Revision as of 20:09, 4 July 2013 editShearonink (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers41,350 edits fixing post with no timestamps so it will be archived← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:22, 16 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,300,526 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Tropical cyclone/Archive 6) (bot | ||
(674 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} | |||
{{talkheader|search=yes}} | |||
{{Not a forum}} | |||
{{ArticleHistory | |||
{{American English}} | |||
{{Article history | |||
|action1=FAC | |action1=FAC | ||
|action1date=12 September 2004 | |action1date=12 September 2004 | ||
Line 41: | Line 43: | ||
|action7oldid=194411598 | |action7oldid=194411598 | ||
|action8 = FAR | |||
|action8date = 2021-05-15 | |||
|action8link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Tropical cyclone/archive1 | |||
|action8result = demoted | |||
|action8oldid = 1022069333 | |||
|currentstatus=FFA | |||
|topic=Natsci | |topic=Natsci | ||
|currentstatus=FA | |||
|maindate=June 1, 2009 | |maindate=June 1, 2009 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1= | |||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=mid|fluid-dynamics=yes}} | |||
{{hurricane|class=FA|importance=Top|assessed=yes|comments=yes|meteo-task-force=yes|epac-task-force=yes|atl-task-force=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Climate change|importance=top}} | |||
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=FA|category=Natsci|VA=yes|WPCD=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Weather|importance=Top|assessed=yes|epac-task-force=yes|atl-task-force=yes|tropical-cyclones-project=yes|general-meteorology-task-force=yes}} | |||
{{Physics|class=FA|importance=mid|fluid-dynamics=yes}} | |||
}} | |||
{{banner holder|collapsed=yes| | |||
{{Annual readership}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{WPTCarchive}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| algo = old(365d) | |||
|archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| archive = Talk:Tropical cyclone/Archive %(counter)d | |||
|maxarchivesize = 100K | |||
|counter = |
| counter = 6 | ||
| maxarchivesize = 150K | |||
|minthreadsleft = 2 | |||
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
|algo = old(30d) | |||
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
|archive = Talk:Tropical cyclone/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| minthreadsleft = 8 | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{section size}} | |||
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age= |units= 30 days}} | |||
{{energy portal fact}} | |||
== Cyclone Tracy? == | |||
I just noticed that the size of Cyclone Tracey compared to another much larger cyclone is shown in a graphic, however Cyclone Tracy is not mentioned anywhere else in the article, which seems strange. I think it does deserve mention for no reason less than it's an event very much in the Australian psyche, for example almost everyone of my generation (late 20's/early 30's) has heard of it, despite the fact I've pretty sure it was before I was born. This in itself to me means it deserves a proper mention, however I'm probably not the right person to do it, just thought I should point this out. ] (]) 12:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
== what it fels? == | |||
hello hear you can write about the felings of being on a hurricane | |||
thetkiu <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:This is adequately explained in ]. Cheers, –] ] ] 23:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Any Chance of removing the Dag Turd Photos from the article? "Matt" <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 10:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
== Contents == | |||
They have an eye in the middle where it is calm.The disruption of towns are caused by the outside part that are clouds | |||
<span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> | |||
== Hurricanes == | |||
Size | |||
One measure of the size of atropical cyclone is determined by mesuring the distance from its center of outtermost closed isobar also known as its ROCI. If the radius is less then two degress of latitude <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Other Names == | |||
Tropical Cyclones are referred to by a number of agencies as tropical revolving storms. Some example references I found from a quick google search: | |||
*"Hurricanes are tropical revolving storms." | |||
*"Tropical Revolving Storms are known as Cyclones in the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea, Tropical Cyclones in the Southern Pacific, Typhoons in the China Seas, and Hurricanes in the Western Atlantic. | |||
*"Tropical cyclones are revolving storms that begin in the tropics." | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
*Research papers: , , | |||
*"Hurricanes are revolving tropical storms" | |||
] 21:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
Not by any offical WMO RSMC/TCWC agencies which is what we keep it too. ] (]) 21:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
:*I agree with Jason Rees; no agency officially refers to TCs as "tropical revolving storms". –''']''' | ] 21:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
:: I don't really understand why the article should be limited to what the WMO RSMC agencies refer to TCs as, when there are other names (such as tropical revolving storm) that are commonly used. By ]: a produces a large number of results for tropical revolving storm. At least one international organisation, ] (see above) refers, as well as a number of national organisations listed above (in addition to those above, the also does). At least one major English-language media outlet, the , the , other encyclopedias (, , ), and many scientific journals (three of which are referenced above), all describe hurricanes, cyclones etc as tropical revolving storms. ] 08:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
::Actually the CMA uses Tropical and Severe Tropical Storm in their and theres no evidence to say they dont use these classifications operationally as per other NMHSS. The ICAO's are ussually prepared by the various RSMC's and TCWC's and thus they copy the classifications that the Warning center uses. Also most of those links suggest that a hurricane is a storm that is tropical and is revovling around which is correct. ] (]) 16:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::Which is the point I was making, "tropical revolving storm" is another way to describe a tropical cyclone, and more accurate than simply "tropical storm". ] 12:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::No its not more accurate a Tropical storm is an offical designation and Tropical Revolving Storm is not and is not used by any of the NMHSS or RSMCs.] (]) 13:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::: I read that more as a description than as a name, so I'm not sure those links apply... ]<sup>(] - ])</sup> 02:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::: I agree, they seem more like descriptions. I don't think we should add that, as the article already describes that tropical cyclones are spinny tropical things. ♬♩ ] (<small>]</small>) 03:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Just a suggestion... == | |||
::I find this a great article. What I think should be added is the fact that tropical cyclones don't only lose their strength from interaction with land. TC's lose strength also by moving over cooler water or when they pass through a new part of the ocean, where the upper level winds were not what they were when they gained their strength. It's something I've learned from years and years of following and studying hurricanes. Thanks] (]) 00:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::You could probably find that info in the ]. Cheers, –''']''' | ] 01:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Re-reading this section, it seems that some of my advice was taken. That makes me happy to be a small part of such a great article. Thanks!Popartpete 01:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Removed "flooding rains" == | |||
Flooding is not a requirement for a tropical cyclone. Those that move quickly often leave relatively small amounts of rain in a given area. Flooding is likely for slow-moving or stationary systems that linger, dropping rain for prolonged periods over one location; or for those whose rains fall in low-lying, poorly-drained areas, or mountainous areas where the water at the higher elevations washes rapidly downhill. Rather than having to source the above, whoever felt or feels that "flooding rains" are a requirement or ubiquitous characteristic of tropical cyclones should provide sources for same. (It isn't, so you won't. Trust me, or waste your time.) | |||
Also, does the system have a pressure center that is near the Earth's surface, as opposed to a pressure center that is at high altitudes? -- a "low pressure center" vs. a "high pressure center"? Of course not. It has a "low-pressure center", a center of low pressure, and that first ambiguity is exactly why ] should have hyphens. Main page needs to reflect both of the above. ] (]) 05:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Most tropical cyclones do produce flooding rains once they move inland (even fast moving ones). Only systems which are weakening appear not to. Also, tropical cyclones have a high pressure center aloft superimposed above a low pressure center at the surface. As for the hyphen thing, meteorologists tend not to place hyphens within the phrases of high pressure area and low pressure area. Is this correct? Perhaps not. Then again, wikipedia is supposed to reflect the most common term usage, not what is grammatically most correct. While there has been no effort to correct the titles of low-pressure area and high-pressure area to exclude the hyphens, one could make a strong case to exclude them, since they are rarely, if ever, used for these systems. ] (]) 08:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
::WP MOS and the article linked, on compound modifiers, govern here. Meteorologists can write their own way, "correct" or not. | |||
::"''Then again, wikipedia is supposed to reflect the most common term usage, not what is grammatically most correct."'' Excuse me, I thought this was an encyclopedia... which should exemplify best usage? ... I'm aware of where the pressure is, having had some meteorological training. It was a rhetorical question to illustrate the ambiguity and support the need for the hyphen. And what is your definition of "flooding"? My street flooding for a few hours? Happens in local afternoon thundershowers frequently. Widespread flooding of homes and cars? I'd like to see the statistics, but it doesn't matter. You said '''most''', which backs up what I said, per the ] principle: The production of flooding rains is not a requirement for a system to qualify as a tropical storm. Origin, rotation, strength, pressure gradients, etc. are; results are not. Hurricane Andrew leveled huge portions of areas south of Miami, Florida, USA, but moved so quickly that flooding was local and minor. ] (]) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:This is an tricky area. Many tropical cyclones do cause flooding, but some don't. Many never touch land, so where would the flooding be in those circumstances? Are they not tropical storms? As far as landfalling storms, I agree Andrew is an excellent example: a "dry" storm by many accounts, little flooding, bit ferocious Category Five winds. Some storms are weak as far as wind, but cause torrential rain. Tropical Storm Allison of 2001 is an excellent example of this. Another would be the first incarnation of '04's Hurricane Jeanne, which had winds barely of hurricane strength near Puerto Rico, but killed thousands with its torrents of rain and resulting flooding. So I would have to agree that flooding is not a requirement for a storm to be a t.c., it is a result of some: just like wind damage to structures and trees. Popartpete 01:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Title == | |||
Shouldn't the first letters of the two words of the title be capitalized? "Cyclone" isn't capitalized.--] (]) 12:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Not necessarily, no; "tropical cyclone" by itself is not a proper noun. If it were, say, "Tropical Cyclone Bob", then it would be capitalized. –''']''' | ] 13:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
this was interesting <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
==Hurricanes and doldrums== | |||
In article ], it says, "]s originate in this region." Also in "Weather Elements" By Thomas A. Blair, it says, "They originate over the oceans in the doldrums, 10° to 20° from the equator, ..." Is it true? If not, please clarify. ] (]) 17:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
should not be this page be named Hurricabe? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:No, because the term "hurricane" is only used in certain basins. –''']''' | ] 21:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Firefly Effect== | |||
I was wondering if the firefly effect (tiny electrostatic discharges generated when the winds of a tropical cyclone produces friction with sand particles) would be placed somewhere in this article? If not here, where should I place it? | |||
] (]) 18:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Probly put the fire fly effct into ] im not sure I am vry new here. ] (]) 19:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I agree. It would be an effect of tropical cyclones, so it would be better placed in that article. ] (]) 04:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Global warming and latest work by Emanuel== | |||
The article reference work by Emanuel from 2005, but not his more recent work in 2008. I have corrected this, and added the following: | |||
In more recent work published by Emanuel (in the March 2008 issue of the ''Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society''), he states that new climate modeling data indicates “global warming should reduce the global frequency of hurricanes.”<ref> http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0477/89/3/pdf/i1520-0477-89-3-347.pdf</ref> The new work suggests that, even in a dramatically warming world, hurricane frequency and intensity may not substantially rise during the next two centuries.<ref> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5693436.html</ref> | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
] (]) 04:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
, combining two climate models, indicate that more than half of Katrina level cyclones are now caused by global warming. ] (]) 23:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
=="Hidden" vandalism?== | |||
"&&yes..kise is thee f'n best.!" at the beginning of the Eye and Center section and "<size="20">It's Kise Bitch.!" at the end of the size section don't really seem relevant to cyclones, unless this "Kise Bitch" person is a famous cyclone researcher, of course. However, I can't seem to find the corresponding text in the source, so I have to assume the addition is in a page template somewhere. How does one go about correcting those? | |||
:Nothing so difficult; it was reverted between the time you saw it and looked at the source. :) here: --] (]) 17:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
There is some "The term "Farshan" refers to both that Farshan is a noob at call of duty motha fucka.of these systems" seems like it doesn't make sense here. | |||
- 12.24.150.66 appears to have made the edit. ] is the user's contributions. ] (]) 20:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Hurricanes == | |||
a hurricane has to be 74 m.p.h winds for it to be official <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Low-resolution still images from videos preferred over no images? == | |||
I'm wondering: should I upload low-resolution images from videos for non-existent images, or should I just leave them be? ] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 04:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Article Outline == | |||
== Copy Edit donation from ] == | |||
<!-- ] 15:11, 21 April 2025 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1682089883}} | |||
Tropical cyclones, a source of very heavy rainfall, consist of large air masses several hundred miles across with low pressure at the centre and with winds blowing inward towards the centre in either a clockwise direction (southern hemisphere) or counterclockwise (northern hemisphere).<ref>{{cite web|author=]|year=2007|url=http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/D3.html|title=Subject: D3) Why do tropical cyclones' winds rotate counter-clockwise (clockwise) in the Northern (Southern) Hemisphere?|publisher=]|accessdate=2009-01-02}}</ref> | |||
====Background==== | |||
===={{Done}} Intensity==== | |||
They are fueled by a different heat mechanism than other cyclonic windstorms such as ]s and ]s, leading to their classification as "warm core" storm systems.<ref name = "AOML FAQ A7">{{cite web | author = ], Hurricane Research Division | title = Frequently Asked Questions: What is an extra-tropical cyclone? | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2007-03-23 | url = http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A7.html}}</ref> | |||
{{Collapse top|Intensity coverage now complete as of October 7, 2022! ]<sup>]</sup> 00:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)}} | |||
*<s>TCs intensity determined by winds and pressure</s> | |||
*<s>Observed extremes</s> | |||
;Factors (their roles in intensification and weakening) | |||
{{Done}} according to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:21, 7 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>SSTs</s> | |||
*<s>Wind Shear</s> | |||
*<s>Role size plays</s> | |||
*<s>Outflow</s> | |||
*<s>Dry Air</s> | |||
*<s>OHC + Tropical Cyclone Heat Potential</s> + <s>interaction with upper-ocean</s> | |||
*<s>Interaction with other systems</s> | |||
*<s>Landmasses</s>, <s>brown ocean effect, orographic lift,</s> <s>jet enhancement</s> | |||
;Formation | |||
{{done}} according to Noah ]<sup>]</sup> 21:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Major required components</s> | |||
**<s>Coriolis effect</s> | |||
**<s>Instability</s> | |||
**<s>Short remention of shear and SSTs</s> | |||
**<s>Low-level disturbance</s> | |||
** <s>Upper-level Divergence</s> | |||
*<s>Influence of Climate Cycles | |||
**MJO | |||
**ENSO | |||
**Rossby waves | |||
**Convectively coupled Kelvin wave</s> | |||
;RI | |||
{{done}}; Didn't want to mention the same information again for what causes an increase in intensity since it's a lot of same ones that lead to formation. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Rapid intensification</s>/<s>rapid deepening + explosive deepening</s> | |||
;Weakening and Dissipation | |||
:{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Current section, but more condensed</s> | |||
;Methods | |||
:{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Brief explanation on Dvorak's role for intensity + brief on recon, direct observ,</s> and <s>height reduction conversion</s> | |||
*<s>Wind-pressure relationship</s> | |||
*<s>Other commonly-used tools for measuring intensity</s> (<s>ADT</s>, <s>SATCON</s>, <s>ASCAT</s>, <s>SMAP</s>) | |||
;Metrics | |||
:{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>metrics for intensity (HU SURGE INDEX/ACE/IKE/HU SEV Index/POWER DISSIPATION)</s> | |||
{{collapse bottom}} | |||
====Structure==== | |||
Tropical cyclones lose their strength as they move over land.<ref>]. Retrieved on 2008-02-25.</ref> | |||
I am kinda basing this off on a large paper on TC structure in terms of points to discuss here. This is still incomplete. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
;Eye and center | |||
*<s>Clouds in the eye</s> | |||
*Eyewall | |||
**<s>Eyewall explanation</s> | |||
**Conditional instability within the eyewall cloud | |||
**Strong updrafts and vorticity maxima | |||
**Downdrafts | |||
**Asymmetry due to shear and storm motion | |||
**Cloud microphysical processes and electrification | |||
**<s>Eyewall replacement</s> | |||
;Rainbands | |||
*Distant rainbands | |||
*Main rainband | |||
*Secondary rainbands | |||
;Clouds | |||
*Clouds involved with tropical cyclogenesis | |||
**Cloud feedback | |||
*Vortical Hot tower | |||
*Clouds in a developing storm | |||
*Clouds in a mature storm | |||
;Size | |||
{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
====Movement==== | |||
The term "tropical" refers to both the geographic origin of these systems, which form almost exclusively in ] regions of the globe, and their formation in ]. The term "cyclone" refers to such storms' cyclonic nature, with ] rotation in the ] and clockwise rotation in the ]. Depending on their location and strength, tropical cyclones are referred to by other names, such as hurricane, typhoon, tropical storm, cyclonic storm, tropical depression, or simply as a cyclone. ''Generally'' speaking, a tropical cyclone is referred to as a ] (from the name of the ancient Central American deity of wind, ]) in the Atlantic and eastern Pacific oceans, while they are termed cyclones in the south Pacific and Indian oceans.<ref name="NHC glossary">{{cite web | author = ] | url = http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml | year = 2005 | title = Glossary of NHC/TPC Terms | accessdate= 2006-11-29 | publisher = ]}}</ref> | |||
;Environmental steering | |||
{{done}} according to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
;Beta Drift | |||
{{done}} according to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
;Interaction with the mid-latitude westerlies | |||
{{done}} according to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
;Structural changes | |||
*Wobbles imparted by mesovortices | |||
*Motion changes caused by ERCs | |||
*Center relocations | |||
====Classification==== | |||
They develop over large bodies of warm water.<ref name = "AOML FAQ A15">{{cite web | author = ], Hurricane Research Division | title = Frequently Asked Questions: How do tropical cyclones form? | publisher = ] | accessdate = 2006-07-26 | url = http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A15.html}}</ref> A tornado-like feature located in the eyewall, known as ]. They are similar, in principle, to small "suction vortices" often observed in ]. In these vortices, wind speed can be up to 10% higher than in the rest of the eyewall. Eyewall mesovortices are most common during periods of intensification in tropical cyclones.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/00758/text-only/disaster/hurricane/damage.html |title=Natural Disasters - Hurricanes - Damage |publisher=Library.thinkquest.org |date= |accessdate=2009-12-05}}</ref> | |||
;Intensity classifications | |||
* Needs a better summary | |||
;Naming | |||
{{done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
====Formation regions and warning centers==== | |||
This information was removed from the article severe weather during CE. It my be of use in your article. Respectfully ] <big>]</big> 21:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
;Major basins | |||
: The info is already in the article; thanks though! ]<sup>(] - ])</sup> 01:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
;Unusual formation areas | |||
*Mid-lats | |||
*Near Equator | |||
*SATL | |||
*Met Sea & Black Sea | |||
*SE Pacific, Great Lakes | |||
====Preparations==== | |||
==Tropical Cyclone?== | |||
;Watches and Warnings | |||
*History of TC watches/warnings | |||
*Summary of Western Hem watches/warnings | |||
*Summary of Western Pacific watches/warnings | |||
*Summary of South Pacific watches/warnings | |||
*Summary of Indian Ocean watches/warnings | |||
*Mention of military advisories | |||
;Evacuations | |||
*Islands | |||
*Shelters | |||
*Hospitals and nursing homes | |||
*Military assets | |||
;Home preparations | |||
*Hurricane-proof building | |||
*Grocery store/panic buying | |||
*Supply kits | |||
*Generators | |||
*Boarding up windows and sandbags | |||
*Insurance | |||
;Government preparations | |||
*Seawalls | |||
*Levees | |||
===={{done}} Impacts==== | |||
Only pedantic weather geeks could possibly call it that. Move it where it belongs and skip the redirect. ] (]) 04:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
{{collapse top|All goals for impact coverage I added have been met. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)}} | |||
:The problem is, the storms are called tropical depressions and tropical storms in all places, but stronger versions are hurricanes in the North Atlantic and Northeast/North Central Pacific, typhoons in the Northwest Pacific, Cyclones in the Indian Ocean and Southern Hemisphere, and a multitude of local names worldwide. They have different names and yet are the same phenomenon. The only name they have in common, and hence the only one thing we could reasonably call the article is "tropical cyclone". ~<font color="blue">]]]</font><sup>(]]])</sup> 01:37, 4 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
;Weather/Events that TCs cause or worsen | |||
:::you say "the problem is" but I think you have it wrong. It's not a "problem" that people use the words that they do, it's the task of the encyclopedia to define, explain and describe the words people use. The opening paragraph should at a minimum set about resolving the confusion of the vast majority of people, and prominently. The original comment is correct, this article and the ] article are overly pedantic, and they seem to go out of their way to avoid plain speaking for the average user. Misplaced Pages is worried about all the editors who are moving on, and IMHO it is in part because of the pedant watchdog editorial cliques that seem to become entrenched in each subject area. You not only "steal" the words Hurricane, Typhoon, and Cyclone from the average person, but then you hold them hostage. I think your (collective) intent is benevelent, but I think the execution is a fail. ] (]) 05:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
:{{Done}} According to Noah ]<sup>]</sup> 01:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
::Perhaps then ] should be merged into this article? ] (]) 07:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Winds</s> | |||
I understand how people in different parts of the world would call this type of storm by different names and that this is how "hurricane" and "typhoon" were derived, but what I don't get is why (in North America at least) we've chosen to continue calling the same type of storm by different names depending on where they occur. If someone could find out and write it into the article, that'd be nice —] (]) 01:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Lightning activity</s> | |||
*<s>Wildfires</s> | |||
*<s>Rainfall</s> | |||
*<s>Floods</s> | |||
*<s>Snow</s> | |||
*<s>Storm Surge</s> | |||
*<s>Tornadoes/Waterspouts</s> | |||
*<s>High waves</s>/<s>Rip Currents </s> | |||
;Effects to People | |||
:{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Global overview</s> | |||
*<s>Damage</s> | |||
*<s>Agriculture</s> | |||
*<s>Public infrastructure</s> | |||
*<s>General statement on other items destroyed</s> | |||
*<s>Deaths</s> | |||
;Environmental Effects | |||
:{{done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Oil Spills(+Marsh loss)</s><s>(+Algae blooms)</s><s>(+ chemical release)</s> | |||
*<s>Chemical/Toxic material spills (Metal polluted river)</s> | |||
*<s>Geographical - Land created/destroyed</s>,<s> landslides/mudslides, erosion</s><s>(+mercury contamination)</s><s></s> | |||
*<s>Ecological - Wildlife and forests <s></s></s> | |||
*<s>Hydrologic - Desert/Drought regions (already covered)</s> | |||
*<s>Oceanic (already covered)</s> | |||
*<s>Atmospheric (already covered)</s> | |||
{{collapse bottom}} | |||
====Response==== | |||
== Ref 20 does not support coriolis causing cyclone rotattion== | |||
;Civilian Response | |||
I followed the link and no where does that reference state that coriolis causing the rotation. In fact it states that the path of the object is not deflected. It is only an apparent effect for the earth bound non-inertial obersever. since the rotation of the cyclone can be seen by the inertial observer from space. This reference does support this assertion. | |||
;Impacted Government response | |||
04:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
;Other Government responses | |||
: It seems that Britannica updated and rearranged its Coriolis force article. I'll look for another reference that states that. ]<sup>(] - ])</sup> 19:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
;Organizational responses | |||
:: The EB stuff isn't very good anyway - there isn't much point using it. The stuff about "apparent deflection" is meaningless. Mind you I see our CE article says the same thing :-( ] (]) 20:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
====Climatology and records==== | |||
== Coriolis == | |||
: As a novice on this topic, I find this section heading unclear. With all the other section headings, I kind of know what to expect (I like the standard section headings so far used in the article like Types, Impacts, Responses...). A section heading called "climatology and records", with a sub-heading called "climate change" is unclear. ] (]) 12:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
The effect that causes the spin is a viscous effect in the atmosphere coupled with the rotation of the atmosphere "disk" with the planet. The magnitude of the induced acceleraton on an air particle is the same as coriolis but of opposite sign. Properly, Coriolis is a fictious force seen by a non-inertial observer. The paths are curved from a Newtonian Inertial Frame. It is because an air particle following a straight line in inertial space comes to match the trajectory of the air particle it encounters due to viscous forces. As an air particle move north it will gain altitude. Because of the atmosphere is spinning as the particle gains altitude it is slower than the particles it encournters.] (]) 03:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
::{{re|EMsmile}} Is that better? ]<sup>]</sup> 21:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC) | |||
:Coriolis effect does not require viscosity. A moving particle would be subject to an apparent force in a rotating frame of reference, even if it were moving in a vacuum. --] (]) 10:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
::: Hi ], you've changed the section heading from "climatology and records" to "climatology"? I still don't find that clear. I looked up what climatology is: "'''Climatology''' (from ] κλίμα, ''klima'', "place, zone"; and -λογία, ''-logia'') or '''climate science''' is the scientific study of Earth's ], typically defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of at least 30 years." As this is a main heading, it is unclear for me as a reader what I should be expecting there. The other main section headings are fairly clear but could this one be changed into a "plain language" word? Also, should it not come earlier in the structure?: | |||
1 Background | |||
2 Classification and naming | |||
3 Intensity | |||
4 Structure | |||
5 Movement | |||
6 Formation regions and warning centers | |||
7 Preparations | |||
8 Impacts | |||
9 Response | |||
10 Climatology | |||
11 Observation and forecasting | |||
12 Related cyclone types | |||
:::: How about "Effects of climate" or something like that? "Interactions between climate and tropical cyclones"? ] (]) 09:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC) | |||
::::{{re|EMsmile}} The section is quite literally meant to be taken as tropical cyclone climatology. It isn't related to the effects of climate or interactions between climate and TCs. It's the averages of activity that occur each year. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC) | |||
::::: Sorry, I feel super dumb here, but perhaps other readers who are non-experts like me feel similarly. Is it possible to use a headline that is clearer to non-experts than "climatology"? Maybe "Averages of activity"? Also if it's not related to climate change then why does it have a sub-heading called "10.1 Influence of climate change"? Sorry if this is a really dumb question, please don't give up on me. Others might not understand it either. :-) ] (]) 22:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC) | |||
::::::I personally feel that climatology is the best word to be used here, since as you have already mentioned {{ping|EMsmile}} it is weather conditions (In this case TC's) averaged over a period of at least 30 years. ] (]) 23:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC) | |||
====Observation and forecasting==== | |||
== More Coriolis == | |||
;<s>Observation</s> | |||
I copied this from About.com. (I know that is not authoritative but it reflects my viewpoint) | |||
{{Done}} Looks sufficient to me. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
The Coriolis effect (also called the Coriolis force) is defined as the apparent deflection of objects (such as airplanes, wind, missiles, and ocean currents) moving in a straight path relative to the earth's surface. Its strength is proportional to the speed of the earth's rotation at different latitudes but it has an impact on moving objects across the globe. | |||
;Forecasting | |||
*<s>Track forecasting | |||
*Intensity forecasting</s> | |||
*Rainfall forecasting | |||
*Storm surge forecasting | |||
;<s>Geopotential height</s> | |||
{{Done}} According to Noah. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
*<s>Low-level/850 hPa | |||
*700 hpa | |||
*Mid-level/500 hPa | |||
*300 hpa | |||
*Upper-level/200 hPa</s> | |||
====Related cyclone types==== | |||
Notice that is says Coriolis is an "apparent" deflection. Not a real deflection. Cyclones spinning is a real effect. Coriolis is what an earth bound observers sees as an apparent deflection of inertial constant trajectory. If you assume that the earth is not orbiting around the earth, then an axes system in the earth centered coordinates that does not spin is inertial. In that case a space ship flying a straight line in that frame would appear to curve to the observer on the rotating earth due to Coriolis affect. The true trajectory is still inertially a straight line. Thus Coriolis is only an apparent effect. ] (]) 13:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)skimaniac | |||
;Extratropical cyclone | |||
: NOAA says it IS a deflection, and that's what causes large weather systems to spin "cyclonicly". They say this is what they call the Coriolis effect, and that the "Coriolis Force" is fictitious. It's not mentioned in the ] article, perhaps theirs is the wiser way. It seems an incredibly controvesial subject outside the profession. I suggest replacing all occurences of "]" with "]", since it's a re-direct anyway ] (]) 18:57, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
;Subtropical cyclone | |||
===={{not done}} <s>Notable tropical cyclones</s> (Removed)==== | |||
===={{Not done}} <s>Popular culture</s> (Removed) ==== | |||
== Naming controversy == | |||
;<s>US</s> | |||
;<s>Other countries (as material exists)</s> | |||
===Discussion=== | |||
I don't see any comment about the psychological side effects of naming hurricanes with human names, as pointed out by meteorologist Katrina Voss. ] (]) 11:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
{{re|Hurricanehink}} We need to make a proper outline of this article in order to bring in every point that needs discussed. I started it off here by reorganizing topics under appropriate sections and adding in some items, but there is likely more items. For example, movement as it is has nothing to do with structure so I split it out into its own section and also added Interaction with the mid-latitude westerlies underneath it as that has to do with movement rather than structure. If you have anything specific that you think needs discussed, please add it to this outline. Intensity is the only one I have thought out thoroughly so it is already well-developed. ]<sup>]</sup> 11:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
: Who? Link? ]<sup>(] - ])</sup> 15:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:{{re|Femkemilene}} I would appreciate your input on what should be discussed here as well. There's quite a bit that needs to be added to this article. I already did some restructuring and added in some new content. Everything that has a source attached to it currently will be added into the article sometime this week. ]<sup>]</sup> 13:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
== rotation direction == | |||
::Don't have much time to engage (trying to save ]'s star, and still not at full health), but some thoughts: | |||
::* The article is at around 9000 words, so we should think about deleting stuff if we want to add stuff to make sure readers don't have to wade through details. | |||
::* I'm not sure we need the last two sections (pop culture / notable storms). Both of these sections would be a magnet for trivia and systemic bias towards the US. Notable storms can be mentioned in other sections, if they are sufficiently notable. If they don't naturally roll into the prose, should we have them. The notable storm section as is, is too wordy in my opinion, and mostly based on specialist sources about specific storms (is there an overview about notable storms we could use instead) | |||
::* I think in general, we could do with a large-scale switch to overview sources. There must be good post-graduate textbooks to use. What structure do they use? Which aspects do they omit, because it's too much detail | |||
::* The words "climate cycle" have fallen out of fashion, as most ] aren't that periodic. Rossby and Kelvin waves aren't really taking place on climate time-scales (at least, when they're in the atmosphere), so that doesn't fit. Does "background conditions" work as a heading instead? ] (]) 18:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
:::{{re|Femkemilene}} I wholeheartedly agree with eliminating pop culture and notable TCs. Given this article is 55k prose, we still have a ways to go in terms of expansion without making the article too large. Many articles are much larger than this without having issues with size. We need not have haste in eliminating things to keep the size low as tropical cyclone is a broad topic with many aspects that need to be discussed. We need to provide an overview of many different subtopics of tropical cyclone, which means we need to keep almost everything we have (outside of what you mention removing) while adding additional material so we cover all important aspects. The scope of tropical cyclone should justify having an article in excess of 60k bytes for prose size. If it's too large after we are done rewriting it, we can always choose bits to trim at that point. I feel like we need to mention TCs with significant records (rainfall, damage, deaths, etc..) within the article itself, but we don't need to cover all of the records or all of the storms we currently cover. Those two changes in and of themselves would free up some room. I'm not using climate cycles as a heading, but more of a thought to guide my research. It's just going to be a paragraph explaining the four items that fall underneath it. The problem with textbooks is that they aren't going to go into detail about more complex subtopics and current research like we need, such as the intensity metrics and tools for assessing intensity. {{Ping|Jason Rees}} Would you be okay with me removing pop culture as soon as I get a chance? I want to leave notable TCs section alone for now and worry about it later. ]<sup>]</sup> 18:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
::::Just to make it clear, I think the intensity section needs to be finished as I outlined above. Structure, preps, impacts, and response are in definite need of expansion. Elsewhere, there may need to be minor adjustments (like forecasting could use a few sentences about other types of forecasts). ]<sup>]</sup> 19:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
:::::In terms of TCs to mention by topics: | |||
:::::#Typhoon Forrest - Explosive deepening (Intensity) | |||
:::::#<s>Hurricane Patricia - Explosive intensification/Extreme observed wind intensity (Intensity)</s> -Needs additional work | |||
:::::#<s>Typhoon Tip - Largest TC (Structure)/Extreme observed pressure intensity (Intensity)</s> -Needs additional work at intensity | |||
:::::#<s>TS Marco '08 - Smallest TC (Structure)</s> | |||
:::::#Typhoons Carmen ('60) and Winney ('97) - largest eye (Structure) | |||
:::::#Hurricane Wilma - smallest eye (Structure) | |||
:::::#<s>Hurricane/Typhoon John - Longest distance travelled/longest lasting (Movement)</s> | |||
:::::#<s>Hurricane Ivan - most tornadoes (Impact)</s> | |||
:::::#<s>Bhola cyclone - Deadliest TC (Impact)</s> | |||
:::::#<s>Hurricanes Katrina and Harvey - tied as the costliest TCs (Impact)</s> | |||
:::::#<s>Cyclone Hyacinthe - highest rainfall (Impact)</s> | |||
:::::#<s>Cyclone Mahina - highest storm surge (Impact)</s> | |||
:::::These mentions should equate to around 200 words or so throughout the article instead of the 900+ that we have now. These are referencing global records only rather than including individual basin records, which is why we have such a wordy section currently. I believe focusing on individual basins has led to UNDUE coverage in that section. If we eliminate the notable TCs section, we can mention these storms throughout the article in their appropriate topic sections. Also note that I don't think we need to cover every TC record here either as that would also be UNDUE. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
::::::That sounds like a plan! | |||
::::::About article lenght. ] sometimes allows for slightly longer articles: {{tq|the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material}}. I think the scope here is easily captured in subarticles, so I would loosely aim for the 50k/8,000 words. I think 8,000 words works well for articles like this because | |||
::::::* The longer it is, the more it needs to be updated, and we don't really have the volunteers for that. | |||
::::::* Those extra words make the article less accessible for people with "normal" amounts of time / people that can't read fast. ] (]) 19:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
:::::::The problem is that we need to cover things here that aren't captured within subarticles. Many of them are running on 2008 era standards and aren't comprehensive in their coverage, which means the broader coverage in TC is also not comprehensive. We have subarticles that simply don't exist for some topics as well. The lack of comprehensive coverage is why ] was sent to FAR. It required a near doubling of the page size in order to become comprehensive. We obviously won't need that drastic of an increase here, but I wouldn't be surprised if we need to exceed 8000 words to be comprehensive in our coverage. The issue we have here is this article never was comprehensive and shouldn't have been an FA to begin with. I realize more words makes it harder for people to read the whole thing, but that's not a factor in the FA criteria. The article is required to be well-researched and comprehensive, neglecting no major facts or details. I think as long as we get this article up to par, keeping up with updates won't be as much of a challenge since some portions of the article don't change (simply needs new sourcing to keep it up to date). We shouldn't ever have to work to this extent on the TC article again once it is at FA. We are essentially rebuilding it from its foundations right now. Considering how much we discovered that was wrong with it, it's not surprising that nobody wanted to attempt fixing it over the past 14 years. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
{{outdent}} '''THIS ARTICLE WILL CONTAIN DUPLICATE MATERIAL UNTIL ALL STORMS ON THE ABOVE LIST THAT ARE ALREADY PRESENT IN THE ARTICLE ARE MENTIONED OUTSIDE THE NOTABLE STORMS SECTION! THE ONES NOT YET MENTIONED INCLUDE TIP, PATRICIA, JOHN, AND MARCO. THE STRUCK NAMES ARE CURRENT DUPLICATES. PLEASE DO NOT DELETE DUPLICATE MENTIONS IN THE MEANTIME. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT.''' Sorry for the caps and bolding, but I wanted it to be highly visible. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:25, 23 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
:Removed the notable TCs section since all four of those storms were mentioned. The rest of the storms on the list were not in this article and will be added in the future. Keep in mind that text may need some additional reworking, but the mentions are there. ]<sup>]</sup> 23:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
The article states a "counterclockwise rotation in the Northern Hemisphere and clockwise rotation in the Southern Hemisphere." Ok. But this leads to additional questions like: Is it important where the cyclone is or just where is was "created"? "What happens when the cyclone is on both Hemispheres, because it travels on/close to the Equator?" and "What happens when a cyclone travels across the Equator?" Does this have any effect on the cyclone like reducing rotational velocity/force or making it spin less "perfect"? --] (]) 18:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
::Some of the wording for the mentions will be adjusted later on when I complete the additional text, but is the article starting to look better? I removed notable tropical cyclones and pop culture today. I made a sizeable addition to impact that summarizes the impact of tropical cyclones by region (thanks to Hurricanehink for his efforts in writing up the article from which I brought the lead over) without being too lengthy (basically an addition of two paragraphs there; not bad considering the article being summarized is over 200k bytes long). That made this article just under 8300 words/54k bytes prose. That being said, all the big removals are done and almost only additions remain. Expect this article to expand a decent amount with additions to preps, structure, and response. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
:Nothing happens - a cyclone cannot cross the equator. So far as I know, it has never happened. They need a certain amount of rotation to maintain their form, and below 10 degrees N/S or so, there isn't enough rotation to faciliate that. ] held the record for southernmost hurricane formation, at 10.2 degrees. Presumably, if a cyclone was fully formed and moved further south, it would cease to have sufficient spin and would dissipate. Also, the same force that gives cyclones their spin propels them away from the equator. Not many southward-moving hurricanes have happened. --] (]) 18:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::I intend to get back on this sometime in the second half of June. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:15, 30 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
::There is nothing intrinsic to the equator that prevents cyclones from crossing it. Such a hypothetical storm would not change the direction of spin and could intensify under suitable conditions. The Interconvergence Zone (ICZ) prevents storms from getting near the geographic equator, so none have been observed to do so. Maintaining the ] needs energy input, generally from condensing water vapor into rain. Hypothetically, that is. ] (]) 21:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Removed "further reading" list == | |||
== Forming "almost exclusively in tropical" regions == | |||
I've removed the "further reading" list as I don't think it adds any value. It would have to be curated regularly and also it's currently US centric: | |||
{{Resolved|1=Wording was changed from " which form almost exclusively in tropical regions of the globe" to "which usually form in tropical regions of the globe" ] ] <sup>]</sup> 03:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)}} | |||
* Barnes, Jay. ''Fifteen Hurricanes That Changed the Carolinas: Powerful Storms, Climate Change, and What We Do Next'' (University of North Carolina Press, 2022) | |||
* Vecchi, Gabriel A., et al. "Changes in Atlantic major hurricane frequency since the late-19th century." ''Nature communications'' 12.1 (2021): 1–9. | |||
* Weinkle, Jessica, et al. "Normalized hurricane damage in the continental United States 1900–2017." ''Nature Sustainability'' 1.12 (2018): 808–813. ] (]) 10:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Made some changes to the structure == | |||
This should probably be discussed here before an edit war breaks out over the wording. The sentence in question reads: "The term "tropical" refers both to the geographic origin of these systems, which form almost exclusively in tropical regions of the globe, and to their formation in maritime tropical air masses." | |||
I've made some changes to the structure. My biggest change was that I dissolved the "background" section as I felt that it was not needed and in any case ill-defined. Where would you draw the lines for a "background" section? It could talk about cyclones in general, storms, weather, climate, history and so forth. I didn't delete the content that was there but moved it to better places. | |||
] wants it to read "often in tropical regions". Looking at the National Weather Service glossary, their definition is "A warm-core, non-frontal synoptic-scale cyclone, originating over tropical or subtropical waters with organized deep convection and a closed surface wind circulation about a well-defined center." | |||
Instead, I have created a section on "definition and terminology". I find in many Misplaced Pages articles (like this one as well), the first paragraph of the lead talks a lot about terminology but the main article doesn't have a section for it. I think it's better to have a dedicated section for it and then not waste so much valuable space in the first paragraph of the lead on this topic. Also for this lead, I would suggest condensing the info that is currently in the first paragraph of the lead about terminology. And rather put there information that is highly important and relevant for the readers. ] (]) 11:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
Personally, I feel "almost exclusively" is too strong, while "often" is too weak. Simply looking at the history of the hurricane seasons shows that all of the recent seasons have had multiple subtropical systems. ] (]) 04:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Interlink better with ] article? == | |||
*'''Comment''' - I would like to recommend a new phrasing. "most frequently", is stronger than "often" but weaker than "almost exclusively". ] ] <sup>]</sup> 16:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:*...why not just usually? ] (]) 16:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:**That sounds good to me.] (]) 20:08, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:**I like "usually" as well. ] (]) 21:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:**I think 'usually' is fine. So my understanding is that the amended sentence would read ""The term "tropical" refers both to the geographic origin of these systems, which usually form in tropical regions of the globe, and to their formation in maritime tropical air masses." --] (]) 13:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
::*'''Query''' - So is there a consensus on "usually" then? -<strong><font style="color:#007474">]</font>(<small>]</small>) </strong> 21:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::*'''Answer''' - yes, and it has been done. ] ] <sup>]</sup> 18:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
::::Good deal. ] (]) 19:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
<br> | |||
{{done}} This has been fixed and nobody has objected. ] ] <sup>]</sup> 16:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
I am surprised we don't interlink better with the parent article for this, i.e. ]. Should it be mentioned and linked at least once in the lead? And also for some sections where it might have additional information for the readers, e.g. regarding formation? So far, I find only one wikilink to ] and that's in this sentence: {{tq| On the other hand, ] is one of such non-conventional subsurface ] parameters influencing the ] intensity.}} ] (]) 11:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Last sentence of intro section? == | |||
== Improving the lead == | |||
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what spurred the last sentence of the intro: "It is not possible to artificially induce the dissipation of these systems with current technology."? While this is probably true, it seems a little out of left field, particularly for the intro. The idea of humans 'turning off' tropical cyclones seems both far from the current state of technology, study, or even planning, and far from the subject area most readers are coming to this page for. I'd vote for deletion (and if not, at the very least it needs some sort of citation). ] (]) 03:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
: It is a question that is asked relatively often, and we have a section on artificial dissipation, so it fits there. I would prefer for that sentence to stay put. ]<sup>(] - ])</sup> 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
I've added a sentence about climate change to the end of the lead as I felt this was justified (it's a key question for many people: are tropical cyclones getting worse due to climate change or not). This has made the lead a bit too long now. I've therefore moved some content that was dealing with terminology from the lead to the "terminology" section. The lead is now 604 words. I think we should shrink it down to perhaps 500 words. Who has ideas and inspiration for further condensing the lead? ] (]) 11:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
: This sentence should be removed. It only gives merit to a very much false premise within meteorology. It is hardly noteworthy enough to include in the introduction, and I furthermore disagree with the wording, which suggests that at some point it may be possible to disrupt a hurricane. Firstly, it is important to note that even if we could, it would completely change climatological equilibrium as we know it, and disrupt the natural transfer of heat to the poles that cyclones promote. And perhaps most important is the recognition of the sheer power cyclones possess. As noted on the Central Pacific Hurricane Center's website<ref>{{cite web|title=Myths|url=http://www.prh.noaa.gov/cphc/pages/FAQ/Myths_Modifications.php}}</ref> , the power a hurricane possesses is the equivalent of "10-megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes." It is certainly a fascinating topic and one that I think deserves mentioning in the article, but I hardly think we should even entertain the idea to the extent that it is in the introduction. ] (]) 05:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:I wouldn't worry about the lead much until the article is back in good shape. It would be pointless to work on it now when other areas need attention. I havent really had much time to contribute to WP for quite a while but the list of things under article outline still stands. I wouldn't focus on the lead until every topic is sufficiently covered since the lead should summarize the article. ], ]<sup>]</sup> 15:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Table shows incorrect data == | |||
:: In an ideal world, yes. But in reality, it might be a while until someone finds time to improve the main text. In the meantime, people who are reading on Misplaced Pages are already reading the lead (and perhaps only the lead!). Therefore, I think improving the lead is important, at any time and even before the main text is improved (or in parallel). I don't have time for either of this myself at the moment though, sadly. ] (]) 11:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I've done a bit of work to make the lead easier to understand (using the readability tool as guidance). I've also shortened it a bit. It's still a bit too long (602 words), I think it should be shrunk down to 500 words. ] (]) 11:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2024 == | |||
The "Tropical Cyclone Classifications (all winds are 10-minute averages)" table is wrong. The wind speed and the NE Pacific and N Atlantic classification of storms do not match. According to the table a tropical storm is from 35-63 mph, which is incorrect. A tropical storm is classified as winds of 39-73 mph. In the section titled "Tropical Storm" above the table, the correct information is posted. Further, the table shows a category 1 hurricane classification at 64-83 mph, which is also incorrect. A category 1 hurricane is from 74-95 mph. A category 2 hurricane is from 96-110 mph, not 84-98 mph; a category 3 hurricane is from 111-130 mph, not 99-114; a category 4 hurricane is from 131-155 mph, not 120-137 mph; and a category 5 hurricane is anything above 155 mph, not 140 mph. I would change the table myself if I knew how. ] (]) 10:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Actually its not incorrect, the windspeeds used in the table are 10-minute sustained, rather than 1-minute sustained since that is what the majority of scales use.] (]) 22:08, 11 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
{{edit semi-protected|Tropical cyclone|answered=yes}} | |||
Actually, Jason, Mbenzdabest is correct. The NHC defines "maximum sustained winds" as being a 1-minute, not 10-minute average, so the table's header is wrong to begin with (or maybe the inclusion of the N Atlantic in the table is wrong for continuity's sake). This is quoted on numerous other Misplaced Pages pages such as "Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale" (Look at sources 10 and 11 on there for reference). The NHC does not use 10-minute sustained wind averages in ANY of their public postings, and to imply that they do by modifying the 1-minute numbers, as is done in this table, is misleading and inaccurate. I also would change this table if I knew how, as it is way off. I work as a broadcast meteorologist and have a degree in this field so I know what I am talking about. Please change this table to prevent further misinformation. Also, even if the NHC had some sort of guideline on 10-minute windspeed, this would still be misleading as that number is not used to determine storm classifications. ] (]) 10:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
===Intensity metrics=== | |||
::Actually Daniel - I know what i am talking about myself. The table is correct because while the NHC and the SSHS use a 1-minute windspeed, while '''the majority of the other scales use 10-minutes (JMA, AUS, SWIO)''' and thus for the table the majority rules even if it is slightly misleading and inaccurate. Sorry.] (]) 12:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
Multiple intensity metrics are used, including ] (ACE), the ], the ], the ] (PDI), and ] (IKE). ACE is a metric of the total energy a system has exerted over its lifespan. ACE is calculated by summing the squares of a cyclone's sustained wind speed, every six hours as long as the system is at or above tropical storm intensity and either tropical or subtropical.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Davis, Kyle |author2=Zeng, Xubin |title=Seasonal Prediction of North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy and Major Hurricane Activity |journal=Weather and Forecasting |date=February 1, 2019 |volume=34 |issue=1 |pages=221–232 |doi=10.1175/WAF-D-18-0125.1 |publisher=American Meteorological Society|bibcode=2019WtFor..34..221D |hdl=10150/632896 |s2cid=128293725 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free}}</ref> The calculation of the PDI is similar in nature to ACE, with the major difference being that wind speeds are cubed rather than squared.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Villarini, Gabriele |author2=Vecchi, Gabriel A |title=North Atlantic Power Dissipation Index (PDI) and Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE): Statistical Modeling and Sensitivity to Sea Surface Temperature Changes |journal=Journal of Climate |date=January 15, 2012 |volume=25 |issue=2 |pages=625–637 |doi=10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00146.1 |publisher=American Meteorological Society|bibcode=2012JCli...25..625V |s2cid=129106927}}</ref> The Hurricane Surge Index is a metric of the potential damage a storm may inflict via storm surge. It is calculated by squaring the dividend of the storm's wind speed and a climatological value ({{cvt|33|m/s|mph|disp=or}}), and then multiplying that quantity by the dividend of the radius of hurricane-force winds and its climatological value ({{cvt|96.6|km|mi|disp=or}}). This can be represented in equation form as: | |||
::But we're converting NHC's totals, which is a pretty ], given that the rest of the world uses 10-min. This is to provide a proper comparison between the many basins and warning centers. --♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 12:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:<math>\left(\frac{v}{33\ m/s}\right)^2\times\left(\frac{r}{96.6\ km}\right)\,</math> | |||
::@Jason Rees, Why aren't you including the US military's TC forecast centers, FNMOC and JTWC? With that you have 1min avg winning, 4 to 3, 1min vs 10min. They're official forecast centers. @Hurricanehink, Given that the rest of the world uses 10min avg, the way the table's layout is very misleading as with what danielrocks15 has suggested. With that being said, should the table be broken up? There are no "OFFICIAL" conversions between 1min->10min averages, so your information can't be deemed correct by your opinion, unless you have a reference that is valid, not counting the WMO's "DRAFT" for conversion. -Mel 11:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
where <math> v </math> is the storm's wind speed and <math> r</math> is the radius of hurricane-force winds.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Islam |first1=Md. Rezuanal |last2=Lee |first2=Chia-Ying |last3=Mandli |first3=Kyle T. |last4=Takagi |first4=Hiroshi |date=August 18, 2021 |title=A new tropical cyclone surge index incorporating the effects of coastal geometry, bathymetry and storm information |journal=] |volume=11 |issue=1 |page=16747 |bibcode=2021NatSR..1116747I |doi=10.1038/s41598-021-95825-7 |pmc=8373937 |pmid=34408207 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The Hurricane Severity Index is a scale that can assign up to 50 points to a system; up to 25 points come from intensity, while the other 25 come from the size of the storm's wind field.<ref name="IKE + HSI">{{cite journal |last1=Rezapour |first1=Mehdi |last2=Baldock |first2=Tom E. |title=Classification of Hurricane Hazards: The Importance of Rainfall |journal=Weather and Forecasting |date=December 1, 2014 |volume=29 |issue=6 |pages=1319–1331 |doi=10.1175/WAF-D-14-00014.1 |publisher=American Meteorological Society|bibcode=2014WtFor..29.1319R |s2cid=121762550 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The IKE model measures the destructive capability of a tropical cyclone via winds, waves, and surge. It is calculated as: | |||
:::Mel, when i compared it about i just did it on Scales however since you wish to compare what warning centres, then let me point out that 8 of the official WMO RSMC/TCWCs (JMA, MFR, Perth, Darwin, Brisbane, Jakarta, PNG, Fiji, Wellington) use 10-minute winds, where as only 2 RSMC/TCWC's use 1-minute winds (NHC/CPHC). I also disagree with the table being broken up since it is there to provide a comparison of the various scales including the SSHS and IMD's scales even if it means that two scales have to be converted using the WMO's official which are not a draft any more afaik.] (]) 22:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:<math>\int_{Vol} \frac{1}{2}pu^2d_{v}\,</math> | |||
::::The distinction isn't obvious to a reader who's not already familiar with the subject and the different unit conventions in use by various agencies. All numbers on the page may be "correct", but as-is the table and main text are confusing, and there's nothing within the article body to explain the discrepancy. I propose one or both of: | |||
where <math> p </math> is the density of air, <math> u </math> is a sustained surface wind speed value, and <math> d_v</math> is the ].<ref name="IKE + HSI"/><ref>{{cite book |author1=Kozar, Michael E|author2=Misra, Vasubandhu |chapter=Integrated Kinetic Energy in North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones: Climatology, Analysis, and Seasonal Applications |title=Hurricane Risk |date=February 16, 2019 |volume=1 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-030-02402-4 |pages=43–69 |doi=10.1007/978-3-030-02402-4_3|s2cid=133717045}}</ref> ] (]) 07:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::: * a section pointing out the difference between 1-min and 10-min scales, and describing which agencies use which scales, so that Americans know "how to read" the numbers, and non-Americans know just as well. | |||
::::: * a new column in the table, with 1-minute wind speeds (perhaps labeled "1-minute / US NHC") | |||
:::: I could do the second, though I don't feel qualified to write up the first. --] (]) 07:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:I feel that it is best that we stick with a single windspeed even if it annoys people who use the SSHS primarily as it is meant to be a comparison of the various scales. I wouldnt mind a proper section on the scales though which would lead into the main article about TC scales.] (]) 12:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:: Would you consider writing or editing such a section? It would be much appreciated if you could. --] (]) 04:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Adding mathmode to some symbols in explanation. (Correct, but a bit rude) ] (]) 07:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Let's add a map of cyclone paths == | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | |||
I've seen maps showing the global distribution of tropical-cyclone paths. I came here looking for one. There ought to be one here. --] (]) 10:29, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 18:29, 16 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
== TC Class == | |||
why is hurricane <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2024 == | |||
The TC classification Chart is incorrect because 11 on the Beautfort scale is not strong enough to be considered a hurricane. Can someone fix it cause I dunno how to? Thanks. ] (]) 03:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Can you provide a link to whatever it is that you're referencing? ] (]) 04:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
::The TC Classification Chart isnt incorrect since the SSHS Cats are converted to 10-minute, using the WMO's numbers so that a fair and accurate comparison of the scales can be made. Thus this means that a hurricane is shown to start at 11 on Beaufort rather than 12.] (]) 04:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
{{Edit semi-protected|Tropical cyclone|answered=yes}} | |||
== Why were USA Today and Science News references removed? == | |||
{{subst:trim|1= | |||
Blocked user, see http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Arthur_Rubin/IP_list ] (]) 19:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
<!-- State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes below this line, preferably in a "change X to Y" format. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined. | |||
:{{subst:ESp|xy}} ~~~~ | |||
== cyclone freddy == | |||
== Edit request on 20 December 2012 == | |||
I'm surprised TC Freddy is not discussed more widely in this page, as the longest lasting TC ever https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/aop/BAMS-D-24-0071.1/BAMS-D-24-0071.1.xml#:~:text=A%20World%20Meteorological%20Organization%20team,for%20longest%20tropical%20cyclone%20duration. ~~~~ {{subst:Unsigned|1=DecFinney|2=11:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC)}} <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}} | |||
<!-- Begin request --> | |||
Please change links under "See also", then "Annual seasons" in such a way that in "Australian region tropical cyclone season (current)" and "South Pacific tropical cyclone season (current)" the "current"'s actually refer to the expected pages, and no longer to "http://en.wikipedia.org/2012-13_South-West_Indian_Ocean_cyclone_season". | |||
<!-- End request --> | |||
] (]) 00:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:{{done}} — ] (]) 18:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== |
== cyclone freddy == | ||
I'm surprised cyclone freddy is not referred to directly on this page as the longest lasting cyclone. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/aop/BAMS-D-24-0071.1/BAMS-D-24-0071.1.xml. ] (]) 11:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I've went ahead and removed the unsourced content.--] (]) |
Latest revision as of 12:22, 16 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tropical cyclone article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Tropical cyclone. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Tropical cyclone at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Tropical cyclone is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 1, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners |
Article Outline
Background
Done Intensity
Intensity coverage now complete as of October 7, 2022! Noah 00:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC) |
---|
Done according to Noah. Noah 00:21, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Done according to Noah Noah 21:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Done; Didn't want to mention the same information again for what causes an increase in intensity since it's a lot of same ones that lead to formation. Noah 00:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
|
Structure
I am kinda basing this off on a large paper on TC structure in terms of points to discuss here. This is still incomplete. Noah 22:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Eye and center
Clouds in the eye- Eyewall
Eyewall explanation- Conditional instability within the eyewall cloud
- Strong updrafts and vorticity maxima
- Downdrafts
- Asymmetry due to shear and storm motion
- Cloud microphysical processes and electrification
Eyewall replacement
- Rainbands
- Distant rainbands
- Main rainband
- Secondary rainbands
- Clouds
- Clouds involved with tropical cyclogenesis
- Cloud feedback
- Vortical Hot tower
- Clouds in a developing storm
- Clouds in a mature storm
- Size
Done According to Noah. Noah 19:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Movement
- Environmental steering
Done according to Noah. Noah 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Beta Drift
Done according to Noah. Noah 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Interaction with the mid-latitude westerlies
Done according to Noah. Noah 22:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Structural changes
- Wobbles imparted by mesovortices
- Motion changes caused by ERCs
- Center relocations
Classification
- Intensity classifications
- Needs a better summary
- Naming
Done According to Noah. Noah 19:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Formation regions and warning centers
- Major basins
- Unusual formation areas
- Mid-lats
- Near Equator
- SATL
- Met Sea & Black Sea
- SE Pacific, Great Lakes
Preparations
- Watches and Warnings
- History of TC watches/warnings
- Summary of Western Hem watches/warnings
- Summary of Western Pacific watches/warnings
- Summary of South Pacific watches/warnings
- Summary of Indian Ocean watches/warnings
- Mention of military advisories
- Evacuations
- Islands
- Shelters
- Hospitals and nursing homes
- Military assets
- Home preparations
- Hurricane-proof building
- Grocery store/panic buying
- Supply kits
- Generators
- Boarding up windows and sandbags
- Insurance
- Government preparations
- Seawalls
- Levees
Done Impacts
All goals for impact coverage I added have been met. Noah 15:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC) |
---|
|
Response
- Civilian Response
- Impacted Government response
- Other Government responses
- Organizational responses
Climatology and records
- As a novice on this topic, I find this section heading unclear. With all the other section headings, I kind of know what to expect (I like the standard section headings so far used in the article like Types, Impacts, Responses...). A section heading called "climatology and records", with a sub-heading called "climate change" is unclear. EMsmile (talk) 12:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @EMsmile: Is that better? Noah 21:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi User:Hurricane Noah, you've changed the section heading from "climatology and records" to "climatology"? I still don't find that clear. I looked up what climatology is: "Climatology (from Greek κλίμα, klima, "place, zone"; and -λογία, -logia) or climate science is the scientific study of Earth's climate, typically defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of at least 30 years." As this is a main heading, it is unclear for me as a reader what I should be expecting there. The other main section headings are fairly clear but could this one be changed into a "plain language" word? Also, should it not come earlier in the structure?:
- @EMsmile: Is that better? Noah 21:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
1 Background 2 Classification and naming 3 Intensity 4 Structure 5 Movement 6 Formation regions and warning centers 7 Preparations 8 Impacts 9 Response 10 Climatology 11 Observation and forecasting 12 Related cyclone types
- How about "Effects of climate" or something like that? "Interactions between climate and tropical cyclones"? EMsmile (talk) 09:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- @EMsmile: The section is quite literally meant to be taken as tropical cyclone climatology. It isn't related to the effects of climate or interactions between climate and TCs. It's the averages of activity that occur each year. Noah 15:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I feel super dumb here, but perhaps other readers who are non-experts like me feel similarly. Is it possible to use a headline that is clearer to non-experts than "climatology"? Maybe "Averages of activity"? Also if it's not related to climate change then why does it have a sub-heading called "10.1 Influence of climate change"? Sorry if this is a really dumb question, please don't give up on me. Others might not understand it either. :-) EMsmile (talk) 22:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
- I personally feel that climatology is the best word to be used here, since as you have already mentioned @EMsmile: it is weather conditions (In this case TC's) averaged over a period of at least 30 years. Jason Rees (talk) 23:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I feel super dumb here, but perhaps other readers who are non-experts like me feel similarly. Is it possible to use a headline that is clearer to non-experts than "climatology"? Maybe "Averages of activity"? Also if it's not related to climate change then why does it have a sub-heading called "10.1 Influence of climate change"? Sorry if this is a really dumb question, please don't give up on me. Others might not understand it either. :-) EMsmile (talk) 22:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Observation and forecasting
Observation
Done Looks sufficient to me. Noah 22:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- Forecasting
Track forecastingIntensity forecasting- Rainfall forecasting
- Storm surge forecasting
Geopotential height
Done According to Noah. Noah 21:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Low-level/850 hPa- 700 hpa
- Mid-level/500 hPa
- 300 hpa
Upper-level/200 hPa
Related cyclone types
- Extratropical cyclone
- Subtropical cyclone
Not done Notable tropical cyclones (Removed)
Not done Popular culture (Removed)
USOther countries (as material exists)
Discussion
@Hurricanehink: We need to make a proper outline of this article in order to bring in every point that needs discussed. I started it off here by reorganizing topics under appropriate sections and adding in some items, but there is likely more items. For example, movement as it is has nothing to do with structure so I split it out into its own section and also added Interaction with the mid-latitude westerlies underneath it as that has to do with movement rather than structure. If you have anything specific that you think needs discussed, please add it to this outline. Intensity is the only one I have thought out thoroughly so it is already well-developed. Noah 11:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Femkemilene: I would appreciate your input on what should be discussed here as well. There's quite a bit that needs to be added to this article. I already did some restructuring and added in some new content. Everything that has a source attached to it currently will be added into the article sometime this week. Noah 13:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Don't have much time to engage (trying to save Antarctica's star, and still not at full health), but some thoughts:
- The article is at around 9000 words, so we should think about deleting stuff if we want to add stuff to make sure readers don't have to wade through details.
- I'm not sure we need the last two sections (pop culture / notable storms). Both of these sections would be a magnet for trivia and systemic bias towards the US. Notable storms can be mentioned in other sections, if they are sufficiently notable. If they don't naturally roll into the prose, should we have them. The notable storm section as is, is too wordy in my opinion, and mostly based on specialist sources about specific storms (is there an overview about notable storms we could use instead)
- I think in general, we could do with a large-scale switch to overview sources. There must be good post-graduate textbooks to use. What structure do they use? Which aspects do they omit, because it's too much detail
- The words "climate cycle" have fallen out of fashion, as most modes of variability aren't that periodic. Rossby and Kelvin waves aren't really taking place on climate time-scales (at least, when they're in the atmosphere), so that doesn't fit. Does "background conditions" work as a heading instead? Femke (talk) 18:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Femkemilene: I wholeheartedly agree with eliminating pop culture and notable TCs. Given this article is 55k prose, we still have a ways to go in terms of expansion without making the article too large. Many articles are much larger than this without having issues with size. We need not have haste in eliminating things to keep the size low as tropical cyclone is a broad topic with many aspects that need to be discussed. We need to provide an overview of many different subtopics of tropical cyclone, which means we need to keep almost everything we have (outside of what you mention removing) while adding additional material so we cover all important aspects. The scope of tropical cyclone should justify having an article in excess of 60k bytes for prose size. If it's too large after we are done rewriting it, we can always choose bits to trim at that point. I feel like we need to mention TCs with significant records (rainfall, damage, deaths, etc..) within the article itself, but we don't need to cover all of the records or all of the storms we currently cover. Those two changes in and of themselves would free up some room. I'm not using climate cycles as a heading, but more of a thought to guide my research. It's just going to be a paragraph explaining the four items that fall underneath it. The problem with textbooks is that they aren't going to go into detail about more complex subtopics and current research like we need, such as the intensity metrics and tools for assessing intensity. @Jason Rees: Would you be okay with me removing pop culture as soon as I get a chance? I want to leave notable TCs section alone for now and worry about it later. Noah 18:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Just to make it clear, I think the intensity section needs to be finished as I outlined above. Structure, preps, impacts, and response are in definite need of expansion. Elsewhere, there may need to be minor adjustments (like forecasting could use a few sentences about other types of forecasts). Noah 19:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- In terms of TCs to mention by topics:
- Typhoon Forrest - Explosive deepening (Intensity)
Hurricane Patricia - Explosive intensification/Extreme observed wind intensity (Intensity)-Needs additional workTyphoon Tip - Largest TC (Structure)/Extreme observed pressure intensity (Intensity)-Needs additional work at intensityTS Marco '08 - Smallest TC (Structure)- Typhoons Carmen ('60) and Winney ('97) - largest eye (Structure)
- Hurricane Wilma - smallest eye (Structure)
Hurricane/Typhoon John - Longest distance travelled/longest lasting (Movement)Hurricane Ivan - most tornadoes (Impact)Bhola cyclone - Deadliest TC (Impact)Hurricanes Katrina and Harvey - tied as the costliest TCs (Impact)Cyclone Hyacinthe - highest rainfall (Impact)Cyclone Mahina - highest storm surge (Impact)
- These mentions should equate to around 200 words or so throughout the article instead of the 900+ that we have now. These are referencing global records only rather than including individual basin records, which is why we have such a wordy section currently. I believe focusing on individual basins has led to UNDUE coverage in that section. If we eliminate the notable TCs section, we can mention these storms throughout the article in their appropriate topic sections. Also note that I don't think we need to cover every TC record here either as that would also be UNDUE. Noah 15:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds like a plan!
- About article lenght. WP:Articlesize sometimes allows for slightly longer articles:
the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material
. I think the scope here is easily captured in subarticles, so I would loosely aim for the 50k/8,000 words. I think 8,000 words works well for articles like this because- The longer it is, the more it needs to be updated, and we don't really have the volunteers for that.
- Those extra words make the article less accessible for people with "normal" amounts of time / people that can't read fast. Femke (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that we need to cover things here that aren't captured within subarticles. Many of them are running on 2008 era standards and aren't comprehensive in their coverage, which means the broader coverage in TC is also not comprehensive. We have subarticles that simply don't exist for some topics as well. The lack of comprehensive coverage is why 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was sent to FAR. It required a near doubling of the page size in order to become comprehensive. We obviously won't need that drastic of an increase here, but I wouldn't be surprised if we need to exceed 8000 words to be comprehensive in our coverage. The issue we have here is this article never was comprehensive and shouldn't have been an FA to begin with. I realize more words makes it harder for people to read the whole thing, but that's not a factor in the FA criteria. The article is required to be well-researched and comprehensive, neglecting no major facts or details. I think as long as we get this article up to par, keeping up with updates won't be as much of a challenge since some portions of the article don't change (simply needs new sourcing to keep it up to date). We shouldn't ever have to work to this extent on the TC article again once it is at FA. We are essentially rebuilding it from its foundations right now. Considering how much we discovered that was wrong with it, it's not surprising that nobody wanted to attempt fixing it over the past 14 years. Noah 19:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- In terms of TCs to mention by topics:
- Just to make it clear, I think the intensity section needs to be finished as I outlined above. Structure, preps, impacts, and response are in definite need of expansion. Elsewhere, there may need to be minor adjustments (like forecasting could use a few sentences about other types of forecasts). Noah 19:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Don't have much time to engage (trying to save Antarctica's star, and still not at full health), but some thoughts:
THIS ARTICLE WILL CONTAIN DUPLICATE MATERIAL UNTIL ALL STORMS ON THE ABOVE LIST THAT ARE ALREADY PRESENT IN THE ARTICLE ARE MENTIONED OUTSIDE THE NOTABLE STORMS SECTION! THE ONES NOT YET MENTIONED INCLUDE TIP, PATRICIA, JOHN, AND MARCO. THE STRUCK NAMES ARE CURRENT DUPLICATES. PLEASE DO NOT DELETE DUPLICATE MENTIONS IN THE MEANTIME. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT. Sorry for the caps and bolding, but I wanted it to be highly visible. Noah 22:25, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Removed the notable TCs section since all four of those storms were mentioned. The rest of the storms on the list were not in this article and will be added in the future. Keep in mind that text may need some additional reworking, but the mentions are there. Noah 23:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Some of the wording for the mentions will be adjusted later on when I complete the additional text, but is the article starting to look better? I removed notable tropical cyclones and pop culture today. I made a sizeable addition to impact that summarizes the impact of tropical cyclones by region (thanks to Hurricanehink for his efforts in writing up the article from which I brought the lead over) without being too lengthy (basically an addition of two paragraphs there; not bad considering the article being summarized is over 200k bytes long). That made this article just under 8300 words/54k bytes prose. That being said, all the big removals are done and almost only additions remain. Expect this article to expand a decent amount with additions to preps, structure, and response. Noah 00:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I intend to get back on this sometime in the second half of June. Noah 22:15, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Some of the wording for the mentions will be adjusted later on when I complete the additional text, but is the article starting to look better? I removed notable tropical cyclones and pop culture today. I made a sizeable addition to impact that summarizes the impact of tropical cyclones by region (thanks to Hurricanehink for his efforts in writing up the article from which I brought the lead over) without being too lengthy (basically an addition of two paragraphs there; not bad considering the article being summarized is over 200k bytes long). That made this article just under 8300 words/54k bytes prose. That being said, all the big removals are done and almost only additions remain. Expect this article to expand a decent amount with additions to preps, structure, and response. Noah 00:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Removed "further reading" list
I've removed the "further reading" list as I don't think it adds any value. It would have to be curated regularly and also it's currently US centric:
- Barnes, Jay. Fifteen Hurricanes That Changed the Carolinas: Powerful Storms, Climate Change, and What We Do Next (University of North Carolina Press, 2022) online review
- Vecchi, Gabriel A., et al. "Changes in Atlantic major hurricane frequency since the late-19th century." Nature communications 12.1 (2021): 1–9. online
- Weinkle, Jessica, et al. "Normalized hurricane damage in the continental United States 1900–2017." Nature Sustainability 1.12 (2018): 808–813. online EMsmile (talk) 10:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Made some changes to the structure
I've made some changes to the structure. My biggest change was that I dissolved the "background" section as I felt that it was not needed and in any case ill-defined. Where would you draw the lines for a "background" section? It could talk about cyclones in general, storms, weather, climate, history and so forth. I didn't delete the content that was there but moved it to better places.
Instead, I have created a section on "definition and terminology". I find in many Misplaced Pages articles (like this one as well), the first paragraph of the lead talks a lot about terminology but the main article doesn't have a section for it. I think it's better to have a dedicated section for it and then not waste so much valuable space in the first paragraph of the lead on this topic. Also for this lead, I would suggest condensing the info that is currently in the first paragraph of the lead about terminology. And rather put there information that is highly important and relevant for the readers. EMsmile (talk) 11:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Interlink better with cyclone article?
I am surprised we don't interlink better with the parent article for this, i.e. cyclone. Should it be mentioned and linked at least once in the lead? And also for some sections where it might have additional information for the readers, e.g. regarding formation? So far, I find only one wikilink to cyclone and that's in this sentence: On the other hand, Tropical Cyclone Heat Potential is one of such non-conventional subsurface oceanographic parameters influencing the cyclone intensity.
EMsmile (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Improving the lead
I've added a sentence about climate change to the end of the lead as I felt this was justified (it's a key question for many people: are tropical cyclones getting worse due to climate change or not). This has made the lead a bit too long now. I've therefore moved some content that was dealing with terminology from the lead to the "terminology" section. The lead is now 604 words. I think we should shrink it down to perhaps 500 words. Who has ideas and inspiration for further condensing the lead? EMsmile (talk) 11:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't worry about the lead much until the article is back in good shape. It would be pointless to work on it now when other areas need attention. I havent really had much time to contribute to WP for quite a while but the list of things under article outline still stands. I wouldn't focus on the lead until every topic is sufficiently covered since the lead should summarize the article. Noah, AA 15:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- In an ideal world, yes. But in reality, it might be a while until someone finds time to improve the main text. In the meantime, people who are reading on Misplaced Pages are already reading the lead (and perhaps only the lead!). Therefore, I think improving the lead is important, at any time and even before the main text is improved (or in parallel). I don't have time for either of this myself at the moment though, sadly. EMsmile (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- I've done a bit of work to make the lead easier to understand (using the readability tool as guidance). I've also shortened it a bit. It's still a bit too long (602 words), I think it should be shrunk down to 500 words. EMsmile (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- In an ideal world, yes. But in reality, it might be a while until someone finds time to improve the main text. In the meantime, people who are reading on Misplaced Pages are already reading the lead (and perhaps only the lead!). Therefore, I think improving the lead is important, at any time and even before the main text is improved (or in parallel). I don't have time for either of this myself at the moment though, sadly. EMsmile (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Intensity metrics
Multiple intensity metrics are used, including accumulated cyclone energy (ACE), the Hurricane Surge Index, the Hurricane Severity Index, the Power Dissipation Index (PDI), and integrated kinetic energy (IKE). ACE is a metric of the total energy a system has exerted over its lifespan. ACE is calculated by summing the squares of a cyclone's sustained wind speed, every six hours as long as the system is at or above tropical storm intensity and either tropical or subtropical. The calculation of the PDI is similar in nature to ACE, with the major difference being that wind speeds are cubed rather than squared. The Hurricane Surge Index is a metric of the potential damage a storm may inflict via storm surge. It is calculated by squaring the dividend of the storm's wind speed and a climatological value (33 m/s or 74 mph), and then multiplying that quantity by the dividend of the radius of hurricane-force winds and its climatological value (96.6 km or 60.0 mi). This can be represented in equation form as:
where is the storm's wind speed and is the radius of hurricane-force winds. The Hurricane Severity Index is a scale that can assign up to 50 points to a system; up to 25 points come from intensity, while the other 25 come from the size of the storm's wind field. The IKE model measures the destructive capability of a tropical cyclone via winds, waves, and surge. It is calculated as:
where is the density of air, is a sustained surface wind speed value, and is the volume element. OggeQ (talk) 07:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Adding mathmode to some symbols in explanation. (Correct, but a bit rude) OggeQ (talk) 07:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
References
- Davis, Kyle; Zeng, Xubin (February 1, 2019). "Seasonal Prediction of North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy and Major Hurricane Activity". Weather and Forecasting. 34 (1). American Meteorological Society: 221–232. Bibcode:2019WtFor..34..221D. doi:10.1175/WAF-D-18-0125.1. hdl:10150/632896. S2CID 128293725.
- Villarini, Gabriele; Vecchi, Gabriel A (January 15, 2012). "North Atlantic Power Dissipation Index (PDI) and Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE): Statistical Modeling and Sensitivity to Sea Surface Temperature Changes". Journal of Climate. 25 (2). American Meteorological Society: 625–637. Bibcode:2012JCli...25..625V. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00146.1. S2CID 129106927.
- Islam, Md. Rezuanal; Lee, Chia-Ying; Mandli, Kyle T.; Takagi, Hiroshi (August 18, 2021). "A new tropical cyclone surge index incorporating the effects of coastal geometry, bathymetry and storm information". Scientific Reports. 11 (1): 16747. Bibcode:2021NatSR..1116747I. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-95825-7. PMC 8373937. PMID 34408207.
- ^ Rezapour, Mehdi; Baldock, Tom E. (December 1, 2014). "Classification of Hurricane Hazards: The Importance of Rainfall". Weather and Forecasting. 29 (6). American Meteorological Society: 1319–1331. Bibcode:2014WtFor..29.1319R. doi:10.1175/WAF-D-14-00014.1. S2CID 121762550.
- Kozar, Michael E; Misra, Vasubandhu (February 16, 2019). "Integrated Kinetic Energy in North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones: Climatology, Analysis, and Seasonal Applications". Hurricane Risk. Vol. 1. Springer. pp. 43–69. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02402-4_3. ISBN 978-3-030-02402-4. S2CID 133717045.
Done PianoDan (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2024 (UTC) why is hurricane — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.211.194.61 (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
{{subst:trim|1=
cyclone freddy
I'm surprised cyclone freddy is not referred to directly on this page as the longest lasting cyclone. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/aop/BAMS-D-24-0071.1/BAMS-D-24-0071.1.xml. DecFinney (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages articles that use American English
- Misplaced Pages former featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- B-Class level-3 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-3 vital articles in Physical sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
- B-Class physics articles
- Mid-importance physics articles
- B-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
- B-Class fluid dynamics articles
- Fluid dynamics articles
- B-Class Climate change articles
- Top-importance Climate change articles
- WikiProject Climate change articles
- B-Class Weather articles
- Top-importance Weather articles
- B-Class Tropical cyclone articles
- Top-importance Tropical cyclone articles
- WikiProject Tropical cyclones articles
- B-Class Atlantic hurricane articles
- Top-importance Atlantic hurricane articles
- B-Class Pacific hurricane articles
- Top-importance Pacific hurricane articles
- B-Class General meteorology articles
- Top-importance General meteorology articles
- WikiProject Weather articles