Talk:2017–18 Australian region cyclone season

Season Summary

ID	Date (ACST)	TC Name	TCWC	Original Basin	Source
02U	2017-11-22	Cempaka	P/J	Indian Ocean	BT Database
03U	2017-11-28	Dahlia	P/J	Indian Ocean	BT Database
06U	2017-12-27	Hilda	P	Indian Ocean	BT Database
08U	2018-01-05	Irving	P	Indian Ocean	BT Database
09U	2018-01-07	Joyce	P/D	NW Aus	BT Database
11U	2018-01-28	--	P/D	GoC	PTCR
17U	2018-02-14	Kelvin	D	GoC	BT Database
20U	2018-03-14	Marcus	D/P	GOC	BT Database
21U	2018-03-13	Linda	B	Coral Sea	BT Database
22U	2018-03-21	Nora	D/B	Arafura Sea	BT Database
24U	2018-04-02	Iris	B	Coral Sea	BT Database
25U ?	2018-04-28	Flamboyan	P/J	Indian Ocean

Location of Advisories

Tropical Cyclone Three Day Outlook Jakarta \\ Perth \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane

Tropical Cyclone High Seas Warning Jakarta 1 \\ Jakarta 2 \\ Perth 1 \\ Perth 2 \\ Darwin 1 \\ Darwin 2 \\ Brisbane 1 \\ Brisbane 2

Tropical Cyclone Technical Bulletin Perth 1 \\ Perth 2 \\ Darwin \\ Brisbane

Main Pages Jakarta \\ BoM \\ Port Moresby \\ JTWC

ABIO10 STWA \\ ABPW10 STWA

JTWC 1 \\ JTWC 2 \\ JTWC 3

Running Best track

JMA Archives: Jakarta // Perth // Darwin // Brisbane // Port Moresby // JTWC

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2017–18 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.australiasevereweather.com/cyclones/2008/summ0713a.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091112010420/http://www.bom.gov.au/weather/cyclone/ to http://www.bom.gov.au/weather/cyclone/

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) 06:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

PNG finally has a website!

Hi, I've updated the 'Locations of Advisories' section with a link to PNG's new website (which had taken forever to come up). Feels good to finally have websites for all the RSMCs and TCWCs in the world! Damien4794 (talk) 06:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Broken archived sources?

@Keith Edkins: Hi Keith. Something is wrong with the sources you've put for all system starting at Hilda, which is the reason why I could not fill in their storm sections. Could you fix this please? Thanks. Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Keith Edkins: This also includes the TL before 08U. Thanks. Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

U numbers

Until proof is provided that a system is XXU, we cannot be including the designations in the article. This is per the verifiability rules, which mean we need to be able to prove it.Jason Rees (talk) 14:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jason Rees: Well but for sure the 2 TLs between Dahlia and Hilda for sure are 04U and 05U as no other TLs were monitored that time. We have discussed about this before and I did speculate that BoM 'designates' TLs if its in their bulletins with the coordinates. This worked for the previous season where we got most of the TLs, as well as a TL (07U) before Irving. But for the first TL we cannot clarify it is 01U. Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

The problem Typhoon2013 is that the BoM like to assign the U numbers to systems, that the models throw up to test the models at times. That's one of the reasons why we have TC's in the SPAC/SWIO assigned U numbers. This is why we have the seasonal summuary section above. Also where is your evidence that Cempaka is 02U? How do i know that it wasnt 04U? As a result, the Us should be removed from all seasons unless they can be sourced back to a bulletin or something from BoM.Jason Rees (talk) 02:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jason Rees: Well for sure it's BoM's fault for not explaining about this. Though for sure they have common sense giving "xU" designations in numerical order, not just adding a random number like 15U to 09U. Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

They do issue them in numerical order - they just do not mention the U numbers publically. For example, I for one would be very surprised if Gita did not have a U number, since its impacting Norfolk Island and is being menitoned in Brisbanes TWO as well as the fact that it was called 07F at 162E. This is why we need to have a source for all mentions of the U numbers including on the button bar.Jason Rees (talk) 20:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Typhoon2013: Marcus is a very good example of this, as I think it was mentioned in the TWO's before Linda.Jason Rees (talk) 18:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jason Rees: I did hint about that, too. I also did had another thought whether it was the same system that developed on March 4th. Though one of the sources revealed by BoM stated that they were both separate. But because of this such weird numbering, my only option is to wait for its TC Summary Report and see when it really formed etc and I hope it will show that (at least) Linda and Marcus developed in the same time, or for a clear one, Marcus developing before Linda. Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Typhoon2013: Marcus didnt form before Linda, but I suspect it was mentioned in the TWO and given a U number before Linda.Jason Rees (talk) 23:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Coral Sea tropical low

Hi, I just checked this page and just realised that all of us might have missed the TL that formed in the northwestern Coral Sea near the PNG border. The earliest outlook I could find on Keith's website was on 11 Feb, but the TL may have formed way earlier. Here is a link to the archived version of the outlook. I did not add in the system as I couldn't remember the day it was first mentioned in the TWO. Damien4794 (talk) 23:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Damien4794: It's the same tropical low developed last Feb 9 lol. Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

TL as 11F?

@Jason Rees: I just wanted to confirm whether the TL that developed during 17/3 to 19/3 is the same system as 11F? Someone added that in the storm section and was deleted. Though I did remember watching the satellite animation that time and the system moved in a southwestward direction. Although looking at the archived sources, the bulletin during the 18th didn't mention the system. Typhoon2013 (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

11F/Iris will definitely have a U number since it moved into the Australian region forecasted to be on 161E earlier, however, is it the same system as tne TL from 17/3-19/3 I dont know bur had presumed so since both impacted the Sols.Jason Rees (talk) 01:53, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Linda Dates

I have just tweaked Linda’s dates back to it developing on March 11. This is because of Nadi stating that it had developed on 160Ewhich is the border of Aus and SPAC. As a result I feel that we do not need to plaster the article with the usual entry stuff.Jason Rees (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2018 (UTC) Jason Rees (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Remnants of Iris

Cyclone Iris's remnants are active so it isnt a SD so please change the track

The remnants of Cyclone Iris are indeed active but they are classified as a Subtropical Depression by both the BoM and the JTWC.Jason Rees (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Iris downgraded

Iris is now a tropical low, please update.

Cempaka

@Jason Rees, MarioProtIV, Typhoon2013, CooperScience, and Cyclonebiskit: Do we need an article for Cempaka? Though it was weak, it caused more than 40 fatalities. --B dash (talk) 02:54, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

An article for Cempaka? I don't really think it is neccessary, but if it is created and well-written, I don't see why it can't have an article, provided it is well-sourced and well-written. Cooper 03:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

If it can be sourced that Cempaka caused more than 40 deaths then yes it should be created.Jason Rees (talk) 17:27, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Nora Article

Someone Please Create an article for Nora. Nora seems significant enough.Brandoncyclone (talk) 00:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)