Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Mike

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 43
26
Country Fire Service / Re: Apollo Gold Pagers.
« on: May 17, 2010, 08:07:57 AM »
If they have failed Bill, then they are not much good as spares anyway.

As for the yellow pagers, send them back as faulty (in our eyes). Perhaps they would be more suited to being carried by the paid staff.

27
Country Fire Service / Re: Apollo Gold Pagers.
« on: May 13, 2010, 01:01:18 PM »
I hear rumor that the pager specification has been looked at again.

New pagers will be black, and a request has been made to up the volume.
It was also suggested that some other specs had been changed, that mean the apollo pagers will no longer be acceptable.

These changes are due to complaints from volunteers :)


Once again, **this info is not confirmed**

28
SA Firefighter General / Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« on: May 13, 2010, 12:45:37 PM »
Quote
There seems to be to much fear from the paid staff to tell the vols to go by the SOP's. Do they not realise that in the end the staff wear the penalties!

Let alone to much fear from the vollies, that their brigade will be seen in a bad light if they do default.....

29
Industrial & Private Fire Services / Mine Rescue Competitions
« on: May 03, 2010, 08:17:38 AM »
Congratulations to all the teams who took part in the Mine Rescue Comp hosted by Angus Zinc over the weekend.

Teams from Olympic Dam, Prominent Hill, Angus Zinc, Stawell, Broken Hill and Fosterville took park in a range of exercises.

Firefighting, BA, Rope Rescue and a theory component was conducted at STC, while Search and Rescue, RCR, Skills and First Aid was conducted around Strathalbyn.

A fantastic effort by everyone, with special mention to Olympic Dam who won overall.


30
SA Firefighter General / Re: Interesting Fire and Emergency Related Paging
« on: April 23, 2010, 08:47:17 AM »
1929425 08:00:17 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMANDEL VALLEY AND EDEN HILLS *CFSRES: CFS Sturt Siren (Coromandel Valley Station)
1929428 08:00:17 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMANDEL VALLEY AND EDEN HILLS *CFSRES: CFS Sturt Siren (Eden Hills Station)
1929430 08:00:17 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMAN CFS Sturt Siren (Waite St Blackwood)
1929415 08:00:15 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMANDEL VALLEY AND EDEN HILLS *CFSRES: CFS Sturt Siren (Blackwood Station)
1929423 08:00:15 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMANDEL VALLEY AND EDEN HILLS *CFSRES: CFS Sturt Siren (Mrytle Rd Hawthorndene)
1800068 08:00:13 23-04-10 *CFSRES: WEEKLY SIREN TEST BELAIR, BLACKWOOD, COROMANDEL VALLEY AND EDEN HILLS *CFSRES: CFS Sturt Siren (Belair)

Do Sturt have a new way of triggering sirens? or is this the normal testing with a new name?

31
Country Fire Service / Re: Apollo Gold Pagers.
« on: April 23, 2010, 08:35:02 AM »
We have recieved a few and the issues above have also been discussed. Apparently the vibrate function is fairly strong (enough to wake you when its on the bedside table).

Our current comms guy thinks that this is going to be the standard, and that replacement of scratched screens in particular will be charged back to brigades.
How reliable this info is cannot be certain......

Unfortunatly those that have them here are unlikely to put in a complaint, as the current leadership seems willing to accept that 'this is what we are all going to end up with'.

Physical size, message storage and pager holder = Not so good
Backlight = Good
Volume = Terrible

I thought a few of these got trialed somewhere?? were they working in a sound proof booth?
The range of colours for these pagers tend to fit nicely with the colours of the different services, although im not into accessorising my pager with my uniform!

32
Country Fire Service / Re: NOT THE TRUCK - watch this space
« on: March 09, 2010, 06:12:14 AM »
To sum up the last few posts, your unlikely to get to much sympathy from the forums without justification. Thats not to say your response is over the top.... but there needs to be some reason included.


The following questions have been put out to help gain a better perspective:

1. What were the reasons given for the relocation of the appliance?
2. How many calls have both trucks attended at the same time? (~5 year avg)
3. How many calls have occured while the first appliance is already allocated to another job? (~5 year avg)
4. Has an alternative resource allocation been offered (eg. QRV) or a straight reduction to a single appliance station?

Taking a bit of the passion you are showing for your brigade and combining it with good data will go a long long way.


33
Introductions / Re: I'm new
« on: February 23, 2010, 07:41:22 AM »
Welcome to the forums.  :-)

34
SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: February 11, 2010, 01:38:23 PM »
Quote from: vsteve01 on February 10, 2010, 09:20:00 PM
"PAGING TEST IF YOU DIDNT GET THIS PAGE AND YOU THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE CONTACT STATH COMMS CFS Strathalbyn Info"

hmm

Special people.......

35
SA Firefighter General / Re: Driving requirements
« on: February 08, 2010, 10:37:57 AM »
There will always be a diverse range of driving skills on our roads....
Stereo typing them doesnt do much except annoy the people that dont fit.

We follow much the same process as Pip. It works reasonably well.
For those that do not have a full licence, there are supervised vehicle runs, that way they can learn without the rest of the crew.

36
SASES / Re: Rope Rescue
« on: January 29, 2010, 11:14:57 PM »
Single rope

37
SASES / Re: Rope Rescue
« on: January 28, 2010, 07:24:50 AM »
Quote from: bajdas on January 26, 2010, 11:09:55 AM

The accident was detailed in the 'SASES Chief Officer's E NEWS, Issue 5 of 18 November 2009'. So hardly "banned from volunteer knowledge".

Safework SA and SAFECOM OHS investigated and the ban was lifted on 2nd November. The major review is a standard response to any accident.

If you want more details, contact the person specified in the E News.

Sorry, i have to laugh....

Was that the issue that started with "there is no secret sqirrel business going on in the SES" followed a bit later on in the same letter by.... "There was a serious accident involving vertical operations but we are unable to release details of the incident"  :roll: Am I the only one who finds the initial statement a little ironic.

Im aware of what happened, although not told officially. Its not something that should ever have been hushed IMHO

38
SA Firefighter General / Re: Interesting Fire and Emergency Related Paging
« on: January 22, 2010, 05:35:11 PM »
There was a page earlier today about Helitak 733 having to skirt Mt Barker because of noise.
Can anyone shed some more light?? (besides it being loud!)

39
SASES / Re: Rope Rescue
« on: January 21, 2010, 09:30:20 AM »
Quote from: jason on January 21, 2010, 07:32:51 AM
Because a Lawsuit is pending.... Yeh lets just say that SES f**ked a rescue up, then tried to cover it up, didn’t call for backup until it was way too late. Now a young girl will never walk again. Leave it to the professionals STAR group/ SOT rescue paramedic’s.

I had heard a slightly different version on the rumour mill.....



Quote
Does SES consider high angle rescue to be the same as vertical rescue (equipment and training wise)?

Yes

40
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New CFS QRV's
« on: January 21, 2010, 07:14:42 AM »
[OT] They are looking at them as a fleet replacement across the board. (F350, FTS 500's.... the lot)
They may very well be practical for the metro units, but I have my doubts about the country units....

41
SASES / Re: Rope Rescue
« on: January 21, 2010, 07:08:47 AM »
Am interested about where that list came from as well.

Vertical Resue within SES is its own hot topic at the moment anyway. Apparently there was a serious accident (all details seem to have been banned from public/volunteer knowledge), which in turn prompted a major review of operations.

A lot of the units have vertical gear, but accreditaion of members is an ongoing issue.


42
SASES / Re: Rope Rescue
« on: January 20, 2010, 09:16:43 PM »
Sturt = Yes
Strath = No
Loby & Adelaide Hills - Not sure, but I think: No

Other than Sturt, the next closest would be Metro South (Mitcham) or Eastern Suburbs

43
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New CFS QRV's
« on: January 20, 2010, 06:14:34 AM »
[OT] Was that SES 'van' as ugly as i imagine it to be? (judging from the small impression you can get from the photos)

44
Country Fire Service / Re: Time for action
« on: January 20, 2010, 06:03:32 AM »
Basically, we need some form of feedback from the CFSVA. Even a time frame for what we expect would be enough for the moment.

I tend to think that any form of action not sanctioned by CFSVA would be treading a fine line. The whole idea is for a coordinated effort!

This discussion came as an extension to the knowledge that a few vollies paid an impromptu visit to a minister.

Why a fine line? The CFSVA have hinted that they have teeth with the questionnaire, now they need to back it up and bare them a little. Anything not sanctioned by them will effectively undermine what WE WANT them to do.

I like the idea, but we need to be pressuring the right people to make it happen.

45
SASES / Re: Murray bridge SES
« on: January 18, 2010, 12:50:47 PM »
Quote from: Darren on January 15, 2010, 08:28:07 PM
Yeah but good luck finding someone in orange !! Also doesn't change the fact that the CFS rescue gear is on the SES rescue truck and that its always full of yellow people.
Yeah, fair call, I cant argue with that.


Murray Bridge very recently suffered a death in the 'family', and I believe it has knocked them about a bit.

46
SASES / Re: Murray bridge SES
« on: January 15, 2010, 03:57:29 PM »
Quote from: Darren on January 15, 2010, 01:21:30 PM
in the case of Onkaparinga group you don't, just use the SES trucks.

Not quite as true as it used to be.... State(SES) decided to make as many of the group as possible SES members - and conduct basic training for them.

Was fairly well attended i believe.

47
SA Firefighter General / Re: Interesting Fire and Emergency Related Paging
« on: January 05, 2010, 03:32:30 PM »
And the subsequent:

1909035 15:13:14 05-01-10 STBN: STOP CALL RECEIVED 05-01-10 15:12 CFS Strathalbyn Response

Not having heard it, I could understand something being said. Sounds like things mave have gone a little to far?? Certainly should be followed up after the incident in any case.
Why was the manual turnout message generated though? Even if it was just to get crew to the station, its boarderline to self responding...

48
All Equipment discussion / Re: PBI - Hated by CFSHQ Since 2005
« on: December 17, 2009, 06:16:31 AM »
Quote from: Darren on December 16, 2009, 03:33:39 PM
To many Group Officers trying to put there own spin on it, for Example our GO is telling us we will be removed from the rural fireground if we have a structural helmet on, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT !!! Tell me where it says we can't wear it, you have NOT got a leg to stand on.

Well at least two things are consistant.......
Were getting the same story, and giving the same answer......

49
All Equipment discussion / Re: PBI - Hated by CFSHQ Since 2005
« on: December 16, 2009, 08:11:54 AM »
Darius, Im certainly not one who likes to remain quite about these things :)

Well, just got off the phone to region. The official stance is still: poster + uniform manual = all the info needed..... (which we all knew anyway)

Which unfortunately contradicts what I was told AGAIN last night, and makes the proposed consequences even more stupid and irrational....

[vent][\vent(maybe)]

50
All Equipment discussion / Re: PBI - Hated by CFSHQ Since 2005
« on: December 16, 2009, 05:57:59 AM »
Well, apparently something is coming from COAC.... But ive been told to chase it up with region.
Have to say im much, much less than impressed with some of the things I was told last night in relation to this issue.... but that shall remain in my head for now.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 43
anything