Talk:Hurricane Ioke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hurricane Ioke is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

Hurricane Ioke is part of the "Retired Pacific hurricanes" series (project page), a featured topic identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

	Article milestones

Date

Process

Result

October 19, 2007

Good article nominee

Listed

November 15, 2007

Featured topic candidate

Promoted

November 28, 2007

Featured article candidate

Promoted

Current Status: Featured article

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
	This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject.

Micronesia Portal

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Micronesia, which collaborates on articles related to Micronesia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.

???

This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Additional information:

Related work groups (nations):
Related work groups (territories):
	Johnston Atoll work group
	Wake Island work group

[edit] Most intense

It seems that Hurricane John (1994) has incomplete pressure data. Since the winds speed of John was higher, then it seems likely that John had a lower pressure.Reub2000 18:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Well you can't simply say that John was more intense than Ioke cause of the wind speeds. In 1994, they didn't have accurate tropical cyclone data as they do today, and even if you re-estimate John's centrsl pressure, you still may not get his accurate pressure. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(talk + contribs + userboxes)} 18:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Well the answer will probably never be known. So it's the most intense hurricane with a recorded pressure in the central pacific. Reub2000 19:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so Reub. It appears to be due to satellite estimates. If this is true, than John would have a lower pressure estimate since its winds were higher via Dvorak. If there was a measured pressure from an island or ship below 950 hPa, it should be included in this article. Thegreatdr 20:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reintensification

Now that Ioke is back up to Category 5,(1 min. mean), it makes it the third time it has weakened then reintensified to a Category 5. How often does that sort of thing happen in the W.Pac., as it is a fairly rare occurence in the Atlantic.WotGoPlunk 21:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I wrote this in the record section: "Ioke tied Hurrican Emilia of 1994 by hitting Category 5 status two times, twice as hurricane. Ioke hit Category 5 status again but as a typhoon, thus not counting towards the record.". Does it answer it-This ties Allen and Ivan for hitting Category 5 three times. Tip only hit Cat5 once.Mitchazenia 21:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

It is clownish to assign human names to things based on an imaginary line. One cyclone has hit category five three or more occasions in it's existence. If that is a record or ties a record, say so. Whether people call it by differing names does not change the physical reality of a physical event.

This storm has unique qualities, not based on crossing the dateline, but based on physical forces. Coming as it does as the 24th category-3 or higher in the 12 months since Katrina, the uniquenesses need to be highlighted, not swept under a rug of bogus definitions.

It happens to be aimed at Tokyo, is one unique feature, and if it hits there, the most populous density on Earth, people are going to be very interested in it's history.

The US stopped keeping archives after it passed out of the Central Pacific. THere are gaps between the CEntral and Guam archives. Japan listed it as a Tropical Depression when it crossed the dateline, even though they listed the winds as cat-5.

THere are gaps in the public archives, and if no other place exists on planet Earth keeping the incrimental record, then THIS PLACE should. That means finding the interim reports before they are lost and storing them here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.119.178.78 (talk • contribs)

Typhoon Tip, the most powerful cyclone on record, was aimed for Tokyo too.

It weakened substantially before landfall, causing a handful of deaths and minimal damage.

You simply cannot predict what a cyclone will do more than 3 days out. Ernesto should have taught you that. --Golbez 01:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Isabel also reached Cat 5 three times.

Because it is an annular hurricane, means that it can maintain a strong intensity for a long period of time. Please sign comments with ~~~~. --IrfanFaiz 12:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

But why are you talking like this? Sometimes predictions are NOT right. And, why are you are complaining about the naming of tropical cyclones and why is it clownish? And what it'll be named? Hurricane Car? Typhoon Bamboo? Cyclone Kangaroo? and with greek alphabets, it will ran out. And JMA, NOAA, JTWC. etc, sometimes wrongly designate storms like i saw some named tropical depressions in the east pacific and a single named depression in the atlantic. This is an online encyclopedia, not a crystal ball (like your overprediction or what Golbez said). And a repeat of Tip would not be possible, i think around 5 storms tried to reach 870 mbar but stuck at 872 or 875 mbar. This storm is uniqe but it depands on the conditions, the area where Ioke was has low wind shear and warm sea surface temperature. Paka for example, it weakened dramatically from a Super Typhoon days after it crossed the IDT. I think this will end up a depression off the coast of Japan and making landfall as a small remnant low causing light to no rainfall. Think again before posting in article's talk pages. --IrfanFaiz 12:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HurricaneWarning tag

Is this really relevant in this article? Ioke is nowhere near a landmass, and the people on Wake are already evacuated. Until the storm actually approaches somewhere where people could be in danger, could we take this tag out? --Merovingian - Talk 22:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I'll take the tag out for now. Should anyone contest this decision, respond here with a decent reason. -Tc w d 23:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Merovingian - Talk 23:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Retirement question

Can the name "Ioke" be retired for impacts in Asia, which is far out of the Central Pacific? Or can a name only be retired for impacts within its basin? CrazyC83 05:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure it can be retired no matter where it is. --Golbez 05:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It's going to recurve north and hurt no one. I don't think it'll be retired. Linda and Monica weren't retired after all... 201.112.93.172 05:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Neither had serious land impacts though...if there was a stronger-than-Wilma fishspinner in the Atlantic (highly unlikely), that likely wouldn't be retired either. CrazyC83 05:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

Shouldn't this article be renamed to Typhoon Ioke, like Typhoon Tip is? Mace 16:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

No. John of 1994 was left as Hurricane John (1994), means this shouldnt be changed either.Mitchazenia 16:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Why? Tip never was a hurricane. This started as a hurricane. – Ch acor 16:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Our policy, which I think is a reasonable one, is to use the terminology of the original basin; in this case, hurricane. Other similar systems such as Typhoon Paka that formed in the Central Pacific before crossing into the Western Pacific are referred to as typhoons by Wikipedia because they were not upgraded to hurricanes before crossing over. —Cuivi é nen 20:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

However, if TY Ioke has a significant impact, I'd suggest the name change might be appropriate.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Why not Hurricane/Typhoon Ioke? RaNdOm26 09:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

You don't see Tropical Storm/Typhoon Paka, do you? – Ch acor 09:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I see Hurricane/Typhoon Ele and I see Hurricane/Typhoon John. Also, I don't see Tropical Storm/Typhoon/Super Typhoon Saomai. hahaha RaNdOm26 10:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not my bloody point. Paka was a crossover, and we didn't name it TS (it's max CPac strength)/TY Paka. John 1994 was a crossover, but there isn't a Hurricane/Typhoon John (1994) article. "Tropical Storm/Typhoon/Super Typhoon Saomai" is quite frankly ridiculous. – Ch acor 10:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Typhoon Ioke, as well as all similar names, are redirects to the article anyway. CrazyC83 00:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't get it. If Ioke was in both basins, the name of the article should acknowledge Ioke's existence in both basins - Hurricane/Typhoon Ioke. The same applies with John 1994. Look, you even put Hurricane/Typhoon Ioke in the Pacific typhoon season page. I see no good reason why you would want to leave the name as Hurricane Ioke. RaNdOm26 07:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

No. Ioke existed in oth basins - and the CONTENT of the article acknowledges that. We are going by its highest strength - in this case, both hurricane and typhoon, therefore we're going by its formation basin - CPac - HURRICANE. – Ch acor 08:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

What a weird criteria for naming a cyclone. Is there a fixed criteria written somewhere for naming crossover storm articles? It's not just the content that matters. People's first impressions on an article is always its TITLE - people only then look at its content. RaNdOm26 09:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

And people know it was both a hurricane and a typhoon. Typing in "Hurricane Ioke" gives them this article; typing in "Typhoon Ioke" redirects to this article. I don't see where you're coming from. – Ch acor 09:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

How about typing in "Hurricane Ioke" or "Typhoon Ioke" redirecting to "Hurricane/Typhoon Ioke". If people know it was both a hurricane and a typhoon, why doesn't the title reflect that. People in Asia will be wondering why the article doesn't acknowledge "Typhoon" in the title. If you're thinking that more people will certainly type in "Hurricane" instead of "Typhoon" in their search, you are wrong. RaNdOm26 09:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you read the Wikipedia naming conventions. – Ch acor 09:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, that took a long time. Finally, something. RaNdOm26 09:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Longevity Records

Since NOAA suggested that "IOKE COULD ENTER THE RECORD BOOKS FOR LONGEVITY AS A CATEGORY 4 OR GREATER STORM". What are the records to be beaten?

Also should ACE be calculated for the storm (wherever located) for comparison to other storms? Hurricane part has been calculated at Talk:2006_Pacific_hurricane_season/ACE_calcs crandles 22:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane Donna holds the record in the Atlantic. I don't know about worldwide. —Cuivi é nen 01:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Donna's record is just for Cat 3+. Sorry. —Cuivi é nen 01:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

And ACE is not used in the WPac, so no. —Cuivi é nen 01:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, JTWC, even if not official, is reliable enough to be used to calculate the ACE.

I think Ivan probably holds the record for Cat 4+ in the Atlantic (nearly 8 days), and was just 6 hours short of Donna's Cat 3+ record (and further yet might hold the record for longest time at Cat 3+ in total). So far, I think Ioke has been at Cat 4+ for about 7 days. Pobbie Rarr 01:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Been through List_of_Category_5_Pacific_hurricanes. I couldn't find many details for Patsy, but I am sure Ioke has lasted longer at Cat 4+ than any of the other cat 5 Pacific hurricanes. Anyone know where to find details for Patsy? If Patsy is shorter, is this a record worth mentioning? More research to look at Cat4 hurricanes and Typhoons would seem sensible though. crandles 12:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Patsy was short lived 6-10 Sept [1] crandles 13:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

So, Ioke is now a Cat 2. Do we know if it broke the record? (The article said it did but the citation did not match the statement) --Golbez 10:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I would say almost certainly. However, ideally the NOAA or the JTWC will say so. Otherwise its a manual search to see if it can be verified through the best track archives (not easy).--Nilfanion (talk) 10:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Year    Storm#  Name            Dates           Wind    Presre  Category        #of 6hr reports at 4+
1959    11      Hurricane PATSY        6-10 SEP 150     -       5               6
1959    15      Hurricane #15          23-29 OCT140     958     5               7
1973    1       Hurricane AVA          2-12 JUN 140     915     5               8
1994    7       Hurricane GILMA        21-31 JUL140     920     5               7
1994    11      Hurricane JOHN     11 AUG-10 SEP150     929     5               17, 16 consecutive
1997    7       Hurricane GUILLERMO30 JUL-24 AUG140     919     5               15
1997    11      Hurricane OLIWA   28 AUG-17 SEP 140     -       5               14
1997    13      Hurricane LINDA        9-17 SEP 160     902     5               10
1997    19      Hurricane PAKA    28 NOV-22 DEC 160     -       5               27, 25 consecutive
2002    5       Hurricane ELIDA   23-31 JUL     140     921     5               5
2002    10      Hurricane HERNAN  30 AUG- 6 SEP 140     921     5               6
2002    13      Hurricane KENNA       22-26 OCT 145     913     5               5
1957    12      Hurricane #12         20-22 OCT 120     -       4               2
1959    6       Hurricane DOT          1- 8 AUG 130     952     4               12
1967    12      Hurricane SARAH        9-22 SEP 130     933     4               4
1971    4       Hurricane DENISE        2-14 JUL120     951     4               2
1972    3       Hurricane CELESTE       6-22 AUG115     940     4               2
1973    4       Hurricane DOREEN   18 JUL- 3 AUG120     968     4               1
1973    5       Hurricane EMILY       21-28 JUL 120     972     4               1
1974    14      Hurricane MAGGIE  26 AUG- 1 SEP 120     934     4               4
1975    4       Hurricane DENISE        5-15 JUL120     -       4               2
1975    11      Hurricane KATRINA 29 AUG- 7 SEP 115     -       4               1
1976    1       Hurricane ANNETTE      3-14 JUN 120     925     4               9, 6 consecutive
1976    9       Hurricane IVA     24 AUG- 2 SEP 115     -       4               2
1976    13      Hurricane LIZA    25 SEP- 2 OCT 120     948     4               7
1976    14      Hurricane MADELINE29 SEP- 8 OCT 125     941     4               2
1978    3       Hurricane CARLOTTA    17-25 JUN 115     -       4               4,3 consecutive
1978    6       Hurricane FICO         9-28 JUL 120     -       4               12, 6 consecutive
1978    8       Hurricane HECTOR      22-29 JUL 120     -       4               3
1978    14      Hurricane NORMAN  30 AUG- 7 SEP 120     -       4               6
1978    18      Hurricane SUSAN       18-24 OCT 115     -       4               1
1979    5       Hurricane ENRIQUE     17-24 AUG 125     -       4               3
1979    9       Hurricane IGNACIO     23-30 OCT 125     938     4               3
1980    11      Hurricane KAY         16-30 SEP 120     -       4               3
1982    18      Hurricane OLIVIA      18-25 SEP 125     -       4               5
1983    2       Hurricane BARBARA      9-18 JUN 115     -       4               4
1983    8       Hurricane HENRIETTE27 JUL- 6 AUG115     -       4               3
1983    11      Hurricane KIKO    31 AUG- 9 SEP 125     -       4               11, 10 consecutive
1983    17      Hurricane RAYMOND      8-20 OCT 125     -       4               7, 5 consecutive
1983    19      Hurricane TICO        11-19 OCT 115     -       4               1
1984    4       Hurricane DOUGLAS 25 JUN- 6 JUL 125     -       4               8
1984    5       Hurricane ELIDA   28 JUN- 8 JUL 115     -       4               1
1984    9       Hurricane ISELLE       3-12 AUG 115     -       4               2
1984    17      Hurricane NORBERT     14-26 SEP 115     -       4               6, 2 consecutive
1985    9       Hurricane IGNACIO     21-27 JUL 115     -       4               4
1985    10      Hurricane JIMENA      20-29 JUL 115     -       4               2
1985    17      Hurricane RICK         1-12 SEP 125     -       4               7
1986    5       Hurricane ESTELLE     16-26 JUL 115     -       4               6
1986    10      Hurricane JAVIER      20-31 AUG 115     -       4               2 non consecutive
1986    17      Hurricane ROSLYN      15-22 OCT 125     -       4               6
1987    14      Hurricane MAX          9-16 SEP 135     -       4               7
1987    19      Hurricane RAMON        5-12 OCT 120     -       4               6
1988    6       Hurricane FABIO   28 JUL- 9 AUG 120     892     4               2
1988    8       Hurricane HECTOR  30 JUL- 9 AUG 125     935     4               6
1989    15      Hurricane OCTAVE       8-16 SEP 115     948     4               1
1989    17      Hurricane RAYMOND 25 SEP- 5 OCT 125     935     4               5
1990    8       Hurricane HERNAN      19-31 JUL 135     928     4               9
1990    14      Hurricane MARIE        7-21 SEP 120     944     4               4
1990    16      Hurricane ODILE   23 SEP- 2 OCT 125     935     4               6
1990    20      Hurricane TRUDY   16 OCT- 1 NOV 135     924     4               13, 7 consecutive
1991    10      Hurricane JIMENA  20 SEP- 2 OCT 115     945     4               8, 5 consecutive
1991    11      Hurricane KEVIN   25 SEP-12 OCT 125     935     4               12
1992    5       Hurricane CELIA   22 JUN- 4 JUL 125     935     4               7
1992    7       Hurricane ESTELLE      9-17 JUL 120     943     4               5, 3 consecutive
1992    8       Hurricane FRANK       13-23 JUL 125     935     4               6
1992    17      Hurricane ORLENE       2-14 SEP 125     934     4               10
1992    18      Hurricane INIKI        5-13 SEP 125     938     4               4
1992    22      Hurricane TINA    17 SEP-11 OCT 130     932     4               10
1992    23      Hurricane VIRGIL       1- 5 OCT 115     948     4               1
1993    4       Hurricane DORA        14-20 JUL 115     945     4               4
1993    6       Hurricane KEONI        9-29 AUG 115     -       4               4
1993    7       Hurricane FERNANDA     9-19 AUG 125     934     4               7
1993    8       Hurricane GREG        15-28 AUG 115     948     4               5
1993    11      Hurricane JOVA    29 AUG- 5 SEP 115     948     4               2
1993    12      Hurricane KENNETH      5-17 SEP 130     932     4               6
1993    13      Hurricane LIDIA        8-14 SEP 130     930     4               4
1994    5       Hurricane EMILIA      16-25 JUL 135     926     4               15
1994    13      Hurricane LANE         3-10 SEP 115     948     4               3
1994    17      Hurricane OLIVIA      22-29 SEP 130     923     4               4
1995    1       Hurricane ADOLPH      15-21 JUN 115     948     4               1
1995    2       Hurricane BARBARA      7-18 JUL 120     940     4               10, 6 consecutive
1995    10      Hurricane JULIETTE    16-26 SEP 130     930     4               4
1996    5       Hurricane DOUGLAS 29 JUL- 6 AUG 115     946     4               6
1997    6       Hurricane FELICIA     14-22 JUL 115     948     4               3
1997    10      Hurricane JIMENA      25-30 AUG 115     948     4               6
1997    15      Hurricane NORA        16-26 SEP 115     950     4               1
1997    17      Hurricane PAULINE      5-10 OCT 115     948     4               2 non consecutive
1998    2       Hurricane BLAS        22-30 JUN 120     943     4               4
1998    5       Hurricane ESTELLE 29 JUL- 8 AUG 115     948     4               1
1998    8       Hurricane HOWARD      20-30 AUG 130     932     4               10, 5 consecutive
1999    4       Hurricane DORA         6-23 AUG 120     943     4               12
2000    3       Hurricane CARLOTTA    18-25 JUN 135     932     4               4
2001    1       Hurricane ADOLPH  25 MAY- 1 JUN 125     940     4               5
2001    10      Hurricane JULIETTE21 SEP- 3 OCT 125     923     4               7, 6 consecutive
2002    6       Hurricane FAUSTO  21 AUG- 3 SEP 125     936     4               4
2004    8       Hurricane HOWARD  30 AUG-10 SEP 120     943     4               3
2004    10      Hurricane JAVIER      10-20 SEP 130     930     4               9
2005    11      Subtrop Storm KENNETH 14-30 SEP 115     947     4               3

Longest Paka 1997 27 (25 consecutive) 6hr reports at Cat 4+ (but that is a Typhoon). Next is John 1994 with 17 (16 consecutive) 6hr reports at Cat 4+.

Is that enough to put the record in? crandles 19:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

How many did Ioke have? --Golbez 23:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the track map, I make it 31. So Ioke would indeed take the record. Pobbie Rarr 02:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The track map includes intermediate advisories from the CPHC I believe. – Ch acor 01:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

This is a manual trawl of Best Track data. I would hope that Best Track [2] could be cited rather than throwing out as original research. crandles 17:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Longest in other basins:

South Indian 1994 Storm #20 20 6hr reports at Cat 4+
North Indian 1999 Storm #5 6 6hr reports at Cat 4+
Atlantic 2004 Ivan 34 (33 consecutive) reports at Cat 4+

crandles 00:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Subtropical Storm Kenneth? I thought Kenneth was a full blown tropical system. Jake52 My talk 13:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I just copied from [3] but now that has been changed to say Hurricane. Did you email or are they watching? :) crandles 14:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I count 32 from Ivan but that sounds like the world record. I count just 28 from Ioke and 25 from Paka. These are all consecutive. I did not count seperate, shorter stints at 4+. After all, the record is for consecutive time as a 4+ storm. Longest time spent as a major hurricane is undoubtedly the 1899 storm with 47 consecutive 6 hr periods as a major hurricane but spent most of that time as a 3. -- §Hurricane E RIC§ archive 21:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Is that official for the San Ciriaco Hurricane or just probable? You see, Wikipedia currently has Donna down as the record-hollder in the Atlantic. Pobbie Rarr 22:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Advisory 20 to 29 is 10 ending 08/26/17Z [4] then on [5] there is advisory 31 to 51 which sounds like it should be 21 but 3 are missing 36, 39, and 46 so there is only 18 listed 18+10 =28 but if you count the missing 3 then it is 31. Then there is the question of number 30: 31 is listed as being at 08/27/12Z so it looks like there is a 19 hour difference since advisory 29. So I am struggling to work out whether it is 31, 32 or 33 6hr advisories. 08/24/11Z to 09/01/12Z looks like it ought to be 33. crandles 20:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NWS Data

JTLYK, the NWS has a observation site on Wake Island, which will provide good data in the coming hours. Here's the most recent observations, and here's where that came from. The question is, how can we source it so we can put it in the article? Hurricanehink (talk) 03:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First Cat 5 CPAC?

I am almost completely certain that Patsy was also a CPac storm, named from the typhoon lists (since that's how naming was done then). —Cuivi é nen 23:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

It's the first CPac *name* to be Cat 5 while still in the CPac. --Golbez 23:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

That would trivia which wouldn't be that significant. The important record is first CPac storm to form in the CPac. If Patsy was the first then Ioke was the second, that is it. However, reading the JTWC ATCR and the CPHC CPHC summary does not clarify what where Patsy formed. From what I can figure, the track traces back into the WPac (implying a WPac storm) but the first positive data point is in the CPac. The HURDAT begins on the dateline and keeps it in the W Hemisphere (UNISYS=HURDAT track), though it is faulty. The JMA analysis starts later on the dateline and moves the storm initially into the E Hemisphere (JMA track map. Does a storm with its first data point at 180° exactly with 65 knot winds and initially moving east count as forming in the W or E part of the ocean? My opinion: Patsy is a WPac storm.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

The JMA picked Ioke up at 180.0°E. Therefore my view is that if Patsy formed at 180.0°E, it is a WPac storm. – Ch acor 04:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, after all, typhoons exclusively move westward. - SpLoT 09:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Typhoons move exclusively westward? I'm afraid that sentence is wrong either way it can be interpreted; hurricanes move westward too (so not EXCLUSIVELY typhoons), while typhoons do move east, a la Typhoon John (also a crossover - it crossed from CPac into WPac and back into CPac) in 1994. :P – Ch acor 09:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quite a storm...

Two things: first, does anyone have a link to satellite data now that it's over the W pacific (the NRL site picture is quite low quality).

Second, does anyone know what the size of that concentric eyewall is? It looks to be more than 100 miles across! -Runningonbrains 20:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Its probably a misnomer to call it an eyewall now.. Ioke is starting to becom extratropical etc.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Ioke is dying, looks like STS Maria when it turned ext. --IrfanFaiz 23:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Nice image of it dying Good kitty 05:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article is horrible...

My first impression of this article is the repetitive images of the same thing without any purpose of its presence. You have got two images saying it's near Wake Island, and another image in the Impact section which shouldn't be there. You have got two somewhat identical images side by side without saying much about them. You really have to organise the article's structure, and delete a few of the pictures. I'm not saying that the images are bad, just too many of them. RaNdOm26 10:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Be Bold and remove them yourself :) Its obvious this article has too many pics - thats what its Commons category is for...--Nilfanion (talk) 12:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] September 8 Alaskan Low

Someone created an article on ex-Ioke, and I redirected it to this article. However, he keeps reverting it, so it may be a good idea to look at this one for any mergeable information, ~~because I may take it to AFD if he doesn't stop, as the article is OR.~~ --Coredesat talk. o_O 21:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

It's also wrong in several places, there is no special numbering for extratropical storms. It should be merged. We mentioned the extratropical effects of Maria in the Atlantic article. --Golbez 22:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it looks like he's going to leave it alone (though he did userfy it), so it should be a simple matter of going into the history and finding mergeable information. --Coredesat talk. o_O 01:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Since it is related to Ioke, it belongs here. Likewise, if Florence stays strong and affects the other side of the Atlantic, that goes in the Florence article. CrazyC83 04:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Emilia

In the records section, there is a mention of Ioke and Emilia being tied for most stints as a 5 in the Pacific. It should be noted that the National Hurricane Center never designated Emilia as a Category 5 [6]. They list it as a 135kt Cat. 4 with a pressure of 926 millibars. -- §Hurricane E RIC§ archive 00:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:List of Category 5 Pacific hurricanes. The CPHC who are official for the CPac (not the NHC) did designate it as such, there is a HURDAT problem.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Just the same, I think the discrepancy should be mentioned. -- §Hurricane E RIC§ archive 21:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extratropical storm history

So, why shouldn't the storm in its extratropical form be mentioned in the storm history section? It is, after all, storm history not tropical storm history. -Runningonbrains 13:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Read the page history. – Ch acor 13:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, what I saw on the page history was that an anonymous user added information in good faith (even provided a source when the initial addition was reverted as unsourced), and was reverted and badgered without an explanation, but instead was read wikipedia policy citations. He at least deserves an explanation as to why his addition does not belong in this article (in laymans terms).

Regardless, some info on the extratropical state really should appear in the storm history. Just because it appears in the impact section doesnt mean it shouldnt be there as well... -Runningonbrains 15:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Thegreatdr 20:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Damage Reports

This article appeared i the Honolulu Advertiser newspaper yesterday. It's titled, "Wake Survived Typhoon--Barely." I think that should say it all. The article also notes, "70 percent of the tiny island's facilities and buildings are moderately to severely damaged." Just thought I'd leave the link here in case someone wanted to merge this into the article. 青い(Aoi) 01:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Record only for Pacific?

So did it break the worldwide record? --Golbez 22:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It may have done, I have added note to longevity section above. There is a bit of a problem with missing advisory 30, 36, 39 and 46 and time for 2 advisories between 29 and 31. Looks like 8 1/4 days consecutive (plus a non consecutive further 3 6 hr reports). crandles 20:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Haven't trawled through west Pacific yet. crandles 20:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The world record is Typhoon Tip with a pressure of 870mb.Reub2000 21:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

No, record for time at cat4+ intensity, not pressure. bob rulz 21:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Then specify the record that you mean! Reub2000 01:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

It's assumed that the people who monitor this page know what I'm referring to. --Golbez 03:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

West Pacific record for cat4+ longevity prior to Ioke was tied: 1961 Super Typhoon 18 and 2002 Super Typhoon 12 both with 28 advisories. So it looks like Ioke was a world record. crandles 17:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I calculate Ivan's Power dissipation index (PDI) as 85.9 *10^6 Kt^3. I estimate (for missing 5 advisories estimated lower of 2 either side) for IOKE 102.4 *10^6 Kt^3 so that could be another record though I think a few others need checking like San Ciriaco, 1961 Super Typhoon 18 and 2002 Super Typhoon 12... crandles 19:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Nope 1961 Super Typhoon 18 managed 119.1 *10^6 Kt^3. It might be a record for a hurricane though. San Ciriaco only managed 69.76 *10^6 Kt^3. crandles 20:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Super Typhoon 18 is Nancy, right? That data is considered incorrect these days, and usually discounted; she didn't actually have 215 mph winds, though the tracking data still says she did (no one's gotten around to updating the estimates, I guess). —Cuivi é nen 12:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How is the name spelled?

The CIA factbook, in describing the damage on Wake Island, spells the name of the storm as Loke. Everyone else uses the name used in this article. Which is correct? - Thanks, Hoshie 09:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Ioke is correct. Look at it this way - you certainly don't pronounce "Loke" as "ee-OH-keh" ;) – Ch acor 09:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Epac/Arctic

since this storm affected the alaskan coast does this mean that it was an epac storm or a arctic ocean storm as well as an Cpac/Wpac storm ?Jason Rees 15:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It was not an arctic ocean storm. Ioke remained south of the arctic circle. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

so does that mean that Ioke was an epac storm ?

Yes, Ioke was an EPAC storm (as CPAC storms are usually combined with epac storms) as well as a WPAC storm. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Technically from a purely basin-only POV Ioke never was an EPac, but the U.S. Govt. usually considers CPac under EPac as well (as evidenced by the NCDC's EPac page). – Ch acor 01:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HURDAT update

The NHC site has the 2006 Pacific HURDAT up now.

35855 08/16/2006 M=22  9 SNBR= 803 IOKE        XING=0      (CP)
35860 08/16*1041425  25 1010*1041439  25 1010*1041454  25 1010*1031467  25 1009*
35865 08/17*1021477  25 1009*1011488  25 1009*1011497  25 1009*1021506  25 1009*
35870 08/18*1021515  25 1009*1001525  25 1009*1001536  25 1009*1001545  25 1009*
35875 08/19*1001553  25 1009*1001560  25 1009*1001566  25 1009*1001573  25 1008*
35880 08/20*1021580  30 1006*1041589  30 1006*1071602  40 1000*1101617  45  999*
35885 08/21*1121632  65  996*1151644  70  990*1201652  75  985*1271660 100  960*
35890 08/22*1351670 115  945*1451677 115  945*1521685 115  945*1581693  90  964*
35895 08/23*1641698  90  971*1691702  90  971*1731705  90  971*1761709  90  971*
35900 08/24*1811714  90  971*1851720 100  960*1861725 115  940*1881729 125  935*
35905 08/25*1901734 125  935*1911742 140  921*1921747 140  921*1921751 140  921* 
35910 08/26*1931758 130  930*1911765 130  930*1881774 140  920*1831780 140  920*
35915 08/27*1791787 140  920*1761797 140  900*1721807 140  900*1691814 140  900*
35920 08/28*1661824 135  900*1631833 130  910*1621842 130  910*1611850 130  910*
35925 08/29*1601858 130  910*1621866 135  910*1621874 130  910*1641881 140  910*
35930 08/30*1661888 140  910*1711895 140  910*1741902 135  910*1811911 135  910*
35935 08/31*1861918 135  910*1921926 135  910*1971937 135  910*2021947 135  910*
35940 09/01*2071955 130  910*2121964 130  910*2181977 115  927*2241992 115  927*
35945 09/02*2312008 115  927*2362023 110  927*2402038 110  927*2452052 110  927*
35950 09/03*2512065 100  927*2572076 100  927*2662082  95  927*2752092  95  927*
35955 09/04*2852101  85  958*2972111  70  972*3092120  65  976*3252125  65  976*
35960 09/05*3412128  60  980*3572126  60  980*3752109  60  980*3992085  60  980*
35965 09/06*4192066  60  980*4502033  60  980*4761988  60  980*0000000   0    0*
35970 HU

The important bit there is on the 27th: 900 mbar. Should this go in?--Nilf anion (talk) 00:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Pretty sure HURDAT qualifies as an official source, and it doesnt seem like a typo since that would have been about when it was at its most intense level. I'd update the min pressure. -Running On Brains 20:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Um, not for locations west of the International Dateline. Tokyo is the RSMC for the northwest Pacific. Since it went to 900 hPa first just east of the dateline, you're safe. I'm very suspicious of that 20 hPa pressure fall with no increase in wind. A sudden increase in storm size in six hours would be the only explanation for such a change, if it is real. Thegreatdr 20:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, thats why I posted to the talk page not directly to the article. 910 I could believe but 900 seems a bit much, especially at only 140 kts. /me hopes the CPHC get their report out soon.--Nilf anion (talk) 20:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if this is due to a change from the Eastern Pacific to the Western Pacific Dvorak pressure/wind relationship. If you remember, the AMSU estimates were even lower than 900 hPa. I bet CPHC matches NHC, if it's in the track database. Thegreatdr 20:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

You have a point. If I remember correctly, the NRL estimates went from 920mb straight to 900mb after Ioke crossed the date line (with the winds remaining at 140kt). NRL estimates in the West Pacific usually correspond with the JTWC, which tends to be pretty bold (as opposed to the more conservative JMA). Pobbie Rarr 03:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CPHC report finally out

CPHC report is finally out, someone please update the article as necessary? They provide synoptic situation, too, which might be useful for storm history. And the key thing is that in the CPac, the CPHC lists lowest pressure only as 915 hPa, not 900 as above. – Chacor 11:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The best track data will be interesting when rereleased, because that still forces a 15 hPa difference right along the International dateline unless they got JMA or JTWC to change accordingly. Oy. Thegreatdr 14:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The JMA's minimum pressure for Ioke in their BT was 920, however at the crossover the JMA has it at 925 hPa. [7] – Chacor 15:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

That must mean PHNL/CPHC is using JTWC data west of the dateline. A definite problem for both our purposes, and theirs. Thegreatdr 16:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Records

I don't like how the last record is phrased. I think giving the number of consecutive hours (198) spent at Category 4 or above would be more effective than listing the number of 6-hourly reports. -- §Hurricane E RIC § archive 21:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pressure

UNISYS gives a minimum pressure of 900. I don't think they're talking out of their ass. Looks like it came from the West Pacific. That also would not be satellite measured because JTWC standard for 140 knot storms is 898. Perhaps it came from JMA. This should be researched (by me or anyone who has time). -- §Hurricane E RICarchive 20:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, not JMA. Valid or not, it came from somewhere and I'm quite curious to know where. -- §Hurricane E RICarchive 20:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It's from the Best track file. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good article review

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.

a (prose): See above b (MoS): See above notes.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.

a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.

a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
Overall:

a Pass/Fail:

Good work on the article. No problems anywhere I can see.Mitch32^contribs 23:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] track map

Isn't it out of date? The last update was on September 9, 2006, and I remember it taking months to get reports out on this one. Good kitty 17:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I never noticed that. Is there a chance it could be updated? The JTWC, JMA, and CPHC best track has been released; since the article treats it largely from the point of view from CPHC and JTWC, I think it should use the Hurdat data, which provides the entire history of the storm (though the "depression" stage should not be included until 00z on August 20). --Hurricanehink (talk) 22:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] featured article

What can be done to finally get this up to FA Status? Juliancolton 22:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the article is up for Featured Article candidacy, if you're interested. --Hurricanehink (talk) 22:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

As a member of the WPTC would I be able to assess an article?-- Juliancolton (talk) 20:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You can only assess articles as either Stub, Start, B, or A-class. GA class and FA class require reviews. Ioke is currently up for featured article candidacy. Hurricanehink (talk) 21:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this officially an FA? Juliancolton (talk) 23:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. ---CWY2190^T^C 00:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thats good, another hurricane FA to add to the list! Juliancolton (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.