Hi Chris
The link is here;
Tidal Prediction Tables My point is that do the weakness of the effect we need a massive body of water. We happen to have natural bodies of water that big (I have one outside my Kent office), AND a handy moon to pass across it in a 13hr cycle (on top of the Suns 24hr cycle, a lower magnitude effect, but the same 'change in position' wrt any point on earth is then due to our rotation). The only problem we then have is that it's all so big and familiar that nobody has NOTICED what it is!! It just needs re-thinking about afresh.
The induced motion is 'UP and DOWN' as well as a flow' 'background effects' are all easy to calculate and allowed for (as far as Mars anyway) in the prediction tables. We just need to record and adjust for relative interface medium vector and density (air pressure) each time. (We call that 'wind' in the trade!).
I keep a set of the prediction tables on my yacht as they're essential for racing. Height is the more direct and useful scalar as the Lagrangian flows are slower where water depth is less due to drag. I can report that the height predictions are very precise.
Do you now see my point? I'm suggesting there's NO fundamental difference in the 'wave' effect from a distant large mass in motion than from nearby small ones!
The tables also account for epigee etc so can be a useful scientific tool.
Very best.
Peter