SACAD

[pumprescue]

AGAIN nothing wrong with system, just the data in it, fix that and it will work.

[safireservice]

AGAIN nothing wrong with system, just the data in it, fix that and it will work.

Getting it fixed is a problem in itself.

[pumprescue]

There is your answer

[mattb]

Our example was a grass fire where we needed one more appliance. We called AF on the phone and asked them to respond one more Heavy Tanker, operator said no you can't have one, you have to have a full second alarm (two trucks + BWC). We said no - we don't need all that just one truck.

After some discussion the operator still wouldn't send one truck, so we spoke with the Comm's Officer, who said he would help us out and just turn out one truck this time, but he had to call it a 'specialist resource' to do it.

Not exactly a speedy and efficient system if you want one extra vehicle.

In future we will just push the button on our Alpha decoder to turn ou the next appliance - at least we know we can get the page sent immediately without having to jump through hoops.

I heard an MFS officer have a similar argument on 150 one night. He asked for one truck and got told no, you will get a second alarm. The argument went on for a bit until he said ok - you send the second alarm, now put a stop on all the other trucks and just keep one appliance coming.

[pumprescue]

They are only doing what they are taught, might be nice if CFS management weren't such a bunch of clowns and made up rules as they went but not pass them on.

[6739264]

How hard is all of this?

Can the CFS grow up and become a real fire service? Lets hope so. Lets use the Alarm Response SOP like we are meant to. If you don't need the resources then just put a stop on them. If you need a specific specialist resource, just call for it. It's not hard.

If people are open and embrace the new system, rather than just trying to smash the old square peg in the new round hole, we might actually move forward. Anyone remember all the crying and sob stories about the wrong trucks being responded to calls in a certain brigades area and people wanting SACAD to fix the issue? Now SACAD IS fixing the issue and consequently it's opened up a number of large glaring holes in people's perfect little empires and people don't like it.

Grow up, and get with the times.

1) If you have a grievance, as has been said before, LODGE THE FORMS. Of course there will be teething problems.

2) If you're trying to do something the "good old way" and it's not working - LEARN how to operate under the new system before you whinge about it. If it's still not working as intended, see point 1.

3) Yes, CFS shot themselves in the foot and are continuing to shoot themselves in the feet and legs by feeding everybody different information. Once the hierarchy sort that mess out, and people put in their grievance forms, we might actually see SACAD working as intended.

4) It's not hard.

Totally agree with Big Al. Has there ever been the thought of trialing the CFA "Make" system???

Have you thought about working for SACFS HQ? Yep, lets trial an outdated system that is inferior in every way to the Greater Alarm Response Procedure - Sounds like you're perfect HQ material

[flyonthewall]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well said Mr No's.

[Bagyassfirey]

I get the feeling these problems are mostly effecting region 1 and part region 2 as the brigades are soooo close. Doesn't seem to be a problem as the distances to respond get greater as the second alarm response is what is required anyway.

[Zippy]

How hard is all of this?

Can the CFS grow up and become a real fire service? Lets hope so. Lets use the Alarm Response SOP like we are meant to. If you don't need the resources then just put a stop on them. If you need a specific specialist resource, just call for it. It's not hard.

If people are open and embrace the new system, rather than just trying to smash the old square peg in the new round hole, we might actually move forward. Anyone remember all the crying and sob stories about the wrong trucks being responded to calls in a certain brigades area and people wanting SACAD to fix the issue? Now SACAD IS fixing the issue and consequently it's opened up a number of large glaring holes in people's perfect little empires and people don't like it.

Grow up, and get with the times.

1) If you have a grievance, as has been said before, LODGE THE FORMS. Of course there will be teething problems.

2) If you're trying to do something the "good old way" and it's not working - LEARN how to operate under the new system before you whinge about it. If it's still not working as intended, see point 1.

3) Yes, CFS shot themselves in the foot and are continuing to shoot themselves in the feet and legs by feeding everybody different information. Once the hierarchy sort that mess out, and people put in their grievance forms, we might actually see SACAD working as intended.

4) It's not hard.

Totally agree with Big Al. Has there ever been the thought of trialing the CFA "Make" system???

Have you thought about working for SACFS HQ? Yep, lets trial an outdated system that is inferior in every way to the Greater Alarm Response Procedure - Sounds like you're perfect HQ material

Haha Mr No.

And no. Would prefer to work for an American fire department and kill myself in a Flash.

You are right, Greater alarm is far more superior, but the business model that unfortunately majority of volunteers have run by is more closer aligned to "Make"...naming specific appliances and/or brigades.  Meanwhile the COSO/SOP handbook is more closer aligned to Greater Alarm.  Right there is two Left hands shaking hands.

Now that we're here, in the now. Looks like some of those groups are doing better. and... "LEARN how to operate under the new system before you whinge about it." is about how perfect a rsponse can be to a whinging volunteer.

There are still some dodgy ones out there nearby...

[Alan (Big Al)]

MFS: *CFSRES INC0094 23/02/12 18:28 RESPOND STRUCTURE SHED, 1 RAILWAY CRES EVANSTON,MAP:ADL 33 F 3,TG 182, ==TYRES ON FIRE BY SHED :DALK34P R  ELZ339 GAW359 :

So it looks like the 19 has finally been dropped.

[Alex]

MFS: *CFSRES INC0094 23/02/12 18:28 RESPOND STRUCTURE SHED, 1 RAILWAY CRES EVANSTON,MAP:ADL 33 F 3,TG 182, ==TYRES ON FIRE BY SHED :DALK34P R  ELZ339 GAW359 :

So it looks like the 19 has finally been dropped.

Thank goodness!
Will erase a lot of confusion for CFS vols and staff, and Adelaide Fire ops.

[Bagyassfirey]

Shame we gotta find this out on here...

[Alan (Big Al)]

Shame we gotta find this out on here...

Honestly its not that big of a deal and pretty easy when your pgaer goes off to go oh look they changed it oh well

[safireservice]

Known of this change for a couple of weeks. Info should have been distributed about 2 weeks ago?

[Darcyq]

So, is it only the "19" that has been changed to "R" or are there changes that havn't filtered down to the 'worker-bee' level?

[COBB]

In the 'Members Only' area on the CFS website there is a SACAD section with references to the issues and current status.
Attached is February's update

[pumprescue]

All the MFS style appliance types have been changed to reflect what is written on the side of the trucks. The request has come down from AF and up from the vols.

[safireservice]

So, is it only the "19" that has been changed to "R" or are there changes that havn't filtered down to the 'worker-bee' level?

28 has been replaced with H, ie ATHL 24P H
42 with BWC

[uniden]

 MFS: *CFSRES INC0123 24/02/12 19:04 RESPOND HAZMAT, : ORLANDO WINES 1916 BAROSSA VALLEY WAY
 ROWLAND FLAT,MAP:C/179C 54,TG 096, == FORKLIFT HAS PENETRATED BUILDING, ACETYLENE GAS LEAKING
 == NURI WINDS ENE 17-24KPH :DALK HAZ :
 CFS Dalkeith response

SACAD has done bugger all to improve responses. No Tanunda MFS to this job and they are just up the road.

[Alan (Big Al)]

maybe it doesnt pull them because they havent got a "9" truck??

[Timbo]

Shame we gotta find this out on here...

We were told 2 Group Meetings ago, so your GO's and Captains would have known.

But it wont impede our business, just improve it, so I don't see that it is necessary to pass it on to all FF's.

[6739264]

Shame we gotta find this out on here...

We were told 2 Group Meetings ago, so your GO's and Captains would have known.

But it wont impede our business, just improve it, so I don't see that it is necessary to pass it on to all FF's.

So the naming conventions for appliance types has changed and you don't see it as necessary to pass it on to the people who are riding the trucks and using the radios?

[chook]

Hi all - long time. Interested to read that after all of the BS of changing call signs to 9's (to fit in with the paid fire & rescue service) it doesn't really matter? Well there you go As a side note I met with the local NSW Fire & Rescue units (Penrith & Regentville) as part of work - all rather youngish & nice people (guys & girls). I did notice on their pumpers that they are all rescue? - except the skyjet thingy! And that afternoon there they were at a major loading dock fire (not ours thank goodness).
Oh well take care & bye 4 now

[safireservice]

MFS: *CFSRES INC0095 25/02/12 17:50 RESPOND GRASS FIRE, WOMMA RD/HEASLIP RD PENFIELD,MAP:ADL 40 L15,TG 102, :AIRDESK ELZ331 ELZ339 SAL321 VIRG24 VIRG34P R : - MFS Salisbury SAL321
Yep, lets just deplete 2 MFS areas for less than a square metre! Go SACAD.

[pumprescue]

Total fire ban day, would happen under any system, every fire starts small.