Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/wrap_fwo.pl?IDY68029.txt

IDY68029

Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology

MEDIA:

NO USE OF STANDARD EMERGENCY WARNING SIGNAL [sEWS]

TOP PRIORITY FOR IMMEDIATE AND FREQUENT BROADCAST

********************************************************************************

TSUNAMI WARNING NUMBER 1 FOR PARTS OF VICTORIA

Issued by the Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Centre [JATWC] at

8.28pm 15 June 2009

********************************************************************************

TSUNAMI THREAT TO THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT

********************************************************************************

SUMMARY:

Tsunami warning for the marine environment for parts of VICTORIA.

Threatened areas extend from Lakes Entrance to Gabo Island including Gabo

Island, Lakes Entrance, Mallacoota and Point Hicks.

Possibility of DANGEROUS WAVES, STRONG OCEAN CURRENTS AND SOME LOCALISED

OVERFLOW ONTO THE IMMEDIATE FORESHORE for several hours from 10:15 pm [EST]

Wednesday.

Although major evacuations are not required, people are advised to get out of

the water and move away from the immediate water's edge.

Next update will be issued by #next_issue_state#.

For latest and further information call 1300 TSUNAMI [1300 878 6264] or visit

www.bom.gov.au

********************************************************************************

DETAILS:

A threat of DANGEROUS WAVES, STRONG OCEAN CURRENTS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF SOME

LOCALISED OVERFLOW ONTO THE IMMEDIATE FORESHORE exists for parts of

VICTORIA from Lakes Entrance to Gabo Island including Gabo Island, Lakes

Entrance, Mallacoota and Point Hicks.

Tsunami effects are expected at the following locations from these times:

Lakes Entrance after 10:15 pm [EST] Wednesday

COMMUNITY RESPONSE ADVICE FROM THE VICTORIAN STATE EMERGENCY SERVICE

- While major evacuations in these areas are not required, people are advised

to get out of the water and move away from the immediate water's edge of

harbours, coastal estuaries, rock platforms and beaches.

- Boats in harbours, estuaries or shallow coastal water should return to

shore. Secure your boat and move away from the waterfront.

- Vessels already at sea should stay offshore in deep water until further

advised.

- Do not go to the coast to watch the tsunami, as there is the possibility of

dangerous, localised flooding of the immediate foreshore.

- Check that your neighbours have received this advice.

CAUTION:

Tsunami waves are more powerful than the same size beach waves, with the first

wave not necessarily being the largest.

Low-level effects may be observed in neighbouring coastal areas. People are

advised to take care.

TSUNAMI SOURCE:

An undersea earthquake of magnitude 7.9 [Latitude 45.960S Longitude 166.470E ]

occurred at 07:22 PM EST on Wednesday 15 July 2009 near OFF W. COAST OF S.

ISLAND, N.Z..

Sea level observations have confirmed a tsunami.

********************************************************************************

The earthquake of magnitude 7.9 [Latitude 45.960S Longitude 166.470E ]

occurred at 07:22 PM EST on Wednesday 15 July 2009.

********************************************************************************

The NEXT UPDATE will be issued by #next_issue_state# local time.

FOR LATEST AND FURTHER INFORMATION:

Call 1300 TSUNAMI [1300 878 6264] or visit www.bom.gov.au

FOR EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE:

Call the VICTORIAN STATE EMERGENCY SERVICE on 132 500

********************************************************************************

EST = Eastern Standard Time

CST = Central Standard Time = EST - 30 minutes

WST = Western Standard Time = EST - 2 hours

The JATWC is operated by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Geoscience

Australia

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/279280-tsunami-warning/
Share on other sites

It was over 2 hours after it happend.

Even if it did happen they were only estimating it to be like a 20cm wave.... OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO lol

shame i was quite hoping for some excitement... but also living in the hills it wouldnt have made much of a diff

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/279280-tsunami-warning/#findComment-4717108
Share on other sites

*waits for some asehole to make a boat joke about 33s*...

Quick, everyone get in my R33.

After the floods die down we can go for a cruise...to the Caribbean...

:mellow:

For the record, I do take warnings very seriously...at first. But not unnecessarily-updated-every-ad-break-minor-shift-in-some-subcontinent's-plate crap. After reading this full warning issue I'm surprised it got as much attention as it did. Fair enough to warn the mariners and islanders. But the word tsunami is now synonymous with thousands of people dying (despite the fact these small ones are quite common), so the newsmedia tend to jump on that one.

Edited by Birds
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/279280-tsunami-warning/#findComment-4717679
Share on other sites

For the record, I do take warnings very seriously...at first. But not unnecessarily-updated-every-ad-break-minor-shift-in-some-subcontinent's-plate crap. After reading this full warning issue I'm surprised it got as much attention as it did. Fair enough to warn the mariners and islanders. But the word tsunami is now synonymous with thousands of people dying (despite the fact these small ones are quite common), so the newsmedia tend to jump on that one.

remember not so long ago the bush fire's ? everyone cracked it cause there was enough warning.

now there is warning, may be over the top, but people were alerted, saves there own arse's and gives residents a bit of heads up, they cant get the weather right nor can they tell the size of a wave coming from 2hours away.

there will always be someone out there who will jump up and go ' there was no warning, we could of been killed, whats the government doing about it?'

even if there was no threat, then sure enough everyone jumps on the band wagon.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/279280-tsunami-warning/#findComment-4718459
Share on other sites

Yer I agree warnings are a good idea, it's just that in this case the severity was a bit on the low and I feel the media/BOM were jumping the guns on a slow day.

On the side, does anyone know if this tsunami had much of an impact on anything? Docks, ships etc?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/279280-tsunami-warning/#findComment-4719894
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...