In message
Arthur Figgis wrote:

On 24/11/2010 08:21, Graeme wrote:
In
wrote:

On Nov 23, 10:40 pm, Arthur
wrote:
On 23/11/2010 09:04, Chris Tolley wrote:

MIG wrote:

The newsreaders just keep on dumbly reading it out every half hour.
You'd think that the London travel newsroom would have some vague
idea about transport in London.

Would you? Why? Do you think it is a requirement for people who mention
London in the things they read out to be Londoners?

Could be interesting for the shipping forecast...

I'd expect whoever organises the shipping forecast to know something
about shipping and weather,

As far as the broadcast is concerned you don't have to know about either.
It is a set formula that hasn't been changed in 70 years or more.[1] The
hard bit is actually reading it! The organisation is done by the Met
Office. By analogy it is not unreasonable for the BBC to expect whover
supplies the rail information to apply the same dilligence to their
reports.

[1] Apart from adding a couple more sea areas about 30 years ago.


There was Finisterre becoming FitzRoy.

Without googling, who, or what, was Fitzroy?


Don't people who actually need it (rather than just like listening to
it) get it via a kind of on-ship fax gadget these days?


The big ships get it all via satellite, the service is now aimed at smaller
craft, mainly small merchant ships, pleasure craft and fishing boats.


--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/