2026 Pacific typhoon season

The 2026 Pacific typhoon season comprises the tropical cyclones occurring in the western North Pacific and the South China Sea during 2026. Its regional meteorological record is maintained by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), operating the Regional Specialized Meteorological Center in Tokyo, alongside observations and warnings issued by national meteorological services. The record encompasses tropical depressions and tropical storms as well as systems reaching typhoon intensity. (jma.go.jp)

The season’s significance lies in the storms’ development and tracks, their associated rainfall and winds, and their effects on communities and economic activity. PAGASA’s preliminary reports document early-season storms including Nokaen, known in the Philippines as Ada, and Penha, locally named Basyang, together with observations and warning histories. This account covers seasonal forecasts, environmental conditions, individual cyclones, regional impacts, and naming practices; its reporting cutoff is October 15, 2026, rather than the end of the calendar year. Preliminary observations and impact estimates are distinguished from subsequently finalized records. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Basin boundaries and meteorological records

The 2026 season record covers tropical cyclones in the western North Pacific north of the equator and west of the International Date Line, including the South China Sea. For operational purposes, the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) defines the responsibility area of its Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre, RSMC Tokyo–Typhoon Center, as $0^\circ$–$60^\circ\mathrm{N}$, $100^\circ$–$180^\circ\mathrm{E}$, including marginal seas and adjacent land. The precise eastern boundary is the $180^\circ$ meridian, rather than every deviation of the civil date line. This record is distinct from the eastern and central Pacific hurricane-season record: the central Pacific extends from $140^\circ\mathrm{W}$ to $180^\circ$, while the eastern Pacific lies east of $140^\circ\mathrm{W}$. A cyclone crossing $180^\circ$ therefore passes between regional reporting areas without necessarily losing its identity. (jma.go.jp)

“Season” denotes the calendar-year accounting period, January 1–December 31, 2026, not a formally bounded interval during which storms alone can develop. Western North Pacific cyclones occur throughout the year, and there is no official opening or closing date. JMA begins each year's numerical sequence with the first qualifying system after January 1. Basin entry must nevertheless be distinguished from formation: an incoming cyclone is not a new meteorological system merely because responsibility changes, and JMA retains an existing name assigned outside its region. Similarly, a cyclone spanning December and January is treated as one continuous event; its identifier and complete agency chronology are retained, while activity occurring within 2026 is distinguished from activity outside that calendar year. These distinctions prevent basin entries and continuing storms from being counted as additional genesis events. (aoml.noaa.gov)

JMA supplies the principal regional reference for tracks and intensities through RSMC Tokyo, providing analyses and forecasts to national meteorological and hydrological services under the World Meteorological Organization's tropical-cyclone arrangements. Regional guidance does not replace official local warnings, which remain the responsibility of the relevant national or territorial service. The Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) maintains a separate analysis and best-track archive. Its intensity estimates use maximum one-minute sustained winds, whereas JMA reports ten-minute sustained winds. Accordingly, values from the two agencies remain explicitly attributed rather than being combined into a single unqualified intensity history; detailed classification thresholds are addressed separately. (jma.go.jp)

The reporting cutoff is October 15, 2026; it is an editorial boundary, not the end of the meteorological season. Cyclone chronology uses Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), with local times identified where retained from national reports. JMA's 2026 track-page instructions illustrate why this matters: the formation month is determined in UTC, but plotted daily positions are labelled at 09:00 and 21:00 Japan Standard Time, corresponding to 00:00 and 12:00 UTC. Thus a date printed on a domestic map or impact report cannot automatically be substituted for the UTC date used in basin-wide statistics. Observed positions through the cutoff are distinguished from forecast positions beyond it. (data.jma.go.jp)

Three record stages are kept separate. Operational estimates describe the cyclone using information available during warning operations; preliminary reports consolidate an event before all review is complete; and best-track analyses reconstruct its position and intensity retrospectively. JTWC's archive documentation explains that post-storm analysts have more observations, more time, and the complete storm history, so archived positions can differ from warning-time estimates. JMA likewise distinguishes preliminary entries on its 2026 track page with an asterisk and identifies unmarked entries as finalized post-analysis values. Finalization can occur storm by storm rather than only after December: JMA's December 24, 2025 seasonal summary, for example, combined finalized values for storms 1–19 with preliminary values for storms 20–27. Consequently, neither a year-labelled track page nor a seasonal summary alone establishes that every included value is final. (metoc.navy.mil)

Seasonal forecasts and their verification

PAGASA’s January–June outlook counted tropical cyclones developing within or entering the Philippine Area of Responsibility (PAR), including tropical depressions; it did not predict total western North Pacific activity or Philippine landfalls. Its simplified bulletin, dated January 28, 2026, specified 0–3 systems for January–March and 2–5 for April–June. These ranges were presented without an associated confidence level or cyclone-count climatological baseline. Basin-wide outlooks from Tropical Storm Risk (TSR) and Weathernews used different geographical coverage and activity measures and therefore require separate verification. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The figures retain each publication’s issue date and stated forecast period; TSR’s storm categories are nested, not additive. The July and August documents describe a June–November forecast window while labelling their numerical tables as 2026 totals, a distinction relevant to subsequent verification. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

PAGASA’s January outlook assumed that weak La Niña conditions would persist through January–March, followed by a transition to neutral El Niño–Southern Oscillation conditions. Its April 8 monthly update instead described neutral conditions and reported a 62% probability of El Niño emerging; the accompanying 0–1 April cyclone forecast was a shorter-period update, not a replacement forecast for the entire April–June quarter. The 62% figure referred to the environmental outlook, not the probability that the cyclone-count range would be met. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

TSR’s forecasts, authored by Adam Lea, increasingly emphasized activity intensity and duration through accumulated cyclone energy (ACE). Its comparison baselines were 1991–2020—25.5 tropical storms, 16.0 typhoons, 9.3 intense typhoons and ACE 301—and 2016–2025, with corresponding values of 24.0, 14.2, 8.4 and 250. The May model assumed an August–October Oceanic Niño Index of $1.5\,^\circ\mathrm{C}$, incorporated April equatorial wind anomalies and activity already observed, and treated the negative Pacific Decadal Oscillation as a potentially suppressing influence. July and August revisions raised ACE much more substantially than storm numbers. The forecast probability of upper-tercile ACE increased from 92% in July to 98% in August, against the 1991–2020 distribution. TSR also identified unpredictable intraseasonal variability as a remaining uncertainty. (tropicalstormrisk.com)

Weathernews combined historical analogues with a machine-learning forecast trained on tropical convective activity. Its June outlook projected 22.8 formations from June onward, compared with a JMA-based normal of 22.7; September’s corresponding remaining-season prediction was 11.0 against 11.6. Thus, its above-normal annual totals did not imply an above-normal formation rate throughout the remaining months. These estimates assumed developing El Niño conditions and changes in tropical Pacific and Indian Ocean circulation; they were forecasts of environmental influences, not retrospective attribution of individual storms. (sea.weathernews.com)

Verification must preserve these regional, temporal and classification differences. PAGASA’s March assessment reported no cyclone development in the PAR that month, an observation relevant to its first-quarter outlook but not a measure of basin-wide March activity. Its preliminary cyclone reports remained subject to replacement by annual analyses. At the October 15 reporting cutoff, neither full-year outlooks nor TSR’s stated June–November window had elapsed, so final verification remained pending; TSR scheduled its seasonal summary and forecast verification for early January 2027. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Oceanic and atmospheric setting

The El Niño–Southern Oscillation changed from La Niña early in 2026 to El Niño by midyear. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center (CPC), in its February 12 diagnostic discussion, reported that La Niña had continued through January: the latest weekly Niño-3.4 sea-surface temperature anomaly was −0.9°C, compared with −0.4°C in Niño-4 and 0.0°C in Niño-1+2. Subsurface warming was nevertheless expanding across the equatorial Pacific, while atmospheric anomalies had weakened partly because of subseasonal variability. On April 9, CPC identified ENSO-neutral conditions following their emergence during March; the weekly Niño-3.4 anomaly had risen to −0.2°C. Its accompanying 61% probability of El Niño developing during May–July was a forecast, not an observation of conditions already established. (cpc.ncep.noaa.gov)

CPC’s June 11 advisory confirmed that El Niño conditions had developed during the preceding month. The weekly Niño-3.4 anomaly was +0.7°C, accompanied by low-level westerly and upper-level easterly wind anomalies over the central equatorial Pacific and negative Southern Oscillation indices. By the October 8 advisory, Niño-3.4 had reached +2.1°C, with enhanced convection extending from the central to the eastern Pacific and suppressed convection over Indonesia. CPC’s expectation of further strengthening through the end of 2026 remained prospective at the October 15 cutoff; it was separate from the observed ocean–atmosphere coupling used to diagnose the event. (cpc.ncep.noaa.gov)

Ocean warming was geographically uneven rather than a uniform increase throughout the typhoon basin. PAGASA’s September regional climate bulletin, describing August observations against a 1991–2020 reference period, reported near-average to slightly cooler sea-surface temperatures across parts of the western Pacific and Maritime Continent despite warm anomalies farther east. JMA’s October 9 monitoring assessment likewise identified below-normal September temperatures in its tropical western Pacific NINO.WEST region. Below the surface, CPC reported expanding positive equatorial temperature anomalies in February and a fifth consecutive monthly increase in its subsurface index by April. JMA’s September monitoring products represented upper-ocean heat content using vertically averaged temperatures in the upper 300 m, with anomalies relative to 1991–2020. These equatorial diagnostics describe the evolving ENSO heat reservoir, rather than local heat availability beneath every cyclone track. (seacm.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Intraseasonal convection also varied during the season. PAGASA’s September bulletin placed the Madden–Julian Oscillation predominantly in phases 6 and 7 during August, corresponding to enhanced convection over the western Pacific, although its signal in the real-time multivariate index was less distinct than in preceding months. It began August in phase 6 before moving into phase 7 for most of the month. By October 13, CPC described El Niño’s persistent convective pattern as overshadowing coherent MJO activity. The index had struggled to propagate beyond Western Hemisphere phases 8 and 1 since early September, limiting the basis for interpreting subsequent western Pacific activity as a straightforward eastward-moving MJO episode. (seacm.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The regional monsoon circulation changed as autumn approached. On October 5, PAGASA declared the Philippine southwest monsoon season terminated after observing strengthening high pressure over East Asia, southward migration of the Intertropical Convergence Zone, weaker monsoon winds, and declining associated rainfall. This declaration concerned the Philippine seasonal circulation, not the cessation of basin-wide tropical cyclogenesis. CPC subsequently recorded Tropical Depression 28 forming near 14°N, 146°E on October 12. Its October 13 discussion identified ambient dry air as a constraint on development and described Koguma, farther north, as rounding a subtropical ridge. Forecast weakening and eventual absorption into the extratropical westerlies were not yet completed observations in that account. (pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Vertical wind shear also entered late-season environmental assessments, but observation and projection remained distinct. CPC’s October 13 outlook associated anticipated additional development toward the eastern part of the Pacific with persistent low-level westerly anomalies and reduced shear in extended-range guidance; those projected conditions cannot be treated as measured shear along earlier storm tracks. The cited operational assessments explained conditions through ENSO, intraseasonal variability, monsoon evolution, dry air, and steering circulation. They did not quantify an anthropogenic climate-change contribution to the season’s cyclone activity. (cpc.ncep.noaa.gov)

Seasonal progression and activity statistics

By 06:00 UTC on October 15, the JMA-based catalogue maintained by the National Institute of Informatics recorded 30 internationally named tropical cyclones, ending with Champi (2630). This was a provisional elapsed-season count, not a final annual total. JMA’s monthly formation statistics count systems reaching tropical-storm strength, rather than every tropical depression; they also include qualifying cyclones entering the western North Pacific from another basin. Nolo, for example, entered the regional record at 00:00 UTC on October 5 near 179.4°E, already carrying maximum sustained winds of 90 knots. Its October entry therefore represents basin arrival, not initial cyclogenesis. (codh.ex.nii.ac.jp)

The monthly sequence showed isolated early-season storms followed by a marked summer concentration. January through April each produced one named system; May and June each produced two, July five, August ten, and September four. October had added three by the reporting cutoff. The table assigns each cyclone to its first month in the JMA named-system record, rather than counting it again in every month during which it remained active. January–September values follow JMA’s published monthly statistics; October incorporates Champi’s October 15 appearance in the JMA-derived catalogue. (data.jma.go.jp)

Simultaneous activity became more conspicuous from June onward. Mekkhala and Higos overlapped at named-storm strength during June 22–26; July included overlapping Bavi, Maysak and, later, Haishen. August’s concentration included Saudel, Narra, Gaenari and Atsani during August 24. Conversely, the named-system chronology contains long early-season gaps, including January 21–February 4 and March 11–April 9. These are intervals without named storms, not necessarily intervals without weaker depressions. Through September, the 27 named systems compared with approximately 18.6 obtained by summing JMA’s rounded 1991–2020 monthly means for the same nine months—about 45% above that equivalent-period baseline. (codh.ex.nii.ac.jp)

Nokaen’s precursor was the first cyclone in JMA’s numbered best-track sequence: its initial depression position was recorded at 18:00 UTC on January 13, at 7.7°N, 132.7°E. The revised record places its attainment of tropical-storm strength at 06:00 UTC on January 16. Sinlaku became the first JMA typhoon at 00:00 UTC on April 11 and reached 115 knots in ten-minute sustained winds and a minimum central pressure of 905 hPa, retaining the season’s lowest listed pressure through the cutoff. Dolphin had the longest named-system lifetime in the catalogue: July 27 at 06:00 UTC to August 11 at 00:00 UTC, or 14 days 18 hours. That duration excludes its precursor depression stage and any subsequent extratropical existence. (jma.go.jp)

Agency-dependent statistics require separate denominators. JMA’s completed January–June best-track file contains eight named systems, of which two—Sinlaku and Mekkhala—reached typhoon strength; it is not a census of depressions that never became named storms. Nor are JMA ten-minute winds interchangeable with the one-minute winds conventionally used for accumulated cyclone energy (ACE). Under that convention, $ACE=10^{-4}\sum V_{\max}^{2}$, using six-hourly tropical-storm-or-stronger observations with wind in knots. The June Pacific regional climate report reproduced Colorado State University’s provisional basin ACE of 53.0 through June 8, including 40.6 from Sinlaku, and characterized activity through that date as above normal. Those dated values describe the early season, rather than an October 15 or final annual ACE total. (jma.go.jp)

Individual cyclones: January–June

Nokaen (Ada)

PAGASA’s revised preliminary chronology places Ada’s tropical-cyclone lifetime between 00:00 UTC on January 14 and 00:00 UTC on January 22. It developed east of Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur, after being tracked as a low-pressure area near Yap from January 12. Moving northwestward offshore of the eastern Philippines, it subsequently turned eastward and then southward without making landfall. PAGASA estimated a peak of 45 kt (85 km/h) and 994 hPa at 18:00 UTC on January 16. Its January 14–22 lifetime differs slightly from JMA’s record for Nokaen (2601), which begins at 18:00 UTC on January 13 and ends at 06:00 UTC on January 22; these are agency-specific analysis boundaries, not separate systems. JMA assessed a lower peak of 40 kt and 996 hPa. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Penha (Basyang)

Penha (2602), locally Basyang, developed near Yap and moved westward toward Mindanao. JMA’s best track begins at 00:00 UTC on February 3, records tropical-storm intensity from February 4, and ends at 00:00 UTC on February 7; its maximum was 35 kt with a minimum pressure of 1002 hPa. The Hong Kong Observatory separately estimated peak winds of 75 km/h before landfall over Mindanao on the night of February 5. Penha subsequently crossed the central Philippines, weakened, and became a low-pressure area early on February 7. The February 2 date associated with its precursor disturbance therefore precedes JMA’s tropical-depression lifetime and should not be treated as an equivalent formation date. (jma.go.jp)

Nuri

JMA tracked Nuri (2603) from 18:00 UTC on March 9 until 00:00 UTC on March 12. Remaining near Yap, it moved initially northward, then southwestward and eastward. Its best-track maximum was 35 kt, with a minimum pressure of 998 hPa. The United States National Weather Service catalogued the same system as Tropical Depression Nuri (03W), retaining the distinction between its classification and JMA’s tropical-storm assessment. (jma.go.jp)

Sinlaku

Sinlaku (2604; 04W) developed on April 7 and intensified while approaching the Mariana Islands. JMA estimated 115 kt and 905 hPa during April 12–13. Its eye passed over Tinian and Saipan during the night of April 14–15, local time. After turning northward and northeastward, it became extratropical at 00:00 UTC on April 20; JMA continued tracking the resulting non-tropical low through April 22. (jma.go.jp)

Hagupit (Caloy)

PAGASA’s preliminary analysis dates Hagupit’s development to 00:00 UTC on May 5 near Chuuk and its degeneration into a remnant low to 12:00 UTC on May 11, east of Northern Samar. It estimated peak winds of 45 kt and pressure of 998 hPa at 06:00 UTC on May 8. The system travelled westward past the waters south of Yap, then turned northwestward east of the Philippines. It entered the Philippine Area of Responsibility at 10:00 UTC on May 9 and received the local name Caloy; PAGASA recorded no Philippine landfall. The Hong Kong Observatory retained its tropical-cyclone classification until May 14, illustrating a longer agency-specific lifetime than PAGASA’s preliminary reconstruction. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Unnamed depression on May 8

JMA’s surface analysis at 00:00 UTC on May 8 depicted a separate, unnamed tropical depression east of Hagupit. The chart assigned it a central pressure of 1008 hPa and slow westward movement. It was distinct from Hagupit’s circulation farther west and did not receive an international storm name on that analysis. (data.jma.go.jp)

Jangmi (Domeng)

PAGASA dated Jangmi’s formation near Yap to 06:00 UTC on May 26. It moved northwestward and then northward toward the Ryukyu Islands, entering the Philippine Area of Responsibility on May 28 as Domeng. PAGASA estimated a peak of 65 kt (120 km/h) and 975 hPa at 06:00 UTC on May 30, classifying it as a typhoon, and recorded no Philippine landfall. Its preliminary tropical lifetime ended with post-tropical transition east of Ibaraki, Japan, at 12:00 UTC on June 3. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Ester

Ester remained unnamed internationally. PAGASA’s revised preliminary report places its formation at 00:00 UTC on June 4, approximately 270 km west of Laoag, with peak winds of 25 kt (45 km/h) and pressure of 1002 hPa. It moved northeastward toward the southern Ryukyu Islands and became a remnant low at 00:00 UTC on June 6 near Nakanougan Island. No Philippine landfall was recorded. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Mekkhala (Francisco)

PAGASA tracked Mekkhala’s precursor north of Pohnpei from June 16 and dated tropical-cyclone formation near Guam to 12:00 UTC on June 18. Named Francisco after entering its area of responsibility on June 20, the cyclone reached PAGASA’s estimated maximum of 100 kt (185 km/h) and 930 hPa at 12:00 UTC on June 22. PAGASA classified it as a super typhoon, recorded no Philippine landfall, and placed its post-tropical transition near Chiba at 12:00 UTC on June 27. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Higos

JMA tracked Higos (2608) from June 21. It moved westward before recurving rapidly northeastward, peaked at 50 kt and 996 hPa, and recorded a landfall position on Japan’s Bōsō Peninsula at 20:00 UTC on June 26. It became extratropical at 00:00 UTC on June 27. (jma.go.jp)

Individual cyclones: July–October 15

The dates below are in UTC. Unless otherwise attributed, intensities are JMA preliminary estimates of maximum 10-minute sustained winds and central pressure; the stated JMA intervals cover tropical-storm strength or greater, not necessarily the full lifetime of the precursor depression or subsequent remnant. PAGASA’s depression-to-remnant chronologies are identified separately. (jma.go.jp)

Bavi (Inday; 2609)

PAGASA dated Bavi’s development as a tropical cyclone to 00:00 on July 1 near the Marshall Islands. JMA’s named-stage record began at 00:00 on July 2 and reached 55 m/s and 910 hPa. Bavi moved westward through the Philippine Sea, then northward into eastern China before turning northeastward toward Korea. JMA recorded extratropical transition at 00:00 on July 15; PAGASA ended its tropical lifetime at 12:00 on July 14 and reported no Philippine landfall. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Maysak (Henry; 2610): July continuation

Already a depression on June 30, Maysak continued through the South China Sea and the Hainan–Gulf of Tonkin region during July. JMA’s named-stage interval extended from 18:00 on July 2 to 18:00 on July 5, with a maximum of 25 m/s and minimum pressure of 990 hPa; PAGASA instead assessed a severe tropical storm peaking at 55 kt and 985 hPa on July 4. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Haishen (Josie; 2611)

PAGASA tracked Josie from 06:00 on July 12 south of Guam until 06:00 on July 14 east of Luzon, classifying it throughout as a depression with a peak of 30 kt and 1004 hPa. JMA classified the same circulation as Tropical Storm Haishen between 00:00 on July 13 and 00:00 on July 14, estimating 18 m/s and 1002 hPa. It moved generally west-northwestward without a Philippine landfall. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Noul (Kiyapo; 2612)

Kiyapo developed at 06:00 on July 22 east of southeastern Luzon and made landfall on Camiguin Island, Calayan, Cagayan, at 06:10 on July 24. It subsequently strengthened west of northern Luzon: PAGASA estimated 80 kt and 955 hPa at 18:00 on July 25, whereas JMA’s maximum was 40 m/s with 960 hPa. JMA downgraded Noul to a depression at 12:00 on July 26; PAGASA retained its tropical lifetime until 00:00 on July 27 over Hunan. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Dolphin (2613)

Dolphin attained tropical-storm strength at 06:00 on July 27 near 176.9°E. Moving west-northwestward across the basin, it intensified to 55 m/s and 910 hPa on July 30. It later passed through the Okinawa region, moved into Zhejiang, and weakened inland. JMA ended its named-stage record at 00:00 on August 11, when it became a depression over China. (data.jma.go.jp)

Luis and Maymay (JMA: Kujira; 2614)

PAGASA treated Luis and Maymay as separate cyclones. Luis developed at 00:00 on August 1 east of Quezon, peaked at 25 kt and 1002 hPa, and made landfall at Maconacon, Isabela, at 09:30 on August 3 before becoming a remnant at 12:00. Maymay developed at 00:00 on August 4 off Ilocos Sur, peaked at 45 kt and 994 hPa on August 5, and made landfall at Santa Catalina at 19:30 that day; PAGASA ended its lifetime at 12:00 on August 6 east of Isabela. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

JMA analyzed one system, Kujira, reaching tropical-storm strength at 18:00 on August 4, peaking at 20 m/s and 994 hPa, and weakening to a depression at 00:00 on August 6. PAGASA’s distinction rested on separately observed surface and lower-tropospheric circulations, supported by radar, surface observations, and soundings; the two local names therefore do not represent two JMA named storms. (data.jma.go.jp)

Chan-hom (2615)

Chan-hom’s named stage lasted from 06:00 on August 5 to 00:00 on August 12. Initially near 165.7°E, it followed an extended westward track toward Japan, reaching 25 m/s and 980 hPa on August 11. It crossed central Honshu while weakening and became a depression near 36.0°N, 135.0°E. (data.jma.go.jp)

Peilou (2616)

Peilou became a tropical storm at 06:00 on August 9 near 21.2°N, 142.7°E. It moved eastward and then northeastward over open water, reaching 23 m/s and 992 hPa. JMA downgraded it to a depression at 12:00 on August 12 near 164°E. (data.jma.go.jp)

Nangka (2617)

Nangka’s tropical-storm interval extended from 00:00 on August 12 to 12:00 on August 14. It moved northeastward from south of Japan, attaining 20 m/s and 990 hPa before turning more eastward and weakening to a depression near 28°N, 155°E. (data.jma.go.jp)

Neneng

PAGASA’s August review recorded Tropical Depression Neneng within the Philippine Area of Responsibility on August 18–20. Operational briefings still classified it as a depression on August 20; the monthly review distinguished it from Luis, Maymay, and Obet. (pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Saudel (Obet; 2618)

Saudel became a tropical storm at 03:00 on August 19 southeast of Guam and moved northwestward, subsequently passing east of Taiwan and the Ryukyu Islands toward China. JMA estimated a maximum of 45 m/s and minimum pressure of 940 hPa on August 24–25. It weakened to a depression at 18:00 on August 28, but regained tropical-storm strength over the South China Sea at 18:00 on August 31. This regenerated phase moved northeastward toward southeastern China and ended at 12:00 on September 3. PAGASA identified the typhoon as Obet. (data.jma.go.jp)

Narra (2619)

Narra remained near the Gulf of Tonkin and Hainan during its named stage, from 00:00 on August 22 to 06:00 on August 26. Its initially slow, irregular movement gave way to a southward excursion and then a northeastward turn. JMA recorded 20 m/s and 990 hPa before its downgrade to a depression. (data.jma.go.jp)

Gaenari (2620)

Gaenari became a tropical storm at 03:00 on August 22 northeast of Taiwan. It moved generally west-southwestward toward the Taiwan Strait and southeastern China, maintaining a maximum of 18 m/s; its lowest pressure was 996 hPa. JMA downgraded it at 18:00 on August 24. (data.jma.go.jp)

Atsani (2621)

Atsani’s named stage lasted exactly 24 hours, from 00:00 on August 24 to 00:00 on August 25. Moving mainly northward near 138°E, it remained a minimal tropical storm at 18 m/s and 998 hPa before weakening to a depression. (data.jma.go.jp)

Etau (2622)

Etau attained tropical-storm strength at 06:00 on August 27 near 168.3°E. It moved predominantly northward, then turned eastward as it weakened. Its maximum wind was 20 m/s and minimum pressure 994 hPa; JMA ended the named stage at 18:00 on August 30. (data.jma.go.jp)

Bang-lang (2623)

Bang-lang became a tropical storm at 03:00 on August 28 near 18.4°N, 165.1°E. Moving northeastward initially, it briefly reached typhoon strength, with 35 m/s and 980 hPa on August 29, before turning north-northwestward. Extratropical transition occurred at 00:00 on August 31 near 37°N, 166°E. (data.jma.go.jp)

Krovanh (Pilandok; 2624)

PAGASA recorded Pilandok within its responsibility area from August 30 to September 3. JMA’s tropical-storm record began at 00:00 on September 1 and showed a peak of 23 m/s and 985 hPa on September 3. Krovanh moved northwestward toward the Ryukyus, then followed a looping southward and eastward track before becoming a depression at 00:00 on September 7. (origin.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Dujuan (2625)

Dujuan became a tropical storm at 12:00 on September 16 east of the Mariana Islands. After moving northward and then west-northwestward, it recurved south of Japan and strengthened to 40 m/s and 960 hPa on September 21. It subsequently accelerated northeastward offshore, becoming extratropical at 12:00 on September 22 near 40°N, 154°E. (data.jma.go.jp)

Surigae (Queenie; 2626)

Surigae attained tropical-storm strength at 12:00 on September 23 and crossed PAGASA’s responsibility area as Queenie on September 24–27. It moved west-northwestward before recurving northeastward, reaching 50 m/s and 945 hPa on September 27–28. Thereafter it weakened south of Japan and became extratropical at 18:00 on October 1 near 38°N, 149°E. (bagong.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Choi-wan (2627)

Choi-wan’s named stage began at 18:00 on September 30 east of the Marianas. It initially moved westward, turned northward, and reached 50 m/s and 925 hPa on October 4–5. After recurving northeastward, it accelerated into higher latitudes and became extratropical at 12:00 on October 7 near 46°N, 162°E; that transition was an observed endpoint before the October 15 cutoff, not a forecast. (data.jma.go.jp)

Observed wind, rainfall, and coastal hazards

PAGASA’s preliminary surface-observation summaries documented substantial rainfall contrasts during Nokaen (Ada) and Penha (Basyang), but their figures represent selected stations in the Philippines, not basin-wide records. The agency defined “storm-duration rainfall” as accumulation over meteorological days when a $5^\circ$-radius buffer around the cyclone’s best track encompassed any Philippine land. This geographical selection identifies cyclone-associated rainfall periods; it does not establish that every millimetre resulted exclusively from the cyclone. The observing network included synoptic, agricultural meteorological, and selected hydrological stations. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

For Nokaen, Virac, Catanduanes, recorded 413.9 mm during January 14–19, 2026, including a highest 24-hour amount of 219.3 mm, dated January 17 in PAGASA’s table. Storm-duration totals were lower at the University of Eastern Philippines agrometeorological station in Catarman, Northern Samar, with 257.0 mm; Catarman’s separate synoptic station measured 242.6 mm. Borongan, Eastern Samar, received 217.9 mm, and Catbalogan, Samar, 204.8 mm. These separate station identities matter: the two Catarman totals are independent observations, not alternative estimates of the same gauge reading. The January 14–19 accumulation window also differs from the cyclone’s complete lifetime. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

During Penha, the Pugaan Bridge automatic rain gauge in Iligan City accumulated 419.0 mm over February 4–6. The Doroteo D. Lloren gauge recorded 405.0 mm over that interval, including 383.0 mm in the 24-hour period dated February 5, 2026, in the preliminary report. Corresponding daily amounts were 361.0 mm at Pugaan Bridge, 354.5 mm at Hindang, and 280.5 mm at Banggolo in Marawi. The 383.0 mm daily observation therefore cannot be compared directly with Virac’s 413.9 mm multiday total. EcoWEB’s field situation report, dated February 11, documented river overflow, flash flooding, and landslides in Iligan following the February 5 rainfall; these were observed hazards rather than the potential impacts listed in advance warnings. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The station wind and pressure observations were likewise distinct from estimated cyclone-centre intensity. During Nokaen, Catarman recorded a northerly peak gust of 21.4 m/s at 18:20 UTC on January 16, and its synoptic station measured a minimum mean sea-level pressure of 997.9 hPa at 18:00 UTC. During Penha, Panglao, Bohol, registered a westerly peak gust of 19 m/s at 06:15 UTC on February 6, followed by a minimum pressure of 1002.1 hPa at 08:00 UTC. These wind figures were reported as peak gusts, not sustained-wind averages. PAGASA restricted its pressure and gust tables to places under tropical cyclone wind signals, explicitly allowing that more extreme readings could have occurred outside that coverage. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Rainfall attribution also depended on the accompanying weather systems. On February 4, the Department of Agriculture’s reproduction of PAGASA guidance attributed rain across eastern Visayas and much of Mindanao to Basyang’s trough, while identifying the northeast monsoon as the cause of rain over parts of Luzon. DSWD subsequently grouped the February emergency under the combined effects of Basyang and a shear line, and grouped later events under the enhanced southwest monsoon and several cyclones. Such combined-event reporting does not support assigning all resulting flooding to a single storm or treating distance from its centre as a measure of rainfall exposure. (rfo12.da.gov.ph)

Coastal guidance requires the same separation between forecasts and measurements. At 08:00 Philippine time on February 6, PAGASA forecast storm-surge heights reaching up to 2.0 m within 48 hours along specified low-lying or exposed coasts, including Bohol, Cebu, and parts of northern Mindanao. That figure was a warning threshold, not a surveyed inundation depth or tide-gauge observation. The bulletin separately identified northeast-monsoon gusts over a much wider area than Basyang’s immediate circulation, distinguishing the cyclone’s local wind threat from concurrent monsoon exposure. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Regional impacts and economic losses

In the Philippines, Nokaen (Ada) affected communities in CALABARZON, Bicol, Eastern Visayas, the Negros Island Region and Caraga. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), in its February 19 report, recorded 283,901 affected families comprising 999,618 people. These were cumulative affected-population figures, rather than numbers remaining displaced on that date. Maritime disruption preceded the completion of damage assessments: the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) reported approximately 8,800 passengers stranded at ports on January 17. (dromic.dswd.gov.ph)

Penha (Basyang) and the accompanying shear line produced extensive housing damage across the Visayas and Mindanao. Reporting systems retained different operational totals: the NDRRMC’s February 10 update recorded 1,373 damaged houses, including 170 destroyed, whereas DSWD’s report at 06:00 that day recorded 2,938 damaged houses, including 512 destroyed. These figures are separate agency assessments, not additive categories. Likewise, the NDRRMC distinguished seven confirmed deaths from 12 reported deaths; the other five had not yet been confirmed in that update. (pna.gov.ph)

The table preserves each source’s geographical coverage and reporting date; a dash denotes an unspecified figure, not zero. The Basyang figures cover the combined storm and shear-line emergency, while the July Philippine figures concern monsoon rainfall intensified by Bavi. They therefore do not represent damage or casualties attributable exclusively to cyclone-centre passage. (pna.gov.ph)

Within Surigao del Sur, Basyang disrupted both housing and road access. A Philippine Information Agency report dated February 10 placed initial infrastructure damage at approximately PHP801.4 million, crop losses above PHP575 million and housing losses at PHP1.83 million. The Surigao–Davao Coastal Road at Barangay Nurcia, Lanuza, remained impassable on February 9 following a major landslide; one lane of the Lanuza–Cortes section reopened to light vehicles the following morning. A subsequent provincial report placed damage above PHP1.5 billion and recorded 161 houses destroyed and 722 partially damaged. These were successive assessments of the same provincial emergency, not independent losses to be summed. Separately, the Department of Agriculture’s March 13 assessment reported PHP48.3 million in agricultural-production damage and more than PHP2 million in agricultural-infrastructure damage from Basyang and the shear line in the province. Those differently dated and scoped agricultural estimates are not added to the provincial totals. All amounts remain in Philippine pesos without currency conversion; they are damage assessments, not insured-loss estimates or comprehensive measures of business interruption. (pia.gov.ph)

In China, Bavi’s July impacts included more than 1,300 toppled trees in Yueqing, Zhejiang, according to state broadcaster CCTV. In Taiwan, some of the reported injuries occurred on slippery roads or while people rode motorcycles or bicycles in strong winds. In Japan, more than 200 flights were cancelled across Okinawa during the same event. Further transport disruption accompanied Dolphin on August 9: Shanghai’s Hongqiao and Pudong airports cancelled more than 1,300 flights, approximately 60% of their expected daily services, while Zhejiang suspended ferries and cruises. These service interruptions are documented operational impacts, not monetary estimates of broader economic loss. (apnews.com)

Forecasting, warnings, and emergency response

Regional forecast guidance and national public warnings served distinct functions during 2026. The Japan Meteorological Agency’s Regional Specialized Meteorological Center in Tokyo supplied analyzed positions, movement and intensity estimates, and forecasts extending to 120 hours to assist national meteorological services. Its regional products were not substitutes for warnings issued by the countries concerned. Advisories distinguished the analyzed cyclone center from subsequent forecast positions; their probability circles represented a 70% probability of the center falling within the circle at each specified forecast time, rather than the geographical extent of hazardous weather. (jma.go.jp)

In the Philippines, PAGASA’s operational framework combined satellite remote sensing, radar imagery, surface and upper-air observations, and numerical weather prediction guidance. Its forecasting section analyzed station, aircraft and ship reports alongside satellite and radar data, while model products supported forecasts of future atmospheric conditions. A dated operational example was the Department of Agriculture’s February 4 morning briefing for Basyang, which reproduced PAGASA information with Himawari-9 satellite imagery and an analyzed center approximately 895 km east of northeastern Mindanao. The accompanying warnings identified possible flash floods and landslides, rather than treating the offshore center position as a boundary of danger. On February 6, Oriental Mindoro’s provincial government relayed PAGASA’s rainfall outlook for Basyang and the shear line, distinguishing that outlook from more immediate, area-specific rainfall warnings supported by Doppler radar. (pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The Basyang response illustrates the progression from meteorological warning to administrative readiness. On February 4, while Surigao del Sur was under Tropical Cyclone Wind Signal No. 1, Governor Johnny Pimentel issued Memorandum Order No. 26-003 placing the provincial emergency operations center on red alert and requiring round-the-clock readiness. The province moved to Signal No. 2 on February 5. These signals concerned anticipated wind conditions: PAGASA defined Signal No. 1 as a threat of 39–61 km/h winds within 36 hours and Signal No. 2 as 62–88 km/h winds within 24 hours. They were separate from rainfall, basin flood and coastal-inundation warnings. PAGASA’s February 5 storm-surge warning separately forecast heights of 1–2 m for listed low-lying coastal communities, including locations in Agusan del Norte; these were predicted hazards, not measured water levels. (pia.gov.ph)

Shelter preparation proceeded alongside warning dissemination. DSWD’s situation report recorded February 5 coordination in CALABARZON to prepare evacuation centers with privacy measures, gender-sensitive spaces, and functioning water, sanitation and hygiene facilities. By 6 p.m. Philippine time on February 6, the same report listed 94,406 people staying in 574 evacuation centers and another 16,807 staying with relatives or friends. These figures described reported shelter occupancy at that reporting time, not the number evacuated before landfall. The report also preserved PAGASA’s explicit warning that heavy rainfall and severe winds could occur outside both the forecast confidence cone and the landfall locality. (dromic.dswd.gov.ph)

Relief operations included support for travelers stranded at ports and temporary shelters. In a February 10 account, DSWD’s Central Visayas office reported distributing 571 ready-to-eat food boxes at Cebu City’s Pier 1 and the ports of Polambato, Carmen, Maya and Hagnaya, with additional distribution documented at Tinago Gym in Cebu City. Separately, its February 6 situation report recorded preparations with Batangas and Lucena port authorities to position food for possible maritime travel disruptions. These records document preparedness and assistance, rather than quantitative verification of track accuracy, warning lead-time performance or evacuation effectiveness. (fo7.dswd.gov.ph)

Storm names, identifiers, and classification

The Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) assigns international names when a tropical cyclone reaches tropical-storm intensity, using the ESCAP/WMO Typhoon Committee’s 140-name list. This naming system, introduced in 2000, proceeds continuously through the list rather than restarting each January. By contrast, JMA’s numerical sequence restarts annually: 2601 identifies the first tropical storm of 2026, not necessarily the first tropical depression. A system that weakens below tropical-storm intensity and subsequently redevelops retains its number. Cyclones already named in another basin retain that name when entering the western North Pacific. (jma.go.jp)

Through the October 15 reporting cutoff, the assigned international names, in sequence, were Nokaen, Penha, Nuri, Sinlaku, Hagupit, Jangmi, Mekkhala, Higos, Bavi, Maysak, Haishen, Noul, Dolphin, Kujira, Chan-hom, Peilou, Nangka, Saudel, Narra, Gaenari, Atsani, Etau, Bang-Lang, Krovanh, Dujuan, Surigae, and Choi-wan, corresponding to JMA identifiers 2601–2627. These are assigned names, rather than a reproduction of unused entries in the international list. Nokaen, contributed by Lao PDR, means “swallow”; Penha is a place-name contributed by Macao, China. JMA’s record identifies Choi-wan as 2627, with tropical-storm formation on October 1. (jma.go.jp)

PAGASA independently names cyclones forming within or entering the Philippine Area of Responsibility, including tropical depressions that never receive international names. Its 2026 regular roster was Set II: Ada, Basyang, Caloy, Domeng, Ester, Francisco, Gardo, Henry, Inday, Josie, Kiyapo, Luis, Maymay, Neneng, Obet, Pilandok, Queenie, Rosal, Samuel, Tomas, Umberto, Venus, Waldo, Yayang, and Zeny. The corresponding auxiliary roster—Agila, Bagwis, Chito, Diego, Elena, Felino, Gunding, Harriet, Indang, and Jessa—would begin with the twenty-sixth locally named cyclone, not the twenty-sixth basin-wide storm. The four regular sets rotate every four years, subject to replacements. Ada, Francisco, Kiyapo, and Pilandok replaced names retired after the 2022 season; these changes were not retirement decisions concerning 2026 storms. (pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The following confirmed cross-references illustrate the independent international and Philippine sequences. A Philippine name does not indicate that a separate cyclone formed when an internationally named system entered PAGASA’s area. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The name pairings are documented in PAGASA’s cyclone reports and rainfall-track archive; the numerical identifiers follow JMA’s 2026 cyclone sequence. Luis and Neneng, separately documented by PAGASA as tropical depressions in August, illustrate why the Philippine roster cannot be aligned one-for-one with JMA’s named-storm numbering. (pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Agency-specific intensity classifications also differ. JMA uses maximum sustained 10-minute winds: tropical depression below 34 knots, tropical storm 34–47 knots, severe tropical storm 48–63 knots, and typhoon at least 64 knots. PAGASA also uses 10-minute winds, but divides the upper range into typhoon at 64–99 knots and super typhoon from 100 knots, approximately 185 km/h. The Joint Typhoon Warning Center uses one-minute sustained winds and a super-typhoon threshold of 130 knots. Consequently, identical category labels do not necessarily represent equivalent winds; numerical comparisons must preserve the issuing agency and averaging period rather than treating a unit conversion as an averaging-period conversion. (jma.go.jp)

International retirement requires a Typhoon Committee decision: members may request removal, particularly following extensive destruction, preferably within one year, and the Committee reviews requests at its annual sessions. Replacement names are subsequently supplied and approved through the Committee’s process. PAGASA’s domestic procedure is separate: a name qualifies for decommissioning when official Office of Civil Defense reports attribute at least 300 deaths or PHP 1 billion in damage to the cyclone. International and Philippine names therefore require separate decisions; reaching a damage threshold alone does not constitute an announced international retirement. Retirement and replacement entries for the season’s storms remain pending in this cutoff record. (typhooncommittee.org)

References

1. Operations at the RSMC Tokyo - Typhoon Center in 2016jma.go.jp
2. ATCF Tropical Cyclone Databaseftp.nhc.noaa.gov
3. NHC Data Archivenhc.noaa.gov
4. Hurricane FAQ - NOAA/AOMLaoml.noaa.gov
5. 台風についてjma.go.jp
6. 気圧配置 台風に関する用語jma.go.jp
7. Japan Meteorological Agency: International Cooperationjma.go.jp
8. Tropical cyclone forecastingwmo.int
9. The Joint Typhoon Warning Center Tropical Cyclone Best-Tracks, 1945–2000metoc.navy.mil
10. 台風情報の種類と表現方法jma.go.jp
11. 台風経路図 令和8年（2026年）data.jma.go.jp
12. 2025年（令和7年）の台風のまとめ（速報）jma.go.jp
13. Seasonal Climate Outlook January–June 2026: simplified bulletinpubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
14. Seasonal Climate Outlook January–June 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
15. Monthly Climate Assessment and Outlook: El Niño Watch, April 8, 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
16. Extended Range Forecast for Northwest Pacific Typhoon Activity in 2026tropicalstormrisk.com
17. July Forecast Update for NW Pacific Typhoon Activity in 2026tropicalstormrisk.com
18. August Forecast Update for NW Pacific Typhoon Activity in 2026tropicalstormrisk.com
19. 2026 Typhoon Season Outlook—Northwest Pacific, South China Sea & North Indian Oceansea.weathernews.com
20. Mid-Season Update: 2026 Typhoon Season Outlook—Northwest Pacific, South China Sea & North Indian Oceansea.weathernews.com
21. Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Reportbagong.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
22. ENSO Diagnostic Discussion, 12 February 2026cpc.ncep.noaa.gov
23. ENSO Diagnostic Discussion, 9 April 2026cpc.ncep.noaa.gov
24. ENSO Diagnostic Discussion, 11 June 2026cpc.ncep.noaa.gov
25. ENSO Diagnostic Discussion, 8 October 2026cpc.ncep.noaa.gov
26. Climate Bulletin — SEA Climate Monitoring Project, September 2026seacm.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
27. El Niño Outlook, October 2026–April 2027data.jma.go.jp
28. El Niño Monitoring and Outlook — September 2026 monitoring productsdata.jma.go.jp
29. Termination of the Southwest Monsoon, 5 October 2026pagasa.dost.gov.ph
30. Global Tropical Hazards Outlook, 13 October 2026cpc.ncep.noaa.gov
31. RSMC Best Track Data: 2026jma.go.jp
32. Format of RSMC Best Track Datajma.go.jp
33. 気象庁｜台風の発生数[協定世界時基準data.jma.go.jp
34. 気象庁｜台風の平年値data.jma.go.jp
35. Q2 2026 Pacific Region Climate Impacts & Outlooks Reportdrought.gov
36. Journal of Climate research paper, Klotzbach and Oliver (2015)tropical.atmos.colostate.edu
37. PAGASA Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Tropical Storm Ada, Revision 2pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
38. Overview of Tropical Cyclone in January 2026hko.gov.hk
39. Overview of Tropical Cyclone in February 2026hko.gov.hk
40. National Weather Service Guam: Post Tropical Cyclone Reportsweather.gov
41. PAGASA Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Caloy, Revision 2pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
42. Overview of Tropical Cyclone in May 2026my.weather.gov.hk
43. JMA Surface Analysis, May 8, 2026, 00:00 UTCdata.jma.go.jp
44. PAGASA Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Domeng, Revision 1pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
45. PAGASA Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Ester, Revision 2pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
46. PAGASA Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Franciscopubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
47. Notes on RSMC Tropical Cyclone Informationjma.go.jp
48. JMA tropical cyclone position tables, 2026data.jma.go.jp
49. PAGASA Preliminary Report: Super Typhoon Inday (Bavi), 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
50. JMA preliminary position table: Bavi (2609)data.jma.go.jp
51. PAGASA Preliminary Report: Severe Tropical Storm Henry (Maysak), 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
52. JMA preliminary position table: Maysak (2610)data.jma.go.jp
53. PAGASA Preliminary Report: Josie, 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
54. JMA preliminary position table: Haishen (2611)data.jma.go.jp
55. PAGASA Preliminary Report: Typhoon Kiyapo (Noul), 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
56. JMA preliminary position table: Noul (2612)data.jma.go.jp
57. JMA preliminary position table: Dolphin (2613)data.jma.go.jp
58. PAGASA Preliminary Report: Tropical Depression Luis, 2026pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
59. PAGASA_Prelim_2026_ADApubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
60. PAGASA_Prelim_2026_ADA, Revision 1pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
61. PAGASA preliminary report on Basyangpubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
62. Iligan City Under Water: A Community-Led Situationer on Tropical Storm Penha (Basyang)ecowebph.org
63. DOST-PAGASA Daily Weather Forecast, February 4, 2026rfo12.da.gov.ph
64. Japan Meteorological Agency | RSMC Tokyo - Typhoon Centerjma.go.jp
65. PAGASA — About Uspagasa.dost.gov.ph
66. Oriental Mindoro, makararanas ng malalakas na mga pag-ulan dulot ng Shear lineormindoro.gov.ph
67. PAGASA — Weather Symbols and Warning Iconspagasa.dost.gov.ph
68. Storm Surge Warning No. 05 for TC Basyangpubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
69. DSWD 7 extends food assistance to stranded individuals affected by #BasyangPHfo7.dswd.gov.ph
70. 台風の番号とアジア名の付け方jma.go.jp
71. Names of Tropical Cyclonesjma.go.jp
72. 2026年台風第27号 CHOI-WAN (2627)data.jma.go.jp
73. Philippine Tropical Cyclone Namespagasa.dost.gov.ph
74. Annual Report on Philippine Tropical Cyclones 2022pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
75. Index of tropical cyclone rainfall-track graphicspubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
76. Tropical Cyclone Preliminary Report: Caloy (Hagupit)pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph
77. Monthly Philippine Agro-climatic Review and Outlookpagasa.dost.gov.ph
78. Weather Forecasts and Warningsjma.go.jp
79. About Tropical Cyclonesbagong.pagasa.dost.gov.ph