Talk:UKALNS

raphael 18:29, 15 August 2011 (UTC) from E.M. via email): The definition is almost ok for me, but I think the last part about predicted tide takes us down a road of historical data, where as the trend today with underkeel allowance is one of real time data. So I recommend the wording reflect this, and in addition use the term water level, as a number of harbours are not tidal harbours (e.g. Montreal) and in others there is much greater effect of weather conditions on the available water column than tide has (e.g. Hamburg). So in conclusion, I recommend changing the last part of the definition;

From … and variance from predicted height of tide.

To …and variance from height of water level (predicted or real time).

As extra curricular reading if interested, the link below is for the St. Lawrence Seaway specification for a dynamic under keep clearance (allowance) system using more real time data for the calculations. [1]