🚀 go-pugleaf

plus their machinery was very poor
"Dave Martindale" <davem@cs.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:a0lb3t$2oo$1@trappist.cs.ubc.ca...
> "Brian Trueman" <batrueman@shaw.ca> writes:
> >It's all part of the plot to discontinue manning of lighthouses so they
can
> >save money.
>
> Actually, if you actually looked into the story, Nav Canada told the
> lighthouses to stop reporting aviation data because it wasn't up to
> aviation weather data standards - instruments weren't calibrated
> regularly, staff wasn't trained to report aviation weather, etc.
>
> When lots of pilots made it clear that the data was useful, even if
> not strictly up to standards, Nav Canada changed their mind.  Now
> they *are* going to continue reporting the lighthouse-supplied data
> in a different format, pilots *will* be able to call lighthouses
> directly to get weather info again.  And Nav Canada will provide
> some additional support that they didn't before, in the form of
> instrument calibration and training.
>
> So, all in all, it looks like pilots gained from this.
>
> What I find interesting is that the original poster was quick to inform
> us about when the service was cancelled, but did nothing at all to
> inform us when it was reinstated a week later.  Can you say "biased"?
>
> And now someone else comes along characterizing this as a plot, without
> apparently being aware that the service has been reinstated.
>
> Dave