The subtropical low in July was not included in this season's list.

The ID numbers are assigned numerically in the sequence that they are required and the sequence reverts back to 01U during the intervening dry season. For example, an unnamed system around 29 July 2007 was assigned the first ID number for the 2007/08 season.

I hope this information helps.

Regards, Ian.

Ian Shepherd,

Senior Meteorologist, Severe Weather Section

Northern Territory Regional Office

Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology Jason Rees (talk) 04:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article name[edit]

I see my move to "2008–2009 Australian region cyclone season" was reverted. Due to consistency reasons it should be "2008–2009". First of all, that's the most common way of naming articles on en.wiki, and secondly it avoids misunderstandings. There is plenty of ways to write dates, and with many of them it might look like the "09" points at the month September (month 9). --Eivind (t) 22:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

using 2008-09 is common use by all the RMSC except for RSMC Réunion that does write storms indentification as 20082009. -- グリフオーザー (talk) 22:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UTC guideline?[edit]

I've not found any guideline stating that UTC must be used. I have also commented on a userpage and have yet to see a reply. Local times and dates should be used and maybe have the UTC time and states in brackets, IE: 10:30am AEST, January 12 (23:30 UTC, January 11). If Hurricane Katrina can have local times then I can't see why an Australian article can't have local time rather then just UTC. Bidgee (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have within about 5 minutes of me searching taken find it. The article WPTC Style guidelines clearly state that all articles should be in UTC. Jason Rees (talk) 23:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was this given any World wide view to see what they think? It's clearly not a policy nor a guideline nor does it have an consensus (the so called guideline). UTC is wrong in an Australian article. Also on date formats Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) states this "For example, with respect to British date formats as opposed to American it would be acceptable to change from American format to British if the article concerned a British subject." Since we use the British format with dating then this article should be converted to that. Bidgee (talk) 20:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might not be stated within MoS, but as a project, we've had a consensus for using UTC for all tropical cyclone related articles as a standard.Cyclone biskit 20:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really Hurricane Katrina (Like all other Hurricane articles) can have both US local and UTC dates and times yet an Australian article can't? Some consensus! Were any Australians asked about UTC dating and times? I doubt it.Bidgee (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

<outdent>Maybe it's just not be explained correctly, but I don't understand this request. We have UTC standardized and have for a while. If you want Australian dates to be used, they can be in brackets. VX!^~~~ 20:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should be in Australian time and date formats (including timezones) with the UTC in brackets. This is an Australian article not a US article. Bidgee (talk) 20:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And UTC is not a US time zone... Cyclone biskit 21:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US local time and dates are/is clearly being used within the Hurricane articles. Bidgee (talk) 21:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That may be so, but there's a lot of bias towards those articles due to the large amount of IP editors from the US who don't use UTC. Also, most (if not all) TCWC's use UTC for times, although they may not have it in their public advisory packages, they base their timing off UTC. Cyclone biskit 21:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Katrina has had the same US local times (with the content changes slightly) for 3 years (maybe more)[1] and I see no attempt of anyone putting it to UTC time. Also if there is a large number IP's who were doing it doesn't it show that local time should be used with the UTC in brackets. Bidgee (talk) 21:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, remember other regions are nearby (i.e Indonesia), and I'm not sure if they use Australian date and time format :/ VX!^~~~ 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To quote from the Manual of Style:

"When writing a date, first consider where the event happened and use the time zone there. For example, the date of the Attack on Pearl Harbor should be December 7, 1941 (Hawaii time/date). If it is difficult to judge where, consider what is significant. For example, if a vandal based in Japan attacked a Pentagon computer in the US, use the time zone for the Pentagon, where the attack had its effect. If known, include the UTC date and time of the event in the article, indicating that it is UTC."

A cyclone hitting Australia should therefore be recorded as doing so in Australian time, with UTC time and date also recorded as a standardised measure. Noting both local and UTC time doesn't seem likely to cause much confusion. What would cause confusion is stating the cyclone made landfall in the afternoon (UTC), then describing how people struggled to deal with it in the dark (because it actually made landfall at midnight AEDT).

For information, this topic is also the subject of lengthy debate here. Euryalus (talk) 05:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I suggest using local time first, and then UTC time in brackets afterwards, as seems to be the current case on the article, as a sensible and reasonable compromise. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Indonesia ferry disaster[edit]

Tropical Cyclone Charlotte didn't cause the disaster. The Australian says the high waves were caused from the "annual monsoon season and a full moon"http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24903444-2703,00.html. AP says it was caused by a Cyclone of the "coast of Sulawesi Island" (Which is incorrect as the Cyclone was located in the Gulf of Carp) http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hgt7wlKmz9E1Fc2d9dRoZLq8fs7wD95LNKVO0 and other news outlets just say rough seas. guardian.co.uk along with some other outlets are incorrect with there reporting but seems that The Australian have it right. I have to go to work so I can't reply until later on. Bidgee (talk) 19:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worth waiting a bit to see what really is the reason to this disaster. Seems like some disinformation by the media. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep i would agree with Brudder Andrusha, though from wat i have seen the ship was nowhere near the GOC.Jason Rees (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt it was even caused by TC Charlotte[2] since she stuck to close to the SE coast of GOC. One media report doesn't mean it's right and should be posted. For now it should be removed until it can be confirmed that it's correct. Just to add the AP states "in a cyclone"[3] (With that it can't be TC Charlotte since it's too far away), BBC has nothing about a cyclone[4] and the Gulf Daily News (Bahrain) states it was struck by TC Charlotte[5](totally incorrect since Charlotte was no were near Sulawesi as clearly seen by the BoM link and google will give you the distance). Bidgee (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

earthquakes/aftershocks in Indonesia? -- グリフオーザー (talk) 23:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible but no major earthquakes/aftershocks were reported before or around that time of the disaster. Bidgee (talk) 03:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Cyclone Innis[edit]

Warning 1 from BoM

40:2:1:24:33S155E570:11:00 IDN21000 SECURITE HIGH SEAS WEATHER WARNING FOR METAREA 10 ISSUED BY THE AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY, SYDNEY 2225UTC 17 FEBRUARY 2009. GALE WARNING FOR SOUTHEASTERN AREA. Please Be Aware: Wind gusts may be a further 40 per cent stronger than the averages given here, and maximum waves may be up to twice the height.

SITUATION AT 02171800UTC TROPICAL CYCLONE INNIS LOCATED NEAR 24 DECIMAL 8 SOUTH 160 DECIMAL 5 EAST, POSITION POOR. CYCLONE MOVING SOUTHWEST AT ABOUT 18 KNOTS. CYCLONE EXPECTED TO TRANSFORM INTO AN INTENSE LOW OVER THE NEXT 6 HOURS AS IT ACCELERATES RAPIDLY SOUTH.

FORECAST POSITION NEAR 28.8S 158.8E AT 180600UTC AND NEAR 33.4S 158.5E AT 181800UTC

AREA AFFECTED WITHIN 60NM OF CENTRE EXTENDING TO 150NM IN EASTERN AND SOUTHERN QUADRANTS.

FORECAST WINDS CLOCKWISE AROUND THE LOW 35/45 KNOTS. ROUGH TO VERY ROUGH SEAS. MODERATE TO HEAVY SWELL.

REMARKS

WEATHER SYDNEY

Warning 2 from BoM

IDN28501 Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology NSW

Priority NSW SEVERE WEATHER WARNING Damaging Winds, Flash Flooding, For people on Lord Howe Island

Issued at 10:25 am on Wednesday 18 February 2009

Synoptic Situation: 9:00 am EDT Wednesday Category one Tropical Cyclone Innis was located approximately 600 kilometres north of the Island moving south/southwest at 35 km/hr. The cyclone is expected to transform into an intense low over the next few hours. On its present track it will pass close the Island at around midnight tonight.

East to northeast winds are expected to strengthen to average 65 to 80 km/h for a period this evening with peak wind gusts reaching 110 km/h. Following the passage of the low winds will shift northerly and moderate Thursday morning. Very heavy rain is expected to cause local flash flooding late today.

Dangerous surf conditions are expected.

Emergency services advise you to keep clear of fallen power lines, stay indoors away from windows and keep children indoors.

Emergency Services advise: Do not enter flood water, and stay well clear of creeks, storm drains and causeways.

For emergency help in floods and storms, ring the SES [NSW and ACT] on telephone number 132 500.

The next warning is due to be issued at 2:00 pm today.

This warning is also available through TV and Radio broadcasts; the Bureau's website at www.bom.gov.au or call 1300 659 218. The Bureau and State Emergency Service would appreciate this warning being broadcast regularly.

Just posting these here since I don't exactly know how to cite web pages properly in articles.

TC Innis[edit]

has been handed over to wellington not Brisbane which whilst i find strange it doesnt surprise me as Nadi were unsure of who was taking over within their TDA @18z and have been finding it difficult to forecast Innis for most of its life so far.Jason Rees (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Took Innis off the invest list since Innis didn't make it west of 160E via advisories. -- グリフオーザー (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I guess we'll just have to see what happens with the season analysis when it concludes. I didn't realise Wellington had already issued a warning for it; I don't think it should change the fact that New South Wales also has, for one of its Islands.Cyclonica (talk) 01:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dont worry about it Cyclonica - i dont think Nadi even knew who was taking over the Primary Warning Responsibilty when they issued their last warning. Also i have applied for the NSW warnign to be webcited but it has not gone through yet and if it rejects it then we will find a way around it. Also as a side note [[6] this] should provide some intresting details about innis Jason Rees (talk) 01:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

16U[edit]

96S.INVEST is marked as 16U by TCWC Perth for this new cyclone -- グリフオーザー (talk) 04:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only question I have is what happened to 13U and 14U? -- RattleMan 04:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now thats wierd - i was thinking about emailing BoM and asking for an update but ive now worked out a seasonal summuary based on the Archives we have been trying to keep upto date.Jason Rees (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

01U - Anika (J/P), 02U - Ex Bernard (J), 03U - Billy (D/P/R), 04U - 21-24 December (D), 05U - 23-29 December (M/B), 06U - Charlotte (D/B), 08U - Dominic (P), 07U - 25-26 January (J/P/R), 09U - 28-30 January (D) 10U - Ellie (B), 11U - Freddy (P), 12U - 03-06 February (B), 13U - 10-16 February (D/P), 14U - Ex Innis (N/W/B), 15U - 19 -28 February (P), 16U - Gabrielle 25 February- Still Active (J/P).

Key

:::N=RSMC Nadi, W=TCWC Wellington, B=TCWC Brisbane, M=TCWC Port Mosebry, D=TCWC Darwin, P=TCWC Perth, J=TCWC Jakarta, R=RSMC La Reunion Jason Rees (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

tropical lows in the archive pages.

2 in Nov

3 in Dec

5 in Jan

6 in Feb (guess we include Innis) - グリフオーザー (talk) 05:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

9U is missing in the article – or got trunkated somehow (vandalism?) --Matthiasb (talk) 19:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its in there - but noones got around to writing the section up Jason Rees (talk) 22:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should try to avoid confusion and add the xxU designation to the storm history above. #March does include 17S.Gabrielle - Tropical Cyclone Category 1 and certainly you made the entry Tropical Low from TCWC Perth but actually which xxU it is? --Matthiasb (talk) 11:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i quite agree that we should include the offical number from the TCWCs - Anyway the timeline is now all up to date bar one or two threads. Jason Rees (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]