This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Africa: Madagascar / Mozambique / Zimbabwe Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Madagascar (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Mozambique (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Zimbabwe (assessed as Mid-importance). Weather: Tropical / Southern Hemisphere Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Southern Hemisphere work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

La Reunion

ITCZ advisories // Meteo.fr repository of WTIO2x & WTIO30

Technical Bulletins

Cyclone warnings: Metarea VIII // Metareas VII&VIII // Metarea VII (map)

Active cyclones

Current season

Past seasons

Alternative website

JTWC:

ABIO10

Cyclone 1 \\ Cyclone 2 \\ Cyclone 3

Best track

With unnumbered systems, or ones mentioned in the ITCZ outlooks, La Reunion has determined that they do no count towards the season activity. Only systems with RMSC advisories do. See here 2014-15 season talk page.

Supportstorm (talk) 20:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since Chalane is threatening impacts in Madagascar, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe, I have made a draft for the storm.Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 00:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops the draft is here, sorry lolRobloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 00:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will you consider Severe Tropical Storm Danilo as dead/dissipated in January 10 or still alive/active? Beraniladri19🌀🌀 (talk) (edits) 06:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19: Still Active Per MFR HurricaneEdgar 10:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneEdgar: But https://zoom.earth/ is saying that it is dissipated. Beraniladri19🌀🌀 (talk) (edits) 12:03, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19:MFR Bulletins according to MFR Bulletin still active HurricaneEdgar 12:17, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19 and HurricaneEdgar: Zoom Earth is based on the JTWC which is superseded by data from RSMC La Reunion, however, upon further analysis of the Reunion advisory I realsied that this is where things get tricky. RSMC La Reunion states that the system is a remnant low and that they would not normally be in advisory still, however, the system is posing a threat to the Mascarene Islands. So its basically a post tropical cyclone.Jason Rees (talk) 14:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Rees: Yeah that's the problem. Remnant low is kind of(ish) a post tropical cyclone which therefore means as dead/inactive. Beraniladri19🌀🌀 (talk) (edits) 15:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be considered that Eloise is an intense tropical cyclone? A few sources say that peak winds were between 100 and 120 mph, so therefore I think that it should be deemed an intense tropical cyclone. Kind of the same way that Cyclone Gabekile and Cyclone Irondro was as well. For both of those some sources deemed them intense. But others no. It's kinda the same here with Eloise. AwesomeHurricaneBoss (talk) 13:52, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AwesomeHurricaneBoss: that is fake . cyclone eloise is tropical cyclone not intense tropical cyclone pls see in the MFR Bulletin HurricaneEdgar 14:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneEdgar: Fake is the wrong word. For what its worth @AwesomeHurricaneBoss: we take our classifications from Meteo France in Reunion estimated the 10-min winds at 80 knots, which makes it a tropical cyclone on their scale. For it to have been rated as an intense tropical scale, MFR would need to estimate 10-min winds estimated at between 90 kts and 120kts. 120 kts or more then MFR would have classified it as a very intense tropical cyclone.Jason Rees (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Rees: Oh, okay, sorry I misunderstood! AwesomeHurricaneBoss (talk) 15:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AwesomeHurricaneBoss: You cannot take Force thirteen as a source. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

since when did they mention force thirteen?! This is getting ANNOYING. People keep assuming people who make mistakes is in force thirteen. Stop trying to put them down when you have no evidence for these FALSE CLAIMS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.104.121 (talk) 11:19, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricaneboy23: and @Gummycow:, just a friendly reminder to not forget to archive your sources. Its quite easy, just use archive.is by entering in the source’s url, and it will generate an archived copy so you can add it into the article. Thanks for expanding Faraji!DachshundLover82 (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MFR already archives their advisories without the use of third-party websites. However thanks for the advice (I use the WayBack Machine for JWTC and FMS advisories already). Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks. I usually use JTWC as a source, and it doesn't keep an archive. Thanks, it'll really help.Gummycow ^moo_milk 05:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricaneboy23:, yep I like how MFR, NHC, and IMD Archive their advisories, but the JTWC doesn’t. Also I wouldn't recommend the Wayback Machine since it’s now starting to overwrite archives, as seen by other editors. Thanks for your hard work!DachshundLover82 (talk) 17:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everybody working very hard to edit and update this page. We’re currently working on updating and maintaining the section for Faraji. A big thanks to everybody who has worked hard on this section, it is very well-written. Also thanks for being sure to archive your sources using either the Wayback Machine or Archive.is. Although, I prefer the latter due to the Wayback Machine beginning to overwrite some archives, as noticed by other editors.

Recently global forecasting models have been hinting at a cyclone forming in the Mozambique Channel around this upcoming weekend. Some models have this system meandering close to Mozambique, dropping several inches of rainfall. We need to start looking out for formation warnings from the MFR and JTWC on this system in the coming days. Also be sure to archive anything from the JTWC. If needed, I may start a draft for this storm, if it does form. Just be sure to be on the lookout for anything.

We have been doing a great job with this season (especially compared to other SWIO seasons). Keep up the good work everybody!DachshundLover82 (talk) 04:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, since yesterday, I'm seeing these over zoom.earth, and the ITCZ bulletins:

10/02/2021: The monsoon flow, currently in place in the channel, will strengthen over the next few days due to the baroclinic interaction between a high altitude trough rising from the South-West and the low pressure area in the South of the channel. On the satellite imagery we can discern a vortex near the island of Europa. The automatic station present on this island, shows a decrease in pressure. The depression is shifting westward under the influence of the subtropical ridge, and is positioned at the end of Thursday under the through. The system remains under the axis of the trough on Friday, which could allow the formation of a warm core near the coast of Mozambique. On Saturday, the through shifted towards the North- West, and the system could then deepen into a moderate tropical storm on the western edge of the ridge that strengthens south of Mada (the displacement of the system limiting the negative effect of the north flow, and benefiting from a good polar divergence). As it tracks towards the SSO, it remains near the coast of Mozambique , whose proximity could have a limiting effect, but on waters with particularly favourable potential. The location near or on the land of the low pressure zone should not allow its deepening but rather favour the intensification of the monsoon flow. This situation should leave at least winds close to 35 knots over a good part of the canal. Related to this situation, weather conditions will be disturbed during the week on the coastal regions of the Mozambique channel in Madagascar and Mozambique.

11/02/2021: The center of the low pressure area lies near 23S/38E in a baroclinic environment. Convective activity is mainly driven by the upper forcing related to the cut-off. Last scatterometric data and model analysis suggest near gale force wind in the southern semi-circle far from the center of this cold core low. Within the next hours, this low should come closer and land on the Mozambican shore while isolating a warm core in both lower and upper levels thanks to a warm seclusion. Given this track, the proximity to the land is likely to prevent a sufficient tropical deepening for the low to reach tropical or subtropical storm status. If it stays more oversea, gale force wind may appear close to the center, thanks to the disappearance of the vertical shear under the trough, overnight or tomorrow. Next week, the risk may increase again with the arrival of the upper subtropical ridge and the increase of the polar low level convergence. Still, the presence of landmasses could also hinder the chance for deepening. In any case, this low pressure area is likely to maintain disturbed weather on a wide portion of the region. Heavy rains are particularly likely in the southern parts of Mozambique during the next five days.

12/02/2021: The depression with the hybrid characteristics followed since yesterday made landfall over the coast of Mozambique late last night without having managed to develop a sustained and durable convective activity near its center. At 0900 UTC, the circulation, fairly well defined, is centered over land at about 22.1°S and 34.1°E about 230 km northwest of Inhambane. This low pressure system is expected to remain over land in the southern region of Mozambique for the next 2-3 days near the border with Zimbabwe and South Africa. During this period, fairly heavy rains of up to 50 mm in 24 hours and locally up to 100 mm are expected near the low pressure center and locally on the coastal areas between Inhambane and Maputo in the onshore easterly winds Next week, the arrival of a South to South-East trade wind surge behind a cold front, will increase the low levels convergence within a Monsoon Trough (MT) pattern which will settle over the southern channel. The current overland depression may move back overseas within this MT or a new low may develop. In spite of the installation of an upper levels ridge, the presence of land, the arrival of dry subtropical air in connection with the trade winds surge, and the lack of consensus within the numerical guidance, still leave a low potential of tropical storm formation over the Southern Channel during the first part of the week. Whatever the scenario, this situation will continue to generate sustained disturbed weather over a large part of the southern channel. The risk of heavy rains and induced flooding is therefore marked for the southern regions of Mozambique as well as some areas of the west coast of Madagascar.

The JTWC: THE AREA OF CONVECTION (INVEST 93S) PREVIOUSLY LOCATED NEAR 23.8S 37.4E IS NOW LOCATED NEAR 23.2S 23.2E, APPROXIMATELY 92 NM NORTH OF MAXIXE, MOZAMBIQUE. THE SYSTEM IS CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED AS A SUBTROPICAL DEPRESSION , GENERALLY CHARACTERIZED AS HAVING BOTH TROPICAL AND MID-LATITUDE CYCLONE FEATURES. RECENT ANIMATED MULTISPECTRAL IMAGERY (MSI) AND A 111901Z MHS NOAA 89H GHZ IMAGE DEPICT FRAGMENTED DEEP CONVECTIVE BANDING TO THE EAST WRAPPING INTO THE LOW LEVEL CIRCULATION (LLC). THE 111954Z ASCAT(METOP-C) PASS DEPICTS AN ELONGATED WIND FIELD WITH 30-35KT WINDS SOUTH OF THE LLC AND WEAKER WINDS TO THE NORTH. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SHOWS AN OVERALL FAVORABLE ENVIRONMENT WITH LOW (10-20KTS) VERTICAL WIND SHEAR (VWS), BURGEONING POLEWARD OUTFLOW, AND WARM (29-30C) SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES (SST). NUMERICAL MODELS GENERALLY AGREE THAT INVEST 93S WILL TRACK WEST-SOUTHWESTWARD, MAINTAINING AN ASYMMETRIC WINDFIELD, BEFORE ENCOUNTERING LAND WITHIN THE NEXT 24-48 HOURS WITH MINIMAL OVERALL DEVELOPMENT. FOR HAZARDS AND WARNINGS, REFERENCE THE FLEET WEATHER CENTER SAN DIEGO HIGH WINDS AND SEAS PRODUCT OR REFER TO LOCAL WMO DESIGNATED FORECAST AUTHORITY. MAXIMUM SUSTAINED SURFACE WINDS ARE ESTIMATED AT 20 TO 25 KNOTS. MINIMUM SEA LEVEL PRESSURE IS ESTIMATED TO BE NEAR 1005 MB. THE POTENTIAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SIGNIFICANT TROPICAL CYCLONE WITHIN THE NEXT 24 HOURS IS UPGRADED TO MEDIUM.

Should we add it to the systems part of this article? BrownieKing talk 13:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownieKing: I also saw in Zoom Earth who also uses JTWC data that there's a invest designated as 93S but unless RSMC La Reunion confirms, it shall not be added in the article. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 08:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now I understand. Thanks! :) BrownieKing talk 10:23, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It says that Faraji had reached cat 5 on the saffr Simpson scale. Faraji was 145mph, cat 5 is 157 SputtyTheSputnik (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, I'm an idiot SputtyTheSputnik (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RESOLVED

Consensus to change to image 3. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 14:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

It saddens me we must have another discussion on this. @FleurDeOdile: has been consistently reverting all edits related to the infobox image of Marian, including from me and @Nino Marakot:, so lets prevent any more edit warring. Which of the 3 images should we use: one thats on the edge of the pass, or 2 others? Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image 1 (currently being disputed over)	Image 2 (my image)	Image 3

Image 3 looks better with the eye a little more defined IMO. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 18:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna have to go with Image 3 as well as it is more to the center and is more defined of an image Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 19:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

image 3 is of Marian with a dry air intrusion, image 2 is of Marian weakening and image 1 is of Marian with neither of those so im going with image 1 FleurDeOdile 19:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have to agree with @FleurDeOdile: here, image one seems the most organized. Also, if it is really such an issue, why can't we just get the same image but more centered?🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 19:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Satellite images don't work like that. Also, Image 2 and 1 are actually both images of a weakening system, as it peaked within the border of the Australian region (right before entering the SWIO), so your reasoning does not make sense whatsoever calling image 2 an image of "Marian weakening". Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 21:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant by centering the image was that since it was taken from Nasa worldview, move over a bit and retake the pic closer to the storm so that it looks more proportional. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 21:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do that... there's spaces the satellite doesn't catch and you don't want a big black empty space on your satellite image. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 22:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I didn't know that. sorry. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 23:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have a slight preference for Image 1, but honestly, I'm fine with either Image 1 or 2. You guys have to stop edit-warring over stuff like this. It isn't worth the time or the energy, and it makes us look bad. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 06:32, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WPTC must create an image policy. This has happened too much for too long. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some slight adjustments to the image to counter an argument that my "image is just trash" and also that I should "leave the project", and many other rude remarks from an off-wiki personal attack by the edit warrior in discussion. I believe my image or image 3 should be used mainly just because they are not on the edge of satellite passes and are generally higher quality, IMO. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 20:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricaneboy23: Hold on, not to change the subject, but if you are getting personally attacked off Wiki by the person who initiated the edit war, then you need to report it to WP:ANI, as that is unacceptable. I am sorry that happened. Any-who, I am more partial to image 3, and as such, I have struck out my original comment. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 22:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not responsible for off-wiki attacks, which I personally disagree with, but can be displayed as evidence for a larger case (which I'm not sure theres to make right now.) The behavior of the user in question was downright ridiculous however. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if things get worse, definitely use it as evidence. Again, I am sorry that they are doing that, I hope it does not continue.🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 15:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RESOLVED

Clearly to change to image 2. HurricaneEdgar 00:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Image 1	Image 2

Hello guys which is a better image. HurricaneEdgar 01:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I think we should use Image 2. It is clearly higher quality, more realistic-looking, and it is actually closer to the storm's peak intensity, which happened right before landfall, not after. Also, Image 1 just doesn't look as realistic in general, and honestly, the image quality isn't nearly as good as the second one. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Image 1 is a better image HurricaneEdgar 13:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19: @FleurDeOdile: @Nino Marakot: @Dam222: @AwesomeHurricaneBoss: @BrownieKing: @CycloneFootball71: @Cyclone of Foxes: HurricaneEdgar 13:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @HurricaneEdgar:, I would say Image 2 looks better than Image 1. Also the quality is way better than the first one Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 13:24, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I am getting tired of these image discussions. Why not just block FleurDeOdile, if he/she is starting all these disputes? 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 13:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the one who created the second image + with the feedback of people off-wiki, I already know there is a consensus of the second image and I support the change. Stop starting unnecessary content disputes, its mainly only you and FleurDeOdile doing this and everyone is tired of it. Just. Stop. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't have a preference either way, so whatever image has the most consensus I will be fine with. However, we need to create better rules fro these image discussions so that there aren't always edit wars. Also, @HurricaneEdgar: did nothing wrong with starting this discussion, I said here: [1] that you guys should start this, because as it was, It would have escalated to ANI and RPP. Everyone who edits the images needs to be more WP:Civil and calm down, as I am getting tired of this constantly happening. so Please, please figure something out. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 15:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with either image though I do lean slightly towards Image 1 Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 15:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, like this would escalate to ANI or RPP. This is just more like just an annoyance than actual rule breaking. HurricaneEdgar is the one who started dismissing a clear consensus in the first place, so now this will just be yet another waste of time and nothing will have changed. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also would like to address that instead of just saying "the better image", theres several reasons why Image 2 is better overall.

• It looks more realistic for a nighttime image. Clouds in real life are NOT that opaque.
• The overall resolution is in fact better.
• The two images are only 3 hours apart, so arguing that one is closer to peak (even though Image 2 should technically be closer to the actual peak between 18Z and 00Z) isn't relevant. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 15:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that I would have had to report it if you and HurricaneEdgar kept reverting each other, due to 3rr with the way it was looking. That is why I said that. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 16:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Of course, I wouldn't personally let it escalate that far but I already know there very likely won't be a change in consensus, so this is merely just a waste of time IMO... Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 16:04, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image 2 for me. And per Chicdat and Hurricaneboy, these image discussion polls are really annoying and should stop. FleurDeOdile and some users needs to have common sense with commenting about other people's images and not making their own image superior than anyone else. Typhoon2013 (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

As Marian has been downgraded to TC (which it's C3 in BOM scale) that shown say it peaked at 100 mph / 155 kph

Link to Marian TCR from BOM: http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/history/marian_2020.shtml

Thanks! EllaCyclone (talk) 08:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a draft for Cyclone Jobo since it May become the first tropical cyclone to hit Tanzania in modern history.DachshundLover82 (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since moved to Cyclone Jobo. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 12:35, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since moved back to Draft:Cyclone Jobo and them been redirect here so see history KylieTastic (talk) 14:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There should at least be more research into its impacts. I discovered 22 deaths in the country when I did a search the other day, so there could be more information out there, plus maybe some info in the Comoros. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]