Talk:2005–06 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season/January-April

January

Week 2

Tropical Cyclone Tam

99P.INVEST/TD05

This invest has popped up on the Navy site, and the Fiji Meteorolgical Service (RSMC Nadi) released this saying it's TD05. -- RattleMan 00:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

06P.TAM

It's now 99P (yes, 99P) Tam. -- RattleMan 21:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now NRL changed the name from "99P.TAM" to "06P.TAM". -- RattleMan 01:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should technically by 04F.TAM NSL E _(T+C) 01:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

90P.INVEST

And another Pacific invest has popped up on the Navy site. -- RattleMan 04:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Cyclone Urmil

91P.INVEST

And another Pacific invest has popped up on the Navy site. TD06F. -- RattleMan 22:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

07P.URMIL

A. TROPICAL CYCLONE 91P (URMIL) 
B. 14/0530Z 
C. 17.7S/5 
D. 173.1W/2 
E. FOUR/GOES10 
F. T3.5/3.5/STT: D2.0/12HRS (14/0530Z) 
G. IR/EIR LLCC 
   13A/PBO BANDING EYE/ANMTN. CONVECTION HAS INCREASED 
   SLIGHTLY OVER THE PAST 06 HOURS. CONVECTION WRAPS .80 ON 
   LOG10 SPIRAL FOR DT OF 3.5. DBO DT. PT SUPPORTS. AODT: 
   4.5.

It seems that Urmil has broken the constraint for Dvorak technique. A rise of two whole T numbers in 12 hours is really amazing! Momoko

Urmil had been intensifying at a horrible rate yesterday until 1200UTC. I can hardly believe that a storm can reach T4.0 just 18 hours after NRL considered it as a disturbance and RSMC Nadi considered it as a tropical depression. TCWC Bribane made me even more surprised by setting DT=5.5 yesterday. Momoko

Tropical Disturbance Advisory Number B4 issued from RSMC NADI 
Jan 14/1401 UTC 2006 UTC. 
Urmil has undergone explosive development in the last 6 hours. 
Primary band has completely wound around LLCC. Dvorak analysis based 
on a 1.1 log-10 spiral wrap, gives a DT=PT=4.0 and MET=3.0, yields 
T4.0/4.0/D2.0/24hrs breaking constraints.

A. TROPICAL CYCLONE 07P (URMIL) 
B. 14/1130Z 
C. 19.8S/8 
D. 172.6W/6 
E. FOUR/GOES10 
F. T4.0/4.0/D2.5/18HRS STT: D0.5/06HRS (14/1130Z) 
G. IR/EIR LLCC 
   13A/PBO BANDING EYE/ANMTN. CONVECTION HAS INCREASED OVER 
   THE PAST 06 HOURS. CONVECTION WRAPS 1.10 ON LOG10 SPIRAL 
   FOR DT OF 4.0. DBO DT. PT SUPPORTS. AODT: 4.7.

BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY 
Queensland Region 
Tropical Cyclone Warning Centre 
SATELLITE ANALYSIS BULLETIN 
1257 UTC 14 January 2006 
Tropical Cyclone "URMIL" 
141230 UTC 
Located near 19.6S 172.7 W 
Analysis based on: GOES10 IRHR imagery at 141020 UTC. 
Latitude Detection Sum : 16 
Longitude Detection Sum: 17 
Dvorak analysis T5.5/4.0/D2.0/24hrs [see notes] 
NOTES: WHR Brisbane- evidence of eye from GOES IR / SSMIS imagery. Using EIR E 
no = 6.0 [white], E adj=-1.0. SSMIS indicated BF = 0.5. Final DT=5.5. Final 
T-no 4.0 given model constraints - expected Met 3.0 [for rapid developer] and 
allowing for +1.0 range from Met. 
Missing latest satellite CIMMS upper winds pass over system. System accelerating 
as it moves into stronger vertical shear. Initial rapid development as system 
moves into area of increased upper divergence with increasing upper outflow 
channel. System moving at approx 19kts.

Week 3

92S and 93S.INVEST

Hey, there's two invests. =P -- RattleMan 03:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Severe Tropical Cyclone Daryl

94S.INVEST

A new invest has popped up on the navy website http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/tc_pages/tc_home.html] and is posing threat to land (by which i mean W.A) Here's the latest advice as of 2.45 P.M WST from TCWC PERTH:

IDW24100
BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY 
WESTERN AUSTRALIA REGIONAL OFFICE

Media: The Emergency Warning Signal should NOT be used with this warning.

PRIORITY 

TROPICAL CYCLONE ADVICE NUMBER 7
Issued at 2:45 pm WST on Wednesday, 18 January 2006
BY THE BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY
TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING CENTRE PERTH

A CYCLONE WARNING is current for a developing tropical low for coastal areas
between Kalumburu and Bidyadanga. A CYCLONE WATCH extends south from Bidyadanga
to Port Hedland.

At 2pm WST a developing tropical low was located near Kuri Bay on the west
Kimberley coast, approximately 250 kilometres north northeast of Derby and 235
kilometres west southwest of Kalumburu and is almost stationary.

The tropical low may develop into a tropical cyclone within the next 12 to 24
hours. Gales are not expected in coastal areas today but may develop on
Thursday. Rainfall over the Kimberley is expected to be widespread and heavy in
parts during the remainder of the week.  

Details of the tropical low at 2pm WST.

  Location of centre : within 60 kilometres of
                       Latitude  15.5 South Longitude 124.4 East.
  Recent movement    : almost stationary.
  Central Pressure   : 992 hPa.
  
The State Emergency Service advises that there are no community alerts at
present. People in coastal areas between Port Hedland and Kalumburu should
listen for the next advice.

The next advice will be issued by 6pm WST Wednesday 18 January.
Cyclone advices and State Emergency Service Community Alerts are available by
dialling  1300 659 210


A map showing the track of the cyclone is available at:
http://www.bom.gov.au/weather/wa/cyclone

M cappeluti

08S.DARYL

It is now Daryl, and NRL names it 94S.DARYL. -- RattleMan 21:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NRL changed it to 08S.DARYL. -- RattleMan 00:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another storm that makes the Australian category system useless...called a Category 3 yet would be a Category 1 here - I wonder how they prepare for damage there with the different system, since the warnings would seem harsher? CrazyC83 04:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The system needs a total revamp. At least they are ready for one though. By the way, it's now a minor cyclone that will turn into a tropical low and could cause flooding in the SW land division, like what clare did. -- M cappeluti

09S.BOLOETSE

95P, 96S and 97S.INVEST

95P has come and gone, but here's two invests. =P -- RattleMan 22:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

09S.NONAME

Apparently now 96S has developed into 09S.NONAME. -- RattleMan 01:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JTWC has a TCFA on it; ~~TCWC Perth has it as a developing Tropical Low~~. NSL E _(T+C) 01:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a La Reunion cyclone. Now a TD says the RSMC. NSL E _(T+C) 04:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

09S.BOLOETSE

Now Boloeste. -- RattleMan 20:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

09S.EX-BOLOETSE

An overland depression, but a TCFA is now out for it, remnants of Boloetse NW of Antananarivo. NSL E _(T+C) 恭喜发财! 00:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now a TD. NSL E _(T+C) 11:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

10P.JIM

98S & 99P.INVEST

98S has come and gone, but here's 99P. =P -- RattleMan 01:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

10P.JIM

99P is now apparently Jim. -- RattleMan 01:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NRL confirms.[1] -- RattleMan 03:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

February

Week 2

92S and 93P.INVEST

After at least three days without any invests/etc anywhere in the world (or NRL, at least), these two appear to break it. -- RattleMan 22:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carina, Vaianu, 94S-99S, 91P and 92P

Ok, here's a lot of systems that I forgot to mention. I believe 90S is now Carina, and 98S was Vaianu. -- RattleMan 06:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to tell you that Mauritius refused to name the system. Momoko

Carina is now a monster, 130 knots, 910 mb. -- RattleMan 02:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Carina a land threat? If so, it should be moved to its own article. 150/910 as peak intensity seems quite low; I am sure it will crack Category 5 soon! CrazyC83 04:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carina will only be a threat to ships and fish and it's about to weaken right now - Yarrah 22:46, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

March

Week 3

Larry, Wati

Queensland is really poor. They may have to face another tropical system after Larry though it may not be as strong as Larry. Momoko

Tropical Disturbance Advisory Number A1 issued from RSMC NADI Mar 19/0154 UTC 2006 UTC.

Tropical Depression 16F centre [998hPa] was located near 15.3 South 166.0 East at 190000 UTC. Position fair based on MTSAT/VIS imagery with animation, peripheral surface reports and recent SSMI passes. Depression moving westsouthwest at about 10 knots. Maximum 10-minute average winds near the centre estimated at about 25 to 30 knots, increasing to 35 knots in the next 12 hours.

LLCC placed on southern edge of deep convection. System continues to organise as it clears the Vanuatu island chain. Outflow good in the sector from northwest to south and becoming good elsewhere. Dvorak analysis based on log10 spiral wrap of .55 yields DT=2.5, MET=2.5 and PT=2.5. FT based on PT yields T2.5/2.5/D1.0/24hrs. 16F lies just to the north of the 250hPa subtropical ridge and is moving under the ridge in an area of increasing diffluence. Environmental shear over 16F is about 10 knots. The depression is expected to steer southwestwards in response to a building midlevel ridge to the east. ECMWF picks up the circulation from tonight and develops it further while moving it westwards. Other global models, on the other hand, have not picked up the recent development of 16F and just maintain an easterly wave moving westwards towards the Australia's east coast in the wake of Tropical Cyclone Larry.

Down to 920 mbar! This thing IS really bad!!! CrazyC83 18:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and 16 is now Wati, looking to head toward the same general area Larry is hitting now! -- RattleMan 20:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what they don't need; most of the banana crop's gone and a lot of damage, esp. in Innisfail. I don't know about the States, but for Australia this is v. v. bad. -- Sarsaparilla39 09:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Floyd

BoM has a warning out for this system in the Indian Ocean here QazPlm 23:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The maximum sustained wind is now 105 knots, just 5 knots from a category 5 cyclone on the Australian scale. Can it become a category 5 like Larry? Momoko

It is a cat. 5 now. It has 115 kt winds and a preassure of 927 mb. If this affects land anytime soon, will this get an article? Icelandic Hurricane #12 13:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Week 4

97P.INVEST

What will become of that? Icelandic Hurricane #12 22:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coastal wind warning is now being issued. Winds may reach 20/30 knots with scattered squalls to 45 knots. I think this will become either George or Glenda if it can track further away from land. Momoko

This Invest is real serious now. It has a very developed circulation and all. All it needs are the winds and the ocean. Icelandic Hurricane #12 13:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glenda

That's right. —Cuivi é nen, Monday, 27 March 2006 @ 13:06 (UTC)

Glenda was named by Perth TCWC. Shouldn't it be listed under Southeast Indian Ocean/Western Australia? If it were an NT cyclone, it would be TC George, no? QazPlm 23:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is true. I've moved it. Glenda is also now a Cat 1 on the SS Scale. Per the Navy site. —Cuivi é nen, Tuesday, 28 March 2006 @ 03:15 (UTC)

TCWC Perth had made it 90kt now and expect it to reach 105kt by tomorrow morning. It will be a terrible storm! Momoko

According to TCWC Perth, as of 28/0300 UTC, Glenda has deepened 50 mbar in the past 24 hours (it became TC 20S at 0300 UTC yesterday) - from 990 mbar to 940 mbar. Impressive! --Coredesat 04:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Hemisphere pressure readins, like the Western Pacific, are not always accurate. NSL E _(T+C) at 05:19 UTC (2006-03-28)

Well, accurate or not, the JTWC and NRL are in agreement with Perth - NRL shows a pressure of 927 mbar, and Perth estimates a pressure of 925 mbar. Both are calling for Glenda to become quite a monster in the next day or two, with the JTWC forecasting 150 kt winds (1-min avg) in 36 hours, and TCWC Perth forecasting 120 kt winds (10-min avg) in 24 hours. --Coredesat 09:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unconfirmed report of 140 kt and 898 mbar! [2] CrazyC83 19:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good lord! Could Glenda be the next Cyclone Zoe? Looks like it's weakening, but anything is possible. Jake52 28 March 2006

Back down to Cat 4, now predicting Cat 3 at landfall. Quite a strong storm, but nothing ridiculous like Zoe. If it maintains its strength, it will probably deserve its own article. —Cuivi é nen, Wednesday, 29 March 2006 @ 00:47 (UTC)

Looks like Glenda has completed an Eyewall Replacement Cycle. It's got a rather noticable eye now forming, but it doesn't have long to go before landfall. Jake52

Looks like another one worthy of it's own article. Weakened to a catagory 4 on the australian scale (catagory 2 on the SS scale) but anything can happen. Looks like Mardie will get the direct hit. M cappeluti 11:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually, Glenda took a slightly less southerly track before landfall and Onslow got a direct hit. It seems that Glenda weakened quite a bit before reaching Onslow as the maximum winds there were only 62 knots gusting to 84 knots and the pressure was 971.9 hPa. The final BoM track map made Glenda a Cat3 near Onslow.

I'm glad that Perth is going to prepare a brief summary of TC Glenda later today. It seems that even NHC won't do so. Momoko

98P.INVEST

April

90S.INVEST

A SW Indian Ocean invest is up[3]. It was getting quiet there for a bit.

Gone. It became extratropical this morning. --Coredesat 00:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

91S.INVEST/92P.INVEST

NRL says we have a 91S, which is also 92P: [4] Not much there worthy of note, though. --Coredesat 00:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gone. --Coredesat 14:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

93S.INVEST

Another one has popped up. Icelandic Hurricane #12 15:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking about ready to become Hubert. —Cuivi é nen, Sunday, 2 April 2006 @ 23:57 (UTC)

21S.HUBERT

NRL has this listed as 21S.NONAME now, while the JTWC has a TCFA out on it. BOM Perth TCWC notes "(Tropical) Low may develop into a tropical cyclone in the next 6 to 12 hours"... NSL E _(T+C) at 08:29 UTC (2006-04-05)

Now Hubert from the NRL. —Cuivi é nen, Wednesday, 5 April 2006 @ 22:19 (UTC)

22S.ELIA

94S.INVEST

And another. This one looks ready to develop. —Cuivi é nen, Sunday, 2 April 2006 @ 23:55 (UTC)

Got to be the longest-lasting INVEST now. Still looks ripe for development. —Cuivi é nen, Tuesday, 11 April 2006 @ 03:41 (UTC)

9 days! Has there been any other invests even close to this long? Icelandic Hurricane #12 23:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

22S.ELIA

After 9 days, TCWC Perth is now calling for the formation of a tropical cyclone. Can it really develop? Momoko

Now 22S.NONAME from the NRL. —Cuivi é nen, Thursday, 13 April 2006 @ 01:44 (UTC)

According to the Navy site, 22S has 35kt winds and a preassure of 997 mb. So would it be a tropical storm now? Or is it different in the Indian Ocean? Icelandic Hurricane #12 11:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elia now. —Cuivi é nen, Friday, 14 April 2006 @ 00:06 (UTC)

95S.INVEST

One more. —Cuivi é nen, Thursday, 6 April 2006 @ 22:53 (UTC) Gone. 69.86.17.202

96S.INVEST

Another one, nothing too spectacular. -- RattleMan 01:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poof! --Coredesat 01:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

97P.INVEST

Here's one from the SPAC! -- RattleMan 20:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

98S.INVEST

Another Indian Ocean one. -- RattleMan 22:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

23P.MONICA

Don't know why you haven't picked this one up, but developed a while ago. Catagory 2 on the australian scale and hit the Queensland coast yesterday. Now sitting in the Gulf of Carpenteria and is excepted to re - intensify. Something that i've just found out, and something that may interest you, is that Monica hit the same spot as Ingrid did, and is forecast to make landfall in the Northern Territory! Can it hit W.A as well and do a Ingrid? M cappeluti 04:29, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monica has just been relocated half a degree to the south, so it is unlikely that it can pass through the seas north of NT and hit WA like Ingrid. Momoko

BoM says the cyclone has recently turned to the north northeast. What's going on? If Monica continues to go north, there will be a chance that it won't make landfall and intensify north of NT. Momoko

BOM now saying that it will be a cat 5 when it hits land! And Nhulunbuy is smack bang in the middle of her path! M cappeluti 02:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The gust have gone up to 320 km/h, which is stronger than Carina, Larry as well as Glenda! I can't remember exactly the corresponding sustained winds, it should be either 120 or 125 knots (10-minute average). Let's wait for the next high seas warning. Momoko

The 1-minute average seems to be around 135 knots based on conversion factors. It is definitely a SS Cat 4. CrazyC83 23:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or am I seeing something VERY similar to Cyclone Ingrid from last year? As Monica will probably reach the western "Hurricane Alley", it could be something that will be comparable to Ingrid, only larger.Omni ND 17:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It basically is Ingrid v2.0 right now. I just hope it doesn't turn and hit a city (Darwin). —Cuivi é nen, Sunday, 23 April 2006 @ 01:24 UTC

Darwin now forecast it to weaken. The highest 10-minute sustained winds were 125 knots, which should make it the strongest cyclone of the season. Fortunately, hurricane force winds are not expected to affetc mainland Australia in next 24 hours. Momoko

877 mbar according to the latest Dvarok estimates!!! This is getting insane!!! CrazyC83 03:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The SSD's Dvorak estimate was 7.0, the automated CIMSS Dvorak was 7.8. Either way, this is a serious cyclone. Aside from land interaction, I don't see any reason for it to weaken, aside from EWRCs. Shear is very low and SSTs are high. --Coredesat 04:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is the most intense tropical cyclone ever outside of the Western Pacific if that is indeed correct - and the lowest pressure ever recorded in the Southern Hemisphere. CrazyC83 04:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

877 mb? Sweet Jesus! I can't believe it! I wonder if another Atlantic hurricane will beat that record this year? -- RattleMan 05:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The official 1pm (3.30 am UTC) advisory from BoM indicates 925hPa, not 877. NSL E _(T+C) at 05:13 UTC (2006-04-23)

As such, I have adjusted the infobox to 925, and removed the bit about 877. If you guys want 877 mentioned in the article please note down that it's not an official reading supplied by the BoM. NSL E _(T+C) at 05:33 UTC (2006-04-23)

I have added a note in the page saying that it is an estimated unoffical automatic reading. I think it is worthy of it being there as it is a data source, even if it is unoffical as well as being an important pointer on how strong this cyclone could be from these readings.- Boochan 05:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official advisory now indicates gusts to 350 km/h and an estimated pressure of 905 mb. The SSD estimate is 898 mb, and unofficial or not, I'd lean toward the 898 estimate. --Coredesat 08:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Darwin pushes the maximum sustained winds up to 135 knots, the highest in recent years! JTWC gave T7.5 at 0530UTC.Momoko

   IR/EIR/VIS/MSI                      LLCC
   03A/PBO EYE/ANMTN. A 46NM CMG BAND SURROUNDS A 10NM WMG
   EYE, FOR A CF OF 6.5. ADDED 1.0 FOR EYE ADJUSTMENT,
   EQUALLING A DT OF 7.5. FINAL T IS BASED ON DT. PT AND
   MET SUPPORT. AODT: 7.6.

NRL made it 145 knots and 892 mb at 0600UTC. Momoko

SH, 23, 2006042306,   , BEST,   0, 113S, 1374E, 145,  892, ST

If the 877 mb estimate is correct, then this is WORSE than Hurricace Wilma! What's the record for lowest pressure ever recorded? M cappeluti 11:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The record for the lowest pressure ever recorded would go to Typhoon Tip of 1979. It had a minimum central pressure of 870 that wasn't extrapolated using the Atkinson-Holliday tecchnique. In fact, it was confirmed by reconnaissance aircraft. Tip was also the largest tropical cyclone ever, and tied Hurricane Camille and Hurricane Allen for the highest windspeeds.Omni ND 12:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This thing is tiny by comparison to even Katrina and Rita. It would be like Wilma at peak intensity before the first eyewall cycle. CrazyC83 15:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Monica has just strengthened to 145 knots and is of severe danger to northern Australia. The JTWC now anticipates weakening only to 130 knots in 48 hours, and Monica would be over land by then, just south of Darwin. If Monica tracks west by 50 miles, it would be a direct hit on Darwin at an intensity and size stronger that Cyclone Tracy! Watch out, all you historic strong storms, because Monica is hot on your tracks. BTW, when are we going to start an article for it?Omni ND 15:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article would be short on impact, but since this is becoming historic, an article would be a good idea to have soon. That northwestern track dead into Darwin would also put Monica over water much longer, strengthening the storm. CrazyC83 15:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a beautiful infrared image of Monica; I'm uploading it now. It looks even more perfect than the infrared image of Rita. —Cuivi é nen, Sunday, 23 April 2006 @ 16:43 UTC

Here it is:

—Cuivi é nen, Sunday, 23 April 2006 @ 16:47 UTC

The source that had the 877 mbar pressure has dropped it down to 869 mbar. If that measurement turns out to be correct, it is a new world record!!! CrazyC83 18:47, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The latest Australian report has raised the pressure up to 910 hPa; that seems bizarre, though I do not trust Dvorak readings for this cyclone; they haven't been 'truthed' in the way NW Pacific ones were. --Nilfanion 19:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to add any more bad news for Australia, but Monica sort of looks like an annular hurricane in that pic. Omni ND 19:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't beileve what is taking place down there. If that Cyclone hit a city then you can kiss it good-bye. The pressure should be around Wilma's or lower right now. That is a amazing picture, if it was bigger then it could be the worst ever. If it's at 869 mbars then I'm going to freak out!! The strongest storm in world history!! Why the heck is there no article!!? Get one up somebody! 216.110.254.167 19:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are three numbers going around right now - that 869, the JTWC's 879 estimate and the BoM's 905 (now 910) measurement. Which one is correct, I don't know. CrazyC83 20:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The BoM's is the official one - it is the TCWC for the area but that doesn't mean its the most accurate though. I don't know enough about how Dvorak works to comment on the validity of the 869, but the conversion used is for the Pacific (NW Pacific presumably), perhaps the background pressure near Australia is significantly higher than in the NW Pacific? --Nilfanion 20:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the BoM raise the pressure when the Navy, TCWC, and DVORAK estimates lowered it? I wish there was a reconaissance aircraft getting real pressure estimates, but I suppose it's not in the mentality of Australians. Americans like to spend a little extra money to get hard data that don't conflict. Australians consider satellite estimates good enough, because all one really needs to know if the storm is really bad! Interesting philosophy I just inferred today... —BazookaJoe 20:58, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why the heck is there no article? What the heck is going on here? If no one puts a article up I will and Monica made a landfall already so it's worth it. 216.110.254.167 01:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It had been created and removed previously by the administrator, although being at legendary status does make the article worthy IMO. I want to wait for the green light though... CrazyC83 01:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It got deleted by the admin? That is not only crazy, but that makes Wikipedia less of a great site by removing very important articles. Why not start one now because it's going to have a article anyways soon? Tell the Admin that it's insane not to put up a article on maybe what is the most powerful Topical Cyclone ever. It already made landfall 2 times I think so what's the reason again? 216.110.254.167 02:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I re-created it, although it looks completely different than it did before. Only brief mention is being made to the 869; the infobox pressure and the one officially going down (for the moment) is 905 mbar - the Bureau of Meteorology estimate - until we get better clarity over these disputed numbers. CrazyC83 03:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think BoM raise the pressure based on data they received. The sustained winds are unchanged, so I don't think it implies a weakening. NRL always made direct conversion from sustained winds and I don't treat that pressure as anything reliable. Momoko

Maybe someone can contact BOM for why their numbers are higher than the other sources. M cappeluti 09:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

868.5mb following this http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tropic/adt/odt26.html. BoM evaluates at 915mb. How can this be possible? RQSTR 10:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The BoM is being conservative (I would believe a sub-900), but the 869 Dvorak figure is inaccurate, in that it is just an automatic conversion from the Dvorak intensity, which may well not be appropriate for cyclones in that location. --Nilfanion 11:15, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For some strange and unexplained reason, the BoM is forecasting Monica (or its remnants) to recurve to the northwest and strike Darwin almost head-on before moving back out to sea. This isn't what any of the models are indicating, so I'd like to know why they're doing that. --Coredesat 02:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The external link (16) for the source is now broken. Nothing new about the official pressure for Monica? RQSTR 19:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

91S.INVEST

Navy site shows an invest in the SE Indian Ocean. --Nilfanion 22:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TCFA released. NSL E _(T+C) at 08:46 UTC (2006-04-27)

On the NRL track image, it says "CANCELED"...I guess that means the TCFA was canceled? -- RattleMan 23:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

92S.INVEST

Navy site has 92S.INVEST...92 for you! -- RattleMan 09:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And its gone.--Nilfanion 17:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]