Talk:1984–85 Australian region cyclone season

Tropical Cyclone Hubert

Tropical Cyclone Hubert appears to have two differing analyses, both from the BoM. The BoM's TCR for Hubert has it as 90 kt, but IBTrACS has it at 80 kt. Which one would be more reliable? I'm assuming IBTrACS. SolarisPenguin (talk) 02:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Along with this, Kirsty is listed as a C2 here, while the BoM features it as a Category 4/5. SolarisPenguin (talk) 02:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

The BOM's overall best track also lists Hubert at 80 knots. I'd go with IBTrACS since it appears to match the best track, and assume the TCR was issued prior to reanalysis or merely preliminary. As for Kirsty, the intensity was changed from Aus C5/SSHWS C4 in this edit by Jason Rees, but I think that may be in error since the Australian region supposedly extended to 80°E prior to the 1985–86 season (instead of the current 90°E boundary), meaning Kirsty's peak at about 85°E was still within the basin. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 04:27, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Should I edit Kirsty's intensity back? (it's also erroneously referred to as "Kristy" multiple times) SolarisPenguin (talk) 10:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I have a couple of comments to make. Firstly, as new technology and data archives have emerged, the BoM has reanalysed some of its systems in order to ensure its database is accurate, however, this does not extend to updating TCRs. Secondly, yes the BoM's AoR extended to 80E before 1985, however, it has previously been determined offline that we would use the intensity of the system while in the present Aus Region in order to be consistent with the present day. Jason Rees (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Should this also extend to the seasons prior to this one then? SolarisPenguin (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

@SolarisPenguin: Lets wait for @KN2731: to comment again as this is a tricky issue to get right, as I have personally flip-flopped over the years. However, if we want to be consistent with the present day and say that these were the Cat 5's in the Aus Region, then yeah it should be extended backwards in time.Jason Rees (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

That's an interesting point there, I can see the merits of trying to lay down consistent boundaries for the Australian region to make more accurate comparisons regarding the number of cyclones of certain intensity over the years. I have to wonder though what to do with the remaining lifespans of the cyclones cut from the AusR season articles, like Kirsty's peak: do we include them in the corresponding SWIO season articles, despite them technically not being part of the SWIO cyclone seasons? I feel it's a bad idea to ignore them altogether, which appears to be what's happening now. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 14:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I personally feel that they should be in the corresponding SWIO cyclone season, like Tony is. I also believe that this is the approach Reunion is taking as they reanalyze the seasons. However, with all that being said, I don't believe that there is a right or wrong answer here, since the SHEM does not have any major landmasses to break up its basins. For example: I have seen Africa, 80E, 90E, 135E, 140E, 150E, 160E, 180, 140W, 120W & the America's used to denote the basins before now. Jason Rees (talk) 14:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)