Talk:Mozambique Channel

International Hydrographic Organization quote from 1953
Why is anyone quoting a publication that is 59 years old (published in 1953) anyway, way before the existence of the independent country of Mozambique? I could also quote anyone who is obviously incorrect, but would that make it factual? Has anyone looked at a map lately? Backspace (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The IHO is the official authority on oceanic limits and hence worth quoting in this sort of article. Their 1953 publication may be 59 years old, but it is still the most recent ratified definition of the limits, and to be fair, the seas and oceans haven't moved much in the last 59 years. (A 2000 version of the Limits document was produced, but it wasn't ratified and has never been published - blame the Australians, but that's another story.) So, whilst not perfect, we are still quoting the official definition. But it's a funny one because it definitely looks wrong. It could just be an error (it certainly wouldn't be the only one in the definitions), but my guess is that by "South Africa" they actually meant "Southern Africa" - they could have been clearer in their wording, but this would make sense. Bazonka (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Width of the Mozambique channel

 * The channel is approximately 460 km (286 mi) across at its narrowest point between Angoche, Mozambique, and Tambohorano, Madagascar.

That's what several websites claim, such as The Encyclopedia of Earth. However, the narrowest point is actually further north, between coordinates 15.0084° East, 40.7708° South (Mozambique) and 16.1979° East, 44.4414° South (Madagascar). The (ellipsoidal) distance between these points is 419.3 km. I'm going to change the article accordingly.

About tools: I trust Google Maps to find the coordinates of points on the earth, but use a proper geodetic calculator to calculate the distance between them. Herbee (talk) 12:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)