Talk:2011 Pacific typhoon season/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

No Predictions yet?

As far as i know, this basin has the first tropical weather event in the northern hemisphere, most of the times. So by this time there should be a whole lot of predictions right?? --Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I wish i knew of a few that published in January but usually there is only one (PAGASA) and so far all ive seen is that they reckon there will be more (intense) storms this year.Jason Rees (talk) 12:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Protection?

Why? The season hasn't had its first storm yet, so to speak, and I don't believe any sort of vandalism would be going on here for that reason, so why is it locked? Rye998 (talk) 01:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

People have been adding in random false tropical depressions so another user took the decesion to request semi protection. It hasnt been locked for established editors, just newbies and ip address.Jason Rees (talk) 23:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I hadn't noticed that, but unless these vandals can calm down a bit, then I'd just leave the article closed up from these vandals for the time being, I guess... Rye998 (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Wait, one more thing — until our first storm does form, should we put the {{currentdate}} template in the storms section? Rye998 (talk) 22:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

No, it is not required, When we say "no storms have formed yet" We automatically understand that no storms have formed as of now. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:42, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Season starting late???

Hey, it is too late already for the season to start. So is this season gonna be less active than last year?? --Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

usually the first named cyclone is in April or May. - グリフオーザー (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, i dont know much, because i once saw tropical cyclones form in the basin right from jan(2009). --Anirudh Emani (talk) 05:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

This discussion is not improving or maintainig this article in any way. See WP:FORUM. If you have any speculations on the activity of this season, put them Here, not here. Rye998 (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Wha...

What happened to the seasonal summary table? Rye998 (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Songda's wind-speed...

Uh, is 445 kmph entirely accurate? Even for ten minute winds, that's insane... Windrays (talk) 15:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah it was a bit of Vandalism.Jason Rees (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

trouble editing Songda (Chedeng)

Hello Everyone, for the past few days the infobox for Songda / Chedeng has been showing hugely exaggerated statistics -- category 5, winds of 275 MPH, etc. Clearly inaccurate. I have tried to fix the infobox but not managed to do it properly. There was a weird-looking warning -- IIRC, "do not plonk as STY as it is unofficial" -- which I suspect was some kind of vandalism, as when I deleted it the calculated values started looking normal again. Usually I edit Atlantic pages. Evidently the system here is slightly different (IE the infoboxes might calculate in a different way, I wouldn't know). Obviously I am out of my depth here but anyone who does know how these work, and can put up accurate info including the proper SSHS strength, would be doing a public service. Best wishes, Pufferfyshe (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually the note was not vandalism and was added by me for numerous reasons including to avoid vandalism. Also the only problem with the infobox has been people keep adding what they believe to be the correct windspeed to the infobox and not the proper windspeeds (10-min: 105 kts 1-min: 140 kts), we have tried to keep on top of it but we do have other things to do.Jason Rees (talk) 01:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Never seen vandalism so bad that one day I had to fix things on the article for ridiculous wind speed information. - グリフオーザー (talk) 07:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to both for the clarification. I apologize to Jason Rees for removing the tag. Pufferfyshe (talk) 17:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

My guess is that there is a bot that overwrites hurricane info boxes. I will inquire on weather project page. Student7 (talk) 21:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

....And so Songda is Category 2, not Category 5. Correct? 99.95.11.224 (talk) 21:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Songda was a category 5 Super Typhoon at peak on the SSHS. There is no problem with infobox.Jason Rees (talk) 21:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

T7.0 even though if I am correct the JMA winds estimate was only 6.5. - グリフオーザー (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Miyagi info

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/video/2011-05/31/c_13903055.htm

here

69.148.182.87 (talk) 18:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Sarika

Hi, I don't know much about this whole business - which is why I'm not being bold and leaving it for you (sorry) but this link [1] looks interest - gives prediction of Sarika's course and reports 5 killed. Based on 14 knots travelling 160 nautical miles that's about 11.5 hours from 15.00 gmt - so 2 hrs left until landfall near hongkong roughly ? EdwardLane (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Based on the HKO Radar and the last JMA warning, I think its already made landfall, but id wait for more confirmation.Jason Rees (talk) 23:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Tropical Depression 31 May onwards

I am not sure if we got this right. It seems that we don't have any archived TWOs and the like. I think to remember there was one system west of Manila and antoher system near Taiwan. However, I might be wrong and the phantom in my mind is later Sarika. Any thoughts? --Matthiasb (talk) 12:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

We do have the TWOs etc archived for the May 31 TD - whoever archived it quite rightly decided to chuck it in the June folder instead of the May one.Jason Rees (talk) 14:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

New TD?

PAGASA reports that a depression by the name of "Falcon" has formed east of Visayas. Is it really true? 99.99.87.53 (talk) 04:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

It is true. The advisory will be in the talk section soon - グリフオーザー (talk) 07:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Season effects table

Should we use the season effects table currently used in 2011 AHS and PHS? Using that table is much easier to edit. Darren23^Edits|Mail 04:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Songda Article

Is an article for Songda needed due to its super typhoon status? Rosalina2427 17:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's needed, since it didn't make a catastrophic landfall, but if anyone wanted to make one, that'd be welcome. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:57, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Tropical Depression???

I can't see any tropical depression near Hong Kong and the wind in Hong Kong is like static. Could you please check whether the tropical depression is true or not?

Wildoneshelper (talk) 06:11, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

JTWC depression names

When we name JTWC depressions, we use their real numbers. But they also put a name in parenthesis in their advisories. For example, for TD10W, they put: "1. TROPICAL DEPRESSION 10W (TEN)". They also put the name in parenthesis a JMA name is present. So here's the thing, should we start naming them like Tropical Depression Ten-W? Darren23^Edits|Mail 04:28, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be just Tropical Depression Ten, sans W. I think it would be fine to keep it the way we have it since in the other places such as the prognostic reasoning, they use "TROPICAL DEPRESSION 10W." --Holderca1 ^talk 04:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The advisory isn't the only place it's mentioned. Ten is also used in their JMV data and graphic. And, in NRL, they refer to it as "10W.TEN", which is exactly the same as they do in ATL/E/CPAC. Darren23^Edits|Mail 04:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Dates active

For the dates active, are we using local time or UTC? The first advisory for 10W was issued on the 24th UTC but 25th local and it was changed in the article from the 24th to the 25th, so I just wanted to check. Thanks. --Holderca1 ^talk 05:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

we should be using UTC.Jason Rees (talk) 12:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Current storm status for every tropical cyclone?

It was first used for Typhoon Ma-on because it was powerful and made landfall in Japan. However, does every tropical cyclone including tropical depression need its current storm status? I do not think it is necessary.--Meow✉ 14:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

It is the status quo in the Atlantic and Eastern Pacific. I fail to see how it is detrimental to the article. The information from JTWC and JMA are both easily accessible. --Holderca1 ^talk 23:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

As an addendum, for the JMA tropical depressions that have no advisories, I would say no, since there are no advisories issued that provide the needed info. Personnally I am on the fence on whether to include these in the article at all. --Holderca1 ^talk 00:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The problem in the WPAC with the IHC or the ITC as its now known is no one updating it at all which is why in 2008 it was removed.Jason Rees (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

That problem also exists for the small infobox that is being used as an alternate. In my opinion though, that one is worse to use if the article isn't being updated as it doesn't have an "as of" date and time listed on it, while the current infobox does. So I would say, if we aren't using the current one, we should wait to put up any infobox until the storm disipates, because regardless of what infobox we use, it will need constant updating while active. Perhaps we should recruit some of the folks on the Atlantic page that fight over being the one to update the storm status. --Holderca1 ^talk 22:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

From all RSMCs the JMA provides the most lousy service, and therfore results a lack of possibilities to improve the article until the typhoon session when the report is published. There's also some recentism when a system is affecting the Philippines, but nobody really cares when then storm left the islands. --Matthiasb (talk) 11:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Muifa

Can anybody find an image on Muifa's satellite image? Is using Digital-typhoon center satellite images is allowed?

Wildoneshelper (talk) 07:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Digital Typhoon is a nono, you can use NASA or there are a few links to others on my userpage.Jason Rees (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

NASA will likely have one soon, especially when it strengthens a bit more. --Holderca1 ^talk 23:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

We can also find good images at WMS, NASA... its awesome :D --Anirudh Emani (talk) 12:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Nock-ten page construction underway

the sandbox for nockten is here. Kindly help! --Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:53, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The sandbox is now an article. however, it doesnt look like one yet. Especially, the head and the met history. Both have to be expanded a lot because the storm is sure unusual!--Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

New to here

I'm new to here. Can you give me some advice for editing this page? Wildoneshelper (talk) 06:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Muifa sandbox

I have started a sandbox for Typhoon Muifa here. Everyone feel free to edit. Since I am on Okinawa, my ability to edit will be limited towards the end of this week, but I plan on taking plenty of pictures of the island. --Holderca1 ^talk 00:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Good work! Maintain it, i will get in soon, as the storm approaches Kadena! --Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Severe Tropical storm? severe tropical storm?

The second one should be corrected, but some people do not use upper case correctly.--Meow✉ 10:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Are you trying to say that all the three words in the name (STS) should start in uppercase?? If so, Yes! They should! Agreed! --Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

No, I prefer tropical depression, tropical storm, severe tropical storm, and category x typhoon, but they should be all uppercase with a storm name like “Severe Tropical Storm Nock-ten”.--Meow✉ 11:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Of course!! It is still a part of the name and names should always start in Uppercase! --Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Tropical depression dissipation controversy

So, as we all know, JMA continues tracking tropical depressions long after they dissipated. However, they never issued advisories on the depression. What i wanted to say, is that without an advisory being issued, we should not mention it as a tropical depression because its winds are unknown/assume and may mislead readers. Only the tropical depressions on which advisories are issued should be put on as they are originally lows and probably thats what the JMA means. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Colors removed!?

This is becoming very bad now... Why have the colors been removed from the buttons template!?--Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Nanmadol

Is there a new update on Nanmadol on JMA? The best track took it at 135 mph/115 knts, but I can't find the latest JMA update... Rye998 (talk) 23:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Advisory links are above under location of advisories, the last advisory was @ 21z with one expected to come in at around 01z for 00z.Jason Rees (talk) 23:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I knew that, so the article needs to be updated to reflect that, or JMA hasn't been updated yet... Rye998 (talk) 23:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

That is just a track from the United States Navy, not the best track. Based on 1-min sustained winds, it shows 135 knots, not 115 knots. The JMA will release its best track in several months, and now what we could know is 105 knots based on 10-min sustained winds from the JMA.

The JMA always updates tropical cyclone information at 00:45, 03:45, 06:45, 09:45, 12:45, 15:45, 18:45 and 21:45. Sometimes it may be earlier or later.--Meow✉ 12:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Can it be accepted?

Shall i copy-paste the met history info from the main article of Nanmadol to the section here. It looks abandoned. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 13:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You could go ahead and simplify.--Meow✉ 19:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

JMA Tropical cyclone number

JMA is now releasing best track in their web site earlier than in the past and it's much easier to get the JMA Tropical cyclone number. According to [2], Tropical cyclone number is serial number ID of the storm of intensity with maximum sustained wind speed of 28 kt (near gale) or greater. Simply speaking, any TD with a warning in WWJP25 RJTD will get this ID. As TDs without warnings are not given the Tropical cyclone number, I think it implies that JMA doesn't consider them to be significant tropical cyclones. I suggest that (i) the JMA Tropical cyclone number be added in the summary table under "Season effects" and (ii) systems without the Tropical cyclone number should be removed from the article. 218.215.54.121 (talk) 15:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The document does not tell us that they do not consider tropical depressions below 28 kt as tropical cyclones. Besides, all tropical depressions are tropical cyclones, so the article would include them all.--Meow✉ 19:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

JTWC also has a similar requirement. They prepare warnings on TDs only in the western North Pacific and the South China Sea, and only when the depression reaches an intensity of 25 knots[3]. Prior to 2000, TD that did not receive a warning and a number from JTWC are not included, there is no reason that this approach shouldn't apply to JMA post-2000. If a TD is not given a number, it is not significant enough.218.215.54.121 (talk) 12:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

How do you get all of those tropical cyclone numbers?--Meow✉ 05:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

They are deduced from WWJP25 RJTD and, for named TCs, will be confirmed in best track database.

Even if a Tropical Depression is not given a number, it is still a Tropical Cyclone and must be included in the article. We came across a similar discussion last year and decided to include all TCs monitored by the JMA. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

However, i still feel that tropical depressions with winds of <45 km/h or <55 km/h should be kept seperately, as i am doing it right now because they are not very significant and make the article too lengthy. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 09:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Unless there is a link to a page with the TC IDs, I feel that the article cannot use them until the seasonal BT is released next year; the JMA BT that they release for each storm does not contain them. Also, without sources of the IDs, technically, the JMA IDs are OR as there is no page backing up all the TD's with numbers... — Ines(talk) 22:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)