Jump to content

Talk:2015–16 Australian region cyclone season

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

Season Summary

[edit]
ID Date (ACST) TC Name TCWC Original Basin Lat (S) Long (E) Source
01U* 2015-07-01 Raquel* B Coral Sea 5.8 159.3 Tech Bull
02U 2015-11-17 ?
03U -
04U 2015-12-23 - P Indian Ocean 10 108 Tech Bull
05U 2015-12-23 - D WA 14 131 Database
06U 2015-12-27 - P Indian Ocean 13 91 Tech Bull
07U 2016-01-19 - P Indian Ocean 12 94 Tech Bull
08U 2016-01-27 Stan P Indian Ocean 13 118 Tech Bull
09U 2016-02-05 Uriah P Indian Ocean 9 97 Tech Bull
10U 2016-02-10 Tatiana B Solomon Islands 16 157 Tech Bull
11U 2016-02-14 - P 12 107 Tech Bull
12U 2016-03-05 - P Indian Ocean 17 93 Tech Bull
13U 2016-03-03 Winston B Solomon Islands
14U 2016-03-14 - D Darwin 15 137 Database
15U -

Location of Advisories

[edit]
Tropical Cyclone Three Day Outlook Jakarta \\ Perth \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Tropical Cyclone High Seas Warning Jakarta \\ Perth 1 \\ Perth 2 \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Tropical Cyclone Technical Bulletin Perth 1 \\ Perth 2 \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane
Main Pages Jakarta \\ BoM \\ JTWC
ABIO10 STWA \\ ABPW10 STWA
JTWC 1 \\ JTWC 2 \\ JTWC 3
Running Best track
JMA Archives: Jakarta // Perth // Darwin // Brisbane // PNG // JTWC

Raquel

[edit]

@Meow:, @Jason Rees:, @Cyclonebiskit:, @Jasper Deng: This is weird and kind of awesome about this storm. As of today, Raquel had exited the AusR basin and re-entered the SPac basin. The question is, that since it exited this basin, which article do we put Raquel at? Do we put it in the 2014-15 SPac season or the 2015-16 SPac season? This is really hard to be serious. :| Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, since you guys didnt reply quick, someone already put it in the 2015-16 SPac cyclone season. ″Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is hard to determine as 17F belongs to the previous season. -- Meow 10:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but what do you think at the moment? Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Its simple it belongs in both.Jason Rees (talk) 18:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As an update to this - the BoM has confirmed Raquel as the 3rd tropical cyclone in the Eastern region during 2014-15 in the PTCR, as a result of this we have to treat the system as a part of 2014-15 rather than 2015-16. This does not mean though that we need to get rid off it from this page completely, instead it is my intention to add it to Other Systems when the season gets going properly.Jason Rees (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Ok this is hard now because i go with 50% both. The thing you just put in is interesting since it does describe that Raquel belongs to the 2014-15 season, whilst in BoM's advisories when Raquel was still active, they classified it as 01U, which states that Rauqel is in the 2015-16 season. I really don't know but is it possibly if you or someone else leave a message to the BoM about this? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:24 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Actually @Typhoon2013: they classified it as both 24U and 01U and classified it as a part of both operationally, however, in post analysis they have classified it as a part of the 2014-15 season. Someone on the Facebook South Pacific tropical cyclone group eamiled the BoM a few weeks ago before the PTCR was released and they confirmed that it was going to be classified as just 24U.Jason Rees (talk) 08:39, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Ok, I think I agree with you now of moving Raquel back to the 2014-15 season. However I do personally think that we should mention that the BoM originally classified Raquel in the 2015-16 season but they confirmed it formed within the 2014-15 season. But one question: do we do the same for in the SPac season article? Or what do we do with the cross-over of Raquel in the SPac basin? Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:30, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think its relevant to mention that it was originally classified as a part of the 2015-16 season, since we have no proof that it was since there were two designators. It is also quite simple how we cover it for the SPAC basin - it was only assigned the designator 17F.Jason Rees (talk) 15:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Ok and one more question. Did the 2015-16 season had already started? Because Raquel is in it (or should I say, in both the 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons). Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The project standard says no.Jason Rees (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does Cyclone Raquel deserve it's own article?

[edit]

It seems like it should have it's own article due to it's rarity and the fact that it caused quite a bit of damage and fatalities in the Solomon Islands. - http://hurricanes.einnews.com/article__detail/274604749?lcode=6xbPiy_HSQGAkk3nnxPUuA%3D%3D I tried creating an article for the storm but apparently it keeps redirecting to the main 2015-16 Australian region cyclone season page. Undescribed (talk) 03:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If there is enough information out there about its impacts to the Solomon Islands, then I do not see why we can't make one. However, if we do it we have to mark it up as a part of 4 seasons.Jason Rees (talk) 09:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed that Raquel formed well outside of the typical cyclone season; hence it's rarity, however with the page Cyclone Keli it seems as though it still fit into the 1996-97 season and not 1997-98. I know that this point was partially brought up in the last discussion, but with Keli being an example, how is it determined whether Raquel should be in the 2014-15 season or 2015-16 season? And unlike with Keli, Raquel was part of both the Australian and South Pacific cyclone seasons. Undescribed (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keli fits in too the 1996-97 season because it formed within the 1996-97 tropical cyclone year, which ran from July 1 1996 - June 30 1997 and still does (wink). However, in Raquel's case it is a bit more complex as it was named @ 18z on June 30 and was initially considered a part of the 2015-16 season. For Wiki purposes though I think it should be mentioned in all four seasons, even if its a brief sentence in the other storms section. Oh and ive started a sandbox for Raquel here, feel free to contribute to it. :)Jason Rees (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't realize that. Makes much more sense now (wink). And I also agree in that case it should be mentioned in all four seasons. Raquel is definitely interesting as I can't ever recall a storm which existed in two different basins during two different cyclone seasons. And thank you, I think it is a great start! Undescribed (talk) 23:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your edits @Undescribed: its made the article easier to write overall, allthough i must state that the US warning system is unofficial in the SHEM which is why i went for the 28th rather than the 30th. Anyway we were all getting rather excited in the Facebook groups, about it being the first TC to cross SHEM years with the possible exception of TC 21P of 2011-12. As for the four basin thing i doubt its ever happened before but the closest match would be Tropical Storm Vamei IMO.Jason Rees (talk) 13:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Always happy to contribute @Jason Rees: (wink). And yes, I think that the 28th would be the best to use right now because of the location of the cyclone where the Australian Bureau is the main agency responsible for the tracking. It is definitely exciting that Raquel made history in that area! There is as you said TC 21P, however I think that out of both of them Raquel was rarer since 21P was classified as a tropical low by the Australian Bureau, but a tropical storm by SSHWS. By the way I left you a message on Raquel's sandbox page regarding the creation of a wiki article of it. Undescribed (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No cyclones yet?

[edit]

@Jason Rees: Since we don't have Stan yet and it has been relativity quiet with only 3 TLs, I have decided that we should keep the TL sections instead of putting them in the "Other systems" section. Raquel is part of the 2014-15 season now, right? Since if we only have 1 or 2 TCs this season and add TLs in the "Other systems" section, it will be weird because the article is really short. So if we keep the TLs in their sections, it will be longer like the other seasons. Or just copy the format of the 2010 PTS article. Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Raquel is a part of the 2014 season but still needs mentioning in this season just like 09C. Lets wait and see what happens - I have just added a designation to the December tropical low which i found in the BT Database.Jason Rees (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Designated lows

[edit]

@Jason Rees: First of all, I am sorry that this is just based on my opinion and no sources. But I am going to find out if this does work. Since the 2012-13 season, we have problems each year for missing (designated) lows, as for example in last season where we had a huge jump from 07U to 13U (Lam). IMO, I think the BoM do designate TLs, however they only mention the numbers if the low has a high chance of forming into a TC. Last month, our latest designated low was 06U and last week, we had a TL without a designation and only had a medium chance of further development. Today, a TL formed and was designated as 08U because it had a high chance. Therefore, I decided that last week's TL was 07U as it was the only TL active from January 1 to January 25. I will therefore be updated to BoM for any TLs and add it to the article and see if it works (I hope so). What do you think? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:31, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have never said that the BoM doesn't designate Tropical Lows with a U number, but the problem is them mentioning the number in their bulletins. For whatever reason it isnt always mentioned and i dont think its because of the probability of formation... Anyway I do agree that it seems very likely that last weeks Tropical Low is 07U but we do not have any source for it... This is why I am insisting on us initiating when they say Tropical Low in their TWO's rather than wait for a U number. If you do send them a message and they respond, please forward it to me for Verification purposes. Jason Rees (talk) 13:34, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Rees: @Keith Edkins: In this site, it says that the next numbered system in the AusR basin is 16U, however so far our recent storm here is 14U and as far as I know, none of the 3 TCWCs have stated anything about a TL, even a weak tropical low. Otherwise this TL is the one from today (Pre-16F) stating a "developing TL", even check TCWC Brisbane. Or Keith, if you can browse through the previous sources from 18 March through to 31 March. Thanks. Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did wonder about pre 13F personally but we can not go around speculating like this and have to work with what we are given im afraid. Besides how do you know that the website is correct?Jason Rees (talk) 15:53, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: 13F? or 13U? Actually the site sometimes makes mistakes as they follow the other site for Australian named storms. For example, in this specific site I used to follow, this name was spelled as "Tatjana" and therefore they used it, however it is originally "Tatiana". Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I meant 13F because of its position on the first advisory but again that is just speculation.Jason Rees (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: @Typhoon2013: Brisbane had a Low from 18th to 20th of March, when it moved east out of the region. It's probably the same as the 90P.INVEST archived at Talk:2015–16 South Pacific cyclone season/March.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 13:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Keith Edkins: May I please a see a source from Brisbane just for confirmation? Is that low a "tropical" one? Otherwise are there any other systems that were considered as "tropical" after 14U? Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Typhoon2013: I've added the sources to Talk:2015–16 South Pacific cyclone season/March for want of anywhere better. "A low" is all they say.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 13:46, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Keith Edkins: Any other lows you can find? Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:05, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Typhoon2013: Perth had "Another weak tropical system may develop over the weekend near 10S between 100E and 105E, however the environment is unfavourable for development." on 16th & 17th March but I take that to mean it was never rated as a Tropical Low ("Another" meaning other than Emeraude which was mentioned as being outside the region.) Can't see anything else.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 22:40, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Keith Edkins: Hmmm, that's weird. Because in the site I was talking about with JR few days ago, it states that the next designation is 16U, however 15U or a TL was not mentioned after 14U. Despite I remembered there was one advisory from Brisbane on 1 April of a "developing tropical low over in the eastern border", which later developed to 16F/Zena. Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stan

[edit]

I would personally like to see a reliable and citeable source directly state that Stan's remnant low affected Queensland or New South Wales, until we readd it to the article. For what its worth South Australia is direclty backed up by Stan's Tropical cyclone report.Jason Rees (talk) 22:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on 2015–16 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 03:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2015–16 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) 13:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to merge Cyclone Stan (2016)

[edit]

Stan didn't cause any deaths, or much damage, and all of its content can (and should) fit in the season section. That would help out the season article, currently start-class and in need of additional content and references. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Article is very short, and can easily be incorporated in its season section. ~ Sandy14156 (Talk ✉️) 17:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above --ZZZ'S 10:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Shouldn't this be merged now? Tavantius (talk) 13:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2015–16_Australian_region_cyclone_season&oldid=1248487237"