Interesting Fire and Emergency Related Paging

[Hazmat206]

I thought a pod truck was '23?. Merry christmas!

[SA Firey]

I thought a pod truck was '23?. Merry christmas!

Nope 23 is the Salvage Pod

[Zippy]

A few numbers were changed eariler this year...i think the Heavy Rescue Pod is 2047 ??

i think 2017 could be the BA Pod...something that i cant remember for once! woo

[SA Firey]

A few numbers were changed eariler this year...i think the Heavy Rescue Pod is 2047 ??

i think 2017 could be the BA Pod...something that i cant remember for once! woo

2017 is the 1st Hook Lift Truck....2016 is the BA Pod Zippy

[Darren]

The Hook trucks are 2017, 2037 and 2047 - the callsign 2016 only comes about when the normal 206 is off the run, the PODS don't change the callsign.

[Hazmat206]

MFS: *CFSRES INC037 28/12/08 16:03,RESPOND COMMERCIAL FIRE,CHURCHILL RD,KILBURN MAP 93 P 10 TG182,2ND ALARM. 361 SO WHITE ON SCENE,AD2015 ADL206 AD2091 OAK303 PAD251 WDV243

2091- can someone clarify this, 2090 is first comms. bus, 2092 is second? according to a cfs website....

[Zippy]

it was 2090 at the job....but as for WHICH 2090, who knows.

[Pipster]

The brand new 2090 was there....photos to come soon....

Pip

[SA Firey]

LTHT INFO: SEEING WE DID A LOT OF MAINTENANCE LAST WEEK, WE WILL BE HAVING SOME CHALLENGES FOR TONIGHTS TRAINING, NAMELY GUITAR HERO ON THE WII. DON''T MISS IT! - CAPT CFS Littlehampton Info

[Zippy]

MRPH INFO; OPERATIONAL BULLETIN #21 AND ASSOCIATED SOP's ARE IN YOUR PIGEON HOLE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT YOU READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE SOP's IN PARTICULAR IF YOU ARE THE OIC OF FIRST ARRIVING APPLIANCE. BRG .CPT. - MAWSON BASE CFS Morphett Vale Info

Anyone in the know of what the bulletin relates too?

[Darius]

Anyone in the know of what the bulletin relates too?

efficient use of the GRN radio. Each GRN agency has done one:
http://sacfs.org/publications/CFS_Bulletin_21_2008-Efficient_GRN_Use.pdf
http://sacfs.org/publications/SAAS_Radio_Procedure_Reminder_Dec2008.pdf

[Zippy]

they keep forgetting to say Talkgroups only take up Tower capacity if someone actually PTT's!

Leaving a radio on 124 24/7,  the nearest tower will only broadcast 124's voice traffic when somebody's talking.  Otherwise, your just on the tower control channel like everyone else.

[JC]

We even got the SAAS reminder at work. Even though we only switch the GRN on when we are doing a transport to town. Must be subject of the month.

[Hockey 1]

I think you'll find that the relevant service is billed for time that each GRN radio is turned on. 

[Zippy]

eh...no.  Its a fixed cost contract for providing the service to the services.

[Darius]

I think you'll find that the relevant service is billed for time that each GRN radio is turned on. 

not that chestnut again, that's incorrect, it doesn't work like that.

the nearest tower will only broadcast 124's voice traffic when somebody's talking

Zippy, yes largely correct, if no traffic is on the talkgroup then no site voice frequency (ie. 'resource') is in use, but the radio is still using a 'slot' on the system (for your radio ID) and still taking up some space ('bandwidth' if you like) on the inter-site links, but that is all pretty minimal compared to using a site voice freq.

The biggest problem is people who are at an incident and have a radio on a talkgroup that is not being used as part of that incident, as traffic on that 'non-incident talkgroup' is then taking up local site resources that could be being used for talkgroups to run the incident, therefore increasing the likelihood of network busies for everyone, compromising the running of the incident and in the end, everyone's safety.

[misterteddy]

The biggest problem is people who are at an incident and have a radio on a talkgroup that is not being used as part of that incident, as traffic on that 'non-incident talkgroup' is then taking up local site resources that could be being used for talkgroups to run the incident, therefore increasing the likelihood of network busies for everyone, compromising the running of the incident and in the end, everyone's safety.

yeah yeah yeah.....but we will all do it when something sounds like its going well.....so lets move on, human nature is what it is.....despite the Op Bulletins. If its an issue...go simplex local area only - oh yeah....CFS dont do that do they 

[Mike]

We dont all do it actually... Im sure you like everyone else misterteddy has spat the dummy over network busies, however its that attitude that compounds the problem.

They will (& do) check talkgroup usage at large incidents if network busies are prominent... and i certainly dont want to be on the recieving end of a serve from my GO when he questions us about misuse of talkgroups. If the incident concerns you that much, ring your base and ask.

*end rant*

[jaff]

Rant rating 3/10 .  No filtered swearing, no real pouting  and no foot stomping, much too learn glasshopper!

[Robert-Robert34]

They will (& do) check talkgroup usage at large incidents if network busies are prominent... and i certainly dont want to be on the recieving end of a serve from my GO when he questions us about misuse of talkgroups. If the incident concerns you that much, ring your base and ask.

Or buy something which they call a scanner and monitor an incident on it that way wont get a serve from your GO about misuse of talkgroups 

[Mike]

Rant rating 3/10 .  No filtered swearing, no real pouting  and no foot stomping, much too learn glasshopper!

Online ranting is a skill to be aquired, and i do have to set at least a slightly example Face to face ranting is much more fun!

[misterteddy]

We dont all do it actually... Im sure you like everyone else misterteddy has spat the dummy over network busies, however its that attitude that compounds the problem.

They will (& do) check talkgroup usage at large incidents if network busies are prominent... and i certainly dont want to be on the recieving end of a serve from my GO when he questions us about misuse of talkgroups. If the incident concerns you that much, ring your base and ask.

*end rant*

bah......when ur finished in fantasy land, your welcome to rejoin the real world. OOOOOH.....a serve from my GO, now thats a shake in my boots sort of encounter.

As for spitting the dummy with busies.....nah, why waste effort about what happens with a GRN radio....its an accessory, if it works, great, when it doesnt, life still continues, fires still get extinguished and jobs still run. They didnt work at Mt Osmond, or Onka Goerge, or Mt Bold.....so don't get reliant on them when the big one comes to a location near you. In fact, it would be really nice when the big one does happen, to be able to switch the filtered thing off rather than listen to the endless drivel that ties up hours of talkgroup time. Brevity would be a nice concept for all concerned (MFS, CFS and SES) to understand. Maybe we should go back to VHF line of sight comms....if u cant see the fire, you dont need to know about it - but sadly i dont think our systemic need to control would allow that.

[Zippy]

the mfs seem's to have it way better,  just have the 150 dribble away ignore it, and pay attention to the local simplex 182 for your incident.

Imagine never having to report to your local station or group base ever again. 

Have Group Forward Command posts for higher alarm incidents.

Everyone in Region 1 Listen to 124...give Arrival's, Requests, upgrades, stop messages to Adelaide Fire. 

All other comm's would just be done via the simplex "line of sight radios".

[Pipster]

And imagine, no sitreps, the incident escalates to something waaayy too big, and no-one else knows about it...

Pip

[Zippy]

hmmm, true. But, im with Mister-teddy, Incident Controlling with Less worry about the Radio may or may not be a good thing.

As for MFS,  pretty much the purpose of 2090 is to act as the "Group Base" for Higher Alarm/Risk incidents, and 2090 feed stuff back to adelaide fire nearly every 5-15mins while operational.

Wouldnt mind seeing 2090 operate a rural job some day. Incident controller and Operations officer can sit in comfort heh.