SACAD

[Skippy]

Thanks Pip, safireservice and fire000, much appreciated.

 

[Zippy]

**SACAD TEST**MFS: *CFSRES INC0098 23/01/12 08:48 RESPOND OPEN DOORS ALARM LEVEL 1 : STATION 4 0 MAP:C/583 54,TG 068, : : *****SACAD TEST ONLY*****

Seems like they are making some progress with the ability to open doors, and the Alarm Level function.

However they still can't get it right, 1ST ALARM

[Darius]

Im sure there will always be those who disagree with the system and have a whinge about losing control, ie no more ALERTS calls, no more 'just going for a look' as every dispatch will be as per SOP, no more choosing who comes to back you up [unless its a specialist resource] etc...

But, it will be much better than the system we currently have. Finally CFS will have response data in the CAD.

no doubt it will be a much better system. I think you're being a bit idealistic (hope you're right but somehow I doubt it) but again we will see...

it's been over 2 months now since SACAD went live, has it delivered as promised?

from the AF comms point of view have ALERTS calls changed?

personally I don't see initial responses that much different than before (ignoring teething problems and things like the dopey crap in pager messages that needs to be fixed, eg. remove all that Alarm level stuff and just show the latest). But something it hasn't fixed is enforcing the "closest most appropriate" thing, I still see some groups continue to respond their entire group (listing brigades by name) before any closer neighbours.

[FlameTrees]

Im sure there will always be those who disagree with the system and have a whinge about losing control, ie no more ALERTS calls, no more 'just going for a look' as every dispatch will be as per SOP, no more choosing who comes to back you up [unless its a specialist resource] etc...

But, it will be much better than the system we currently have. Finally CFS will have response data in the CAD.

no doubt it will be a much better system. I think you're being a bit idealistic (hope you're right but somehow I doubt it) but again we will see...

it's been over 2 months now since SACAD went live, has it delivered as promised?

from the AF comms point of view have ALERTS calls changed?

personally I don't see initial responses that much different than before (ignoring teething problems and things like the dopey crap in pager messages that needs to be fixed, eg. remove all that Alarm level stuff and just show the latest). But something it hasn't fixed is enforcing the "closest most appropriate" thing, I still see some groups continue to respond their entire group (listing brigades by name) before any closer neighbours.

BUT...is that a SACAD issue, or groups not playing by the rules and doing their own thing?? I think more the latter than a SACAD issue.

[Zippy]

Definately is a culture thing, and needs to be dismantled by staff.

Starting with GOMPS, they should be removed, and replaced with Beat/ERZ Response plans (Containing data from sacad that is appropriate resource based + extra stuff that is normally seen in todays GOMPS)....Why you say? Group response boundaries are null and void now. Group officers are now pretty much assisting other groups officers when jobs get big (aside from imt/strike teams)...   Groups exist for administrative purposes only.

GCC's are about the only meaningful representative physical component of a group.  If a job lands in any of the associated beats, and it escalates..bam the job is run from the GCC.

[pumprescue]

CAD program works fine, data in it is slightly dodgy, and you will never get rid of the keep it in the group mentality. One big thing it is exposing is how poorly staffed the CFS is with volunteers. So many defaults, I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years we start to see trucks being taken off brigades, or large appliances replaced with 14's or QRV's. No point having all these trucks if we can't crew them.

[misterteddy]

CAD program works fine, data in it is slightly dodgy, and you will never get rid of the keep it in the group mentality. One big thing it is exposing is how poorly staffed the CFS is with volunteers. So many defaults, I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years we start to see trucks being taken off brigades, or large appliances replaced with 14's or QRV's. No point having all these trucks if we can't crew them.

actually, trucks are allocated on the basis of risk vs assets (not perfectly, but its not too bad on average) - NOT on the number of people you have sitting in the station

You can always backfill with people if you have some spare seats. I'd much rather have 3 people in my truck and be used appropriately until we get a 4th, than perpetually sit 3 abreast in my next to useless QAV, waiting for a real appliance to turn up

[pumprescue]

I am aware of why and how trucks are allocated, but what about if you only ever get 3 full stop, why do you need the second truck, oh look we have risk, we have trucks, but no one to man them and haven't for years!!! Yeah good way to run the service....

I have solid written facts that show that despite recruitment campaigns etc that several brigades still aren't getting more than 1 truck out the door with 2 or 3 people. A volunteer of the highest rank told me recently that he knows that but that the trucks in his group that collect dust all year are there for the big one and he can get crews from the city within 30 mins. Well that's ok then isn't it...we argue about lack of funding but waste the money we have....

[Zippy]

02-02-12 14:42:03    Mundoo Info: As directed by the R1 Commander we are NOT to use K-Codes under any circumstances. Please use correct GRN communication proceedures. Mundoo Group. - CFS Mundoo Group Info

Still waiting for a valid reason (except "its procedure") as to why using codes is a bad idea. They are very easy to learn, and use very intermittently.

Seems like region are promoting lengthy voice transmission.

I know the default answer is, when they retire, but when can we just become one service with MFS...

[misterteddy]

02-02-12 14:42:03    Mundoo Info: As directed by the R1 Commander we are NOT to use K-Codes under any circumstances. Please use correct GRN communication proceedures. Mundoo Group. - CFS Mundoo Group Info

Still waiting for a valid reason (except "its procedure") as to why using codes is a bad idea. They are very easy to learn, and use very intermittently.

Seems like region are promoting lengthy voice transmission.

I know the default answer is, when they retire, but when can we just become one service with MFS...

because we cant get plain language right most of the time....god knows what it would look like if we asked some people to use codes.

Honestly, the K codes are crap anyway and an anachronism of the 50s/60s. If you think MFS comms procedures saves time, you arent listening to the lengthy alarm messages I do.

Want a solution.....3 simple letters (and a word)..... (Quality) MDT - not the version the MFS have that most taxi companies rejected. Save building 1 MFS and 2 CFS trucks each year for the next 5 and spend the $$ on quality comms outfits and be done with it.

negat K.....ok?

[Alan (Big Al)]

Personally i think region must be getting pretty bored up there to be whining about appliances using K-Codes and calling their appliances 19 or pump19.  Case in point one brigade the other day calling their appliance 24P instead of 19. Adelaide Fire than having to spend the next minute clarifying if that appliance was actually a 19 or 24P.  Why not just leave it be until its fixed in CAD then directed to all brigades by STATE as to what their appliance callsign is.   

[pumprescue]

Because region don't worry about important things as they have knowledge on those issues.

[misterteddy]

i think you may find that Regions are getting it dropped down on them to enforce this stuff....and as we know, the brown smelly stuff rolls downhill. I doubt its a personal crusade of any one particular Regional Commander.

It may be one of the straws that is weighing down the camel, that I have referred to in another post

[pumprescue]

So how come no other region is bothering with it?

[Bagyassfirey]

Cos there busy puttin the wet stuff on the hot stuff.

[misterteddy]

So how come no other region is bothering with it?

are you sure they are not?....or are they just doing it a different way?

[pumprescue]

CFS micro managing the small issues and ignoring the big issues since 1976...,

[Mike]

MT has it in one.... CAD was always going to be a pain without MDT's.


As for K codes, at least the CFS is giving clear direction. SES has been told they can use either (for RCR response), creating a giant mush of differing process across the state.


I believe there has been a lot of discussion at by the group officers about some of the issues CAD has created. Including appliance callsigns and response data.
It sounds like a few changes/trials may be happening soon to to help impove things. The one's im aware of are:
- resource depletion exemptions (allowing 2 trucks from one station to be responded)
- Callsigns shall be as marked on the vehicles. A '_R' or '_H' (or something like that) might be added to define the required function.

There are others apparently but we have not been made aware of them.

[pumprescue]

They need to add more beats, we went from 12 to 5, if they won't go to street network than that might help a lot, I don't agree about removing no depletion, should have left it and those that can get 2 trucks out can get it removed. Then again it will just highlight the issue more and cause a lot of defaulting, CFS might actually take note when AF advise them if all the trucks out of service through lack if crew.

[Mike]

They need to add more beats, we went from 12 to 5, if they won't go to street network than that might help a lot, I don't agree about removing no depletion, should have left it and those that can get 2 trucks out can get it removed. Then again it will just highlight the issue more and cause a lot of defaulting, CFS might actually take note when AF advise them if all the trucks out of service through lack if crew.

more clarity..... you've reminded me of a few things that were said!

- a trial of street network (I think it will be in the test database for comparison)
- No depletion will be set by default, request for exemptions will be allowed.

[Bagyassfirey]

Sooo how many Brigades are responding a different appliance to a job than the one on the page from A fire??

I just witnessed a brigade have their 24 responded and rolled out the door in the 34P 

[vsteve01]

Sooo how many Brigades are responding a different appliance to a job than the one on the page from A fire??

I just witnessed a brigade have their 24 responded and rolled out the door in the 34P 

We had adelaide fire tell our 14 to stand down even after it was requested through AF by the captain

[Alan (Big Al)]

You can respond any appliance out of your brigade that the OIC deem neccessary to a fire, as i believe CFS went with a call rotation for appliances for jobs, hence one grass fire job may pull our 34 but very next call it will pull our 19 (please someone correct me if i am wrong) so we quite often have responded our 34 to calls that only our 19 have been tagged for.  As for why they did this i have no idea??

[misterteddy]

pretty sure that we will always take the appropriate appliance to a job regardless of what some tosspot computer program says. If the system cant cope with that..... best we start looking for another system

[Alan (Big Al)]

^Like^