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 - FlameTrees

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
76
Quote
1909066 04:50:27 06-01-12 CFSRES VICTOR: URGENT STRIKE TEAM REQUIRED FOR 8AM DEPARTURE TODAY FOR LOWER FLINDERS. RETURN MONDAY. PHONE GC ON 8552 3210 IF AVAILABLE. FROM GO. VH-Base 6/1/2
 
Quote
1909066 04:14:27 06-01-12 CFSRES OPS SUPPORT: IMMEDIATE RESPONSE OF OPS SUPPORT BRIGADE TO VICTOR GROUP CENTRE TO ASSIST WITH ASSEMBLY OF STRIKE TEAM. FROM GO. 6/1/2012
 

I am curious as to whether 0430 recruitment for Strike teams and resources are really warranted given that this incident has been going for at least 3 - 4 days now..?? Whilst I fully appreciate that any fire can be dynamic and resource requirements can change rapidly, I would have thought that the resources required would be better understood (rather than a new, escalating fire) and that recruitment and acquisition of resources would occur in a more timely manner.

I am not being critical but rather making a constructive "outsiders" observation and asking whether this is the norm and / or appropriate for an incident that is 'not new' so to speak and that a 'Reduced Threat' message was issued last night...

ANy thoughts / feedback...???

Yep. I was on the IMT that made that decision. We identified due to increased fire activity overnight, and a chronic change in weather forecast received at 0300 that we were going to need more resources than had originally been planned for. Reduced Threat was replaced at 0530 with a WAM.

Why not some crews from R4 and the top of R2 organised at short notice for a say 6 hour shift to allow the crews from further afield to get there. I agree a 4 am wake up for a strike team 5 hours away is a bit tough

Regions 2 and 4 were already pretty heavily committed. At the end of the day, state decides which region gets the tap on the shoulder.

77
I will clarify that we didnt make the decision what groups / regions went, or to wake up the Ops team at Victor.

We just identified needed more resources. And needed them before 10am!

78
Quote
1909066 04:50:27 06-01-12 CFSRES VICTOR: URGENT STRIKE TEAM REQUIRED FOR 8AM DEPARTURE TODAY FOR LOWER FLINDERS. RETURN MONDAY. PHONE GC ON 8552 3210 IF AVAILABLE. FROM GO. VH-Base 6/1/2
 
Quote
1909066 04:14:27 06-01-12 CFSRES OPS SUPPORT: IMMEDIATE RESPONSE OF OPS SUPPORT BRIGADE TO VICTOR GROUP CENTRE TO ASSIST WITH ASSEMBLY OF STRIKE TEAM. FROM GO. 6/1/2012
 

I am curious as to whether 0430 recruitment for Strike teams and resources are really warranted given that this incident has been going for at least 3 - 4 days now..?? Whilst I fully appreciate that any fire can be dynamic and resource requirements can change rapidly, I would have thought that the resources required would be better understood (rather than a new, escalating fire) and that recruitment and acquisition of resources would occur in a more timely manner.

I am not being critical but rather making a constructive "outsiders" observation and asking whether this is the norm and / or appropriate for an incident that is 'not new' so to speak and that a 'Reduced Threat' message was issued last night...

ANy thoughts / feedback...???

Yep. I was on the IMT that made that decision. We identified due to increased fire activity overnight, and a chronic change in weather forecast received at 0300 that we were going to need more resources than had originally been planned for. Reduced Threat was replaced at 0530 with a WAM.

79
SA Firefighter General / Strike team cricket
« on: January 08, 2012, 10:41:07 AM »
and cricket....don't forget the Deplyment Test Matches

I've been on the wrong deployments....5 of them under my belt now, and nary a cricket match to be seen let alone played!

No cricket at Wilmington either........

There was today. After the rain

Bugger......was on my way home by then!

80
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: January 07, 2012, 06:14:39 PM »
Should have been.......


MFS: *CFSRES INC0037 04/01/12 12:14 RESPOND GRASS FIRE, : @WOOLUNDUNGA SEC 55 WILMINGTON RD WOOLUNDUNGA,MAP:C/435 53,TG 068, == WOOLUNDUNGA == Alarm upgraded to SHITTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!

81
SA Firefighter General / Strike team cricket
« on: January 07, 2012, 06:12:18 PM »
and cricket....don't forget the Deplyment Test Matches

I've been on the wrong deployments....5 of them under my belt now, and nary a cricket match to be seen let alone played!

No cricket at Wilmington either........

82
SA Firefighter General / Strike team cricket
« on: December 27, 2011, 06:12:45 AM »
and cricket....don't forget the Deplyment Test Matches

I've been on the wrong deployments....5 of them under my belt now, and nary a cricket match to be seen let alone played!

83
SA Firefighter General / Re: Interesting Fire and Emergency Related Paging
« on: December 19, 2011, 03:29:03 PM »
Yeah I saw that and went searching for the initial dispatch, only to see that WAS the initial.

Had to be more to it than what was on the pager....

84
Just ask Police what they think of their partly civilianised call centre.....

A few years after it commenced, the on the ground troops still don't have a lot of good to say about them.....

Pip

But yet SAAS works quite well.

Perhaps it's the way they train their civillians?

85
Perhaps they might even *shock horror* partially civillianise AF, to get with the times, instead of ripping some poor unsuspecting firefighter off the road to go and do a job for 2 years that they have no interest in.

86
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 17, 2011, 04:02:15 PM »
A few SES units seemed to self respond during todays storm event. SES SCC was open, wonder how that all went with SCC dispatching work, and if AF went to dispatch if that resource had been tasked by SCC??

87
SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: December 17, 2011, 12:05:12 PM »
Still seems to be a lot of attempts to self respond or self involve up in them thar hills. Also noticed on the same job another brigade who shall remain nameless (but is a town named after the current season) who kept giving sitreps even though they had not been invited to play. There is maintaining situational awareness, and being too involved when your not involved.

88
SA Firefighter General / Re: GRN paging
« on: December 15, 2011, 08:58:16 AM »
If looking at GRN, couldnt you just off shoot from SAAS? Or is that where the quote came from?

89
SA Firefighter General / Re: CFS using K-codes
« on: December 13, 2011, 12:21:58 PM »
I still think out is required, to designate to anyone else on that TG that the conversation has ceased and any other user can now transmit.

listen before speaking.....an underrated SAGRN skill

As someone who works on the radio side frequently....so very true!

90
SA Firefighter General / Re: CFS using K-codes
« on: December 12, 2011, 07:14:12 PM »
Totally agree Pip. Over is a dinosaur proword.....you can now hear the PTT release at the end of a transmission. I still think out is required, to designate to anyone else on that TG that the conversation has ceased and any other user can now transmit.

SAAS seem to do quite well without the use of out and over, as do SAPOL. Not sure why we still need them.

91
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 12, 2011, 04:27:23 AM »

Interesting in remote areas, I guess these 2 are the nearest as per SACAD:

22:34:33   11-12-11   MFS: *CFSRES INC0092 11/12/11 22:34 RESPOND VEHICLE FIRE INC LPG, LOT 227 GILES ST COOBER PEDY,MAP:CPD 1 K14,TG 073, ==CAR ON FIRE NEXT TO HOUSE FROM SAPOL :COOB34 MRLA34 :  -- CFS Marla Response
22:34:31   11-12-11   MFS: *CFSRES INC0092 11/12/11 22:34 RESPOND VEHICLE FIRE INC LPG, LOT 227 GILES ST COOBER PEDY,MAP:CPD 1 K14,TG 073, ==CAR ON FIRE NEXT TO HOUSE FROM SAPOL :COOB34 MRLA34 :  -- CFS Coober Pedy Response

but Marla is 230km from Coober Pedy:

22:37:13   11-12-11   FROM PHIL R4 STOP FOR CALL  -- CFS Marla Response

not really practical to respond both on initial page (despite SOPs).


But if SOP's call for it, and remember the Brigades / Groups / Regions drew up the response plans, why wouldnt the response be done. Yeah, it's 230 kms away, but I am sure if it was a semi on fire, Coober Pedy would like to know they will have some back up at some time.

92
SAAS / Re: EMDSO Recruiting
« on: December 08, 2011, 06:28:36 PM »
Thanks.

Got my email this afternoon after posting that to invite me for medical and interview....doing the interview over a weekend!

I do know that start date for the successful ones in Jan 16 and they shortlisted 53 for testing....dont know how many they cull from the testing.

93
SAAS / Re: EMDSO Recruiting
« on: December 08, 2011, 02:00:57 PM »
Is anyone up to date with the process of recruiting? How long after testing has finished do they normally notify if you have made it to next stage? I did my testing last week, and it all finished on Tuesday, no updates at this point in time.

94
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 07, 2011, 10:56:02 AM »
And then lets throw some more issues in

Logistics vehicles
The Region 1 pod
The Region 2 OSV (Command Bus) or staging trailer (this can operate stand alone from a vehicle)
The Region 3 hook truck
Region 5's command bus

State Ops have their own vehicle

I'm sure most of the Ops Brigades have their own command cars as well (I'm pretty sure Regions 1,2,5 and 6 all have some). Command cars are easy enough, but what about the specialist vehicles...where do they fit into it all?

95
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 07, 2011, 07:08:53 AM »
Do CFS bulk water carriers have '42' written on the side of them?

Nope.... callsigns need standardising and simplification.

Blurgsville BW13 or Knorksville BW26 is pretty standardised to me. This tells me where the BWC belongs to, the fact it IS a BWC, and how many litres of water it can hold. Surprisingly, our tanker call signs (Aldgate 24, Rendalsham 34) etc do the same.....

I think non sprcific Hazmat appliances (such as a 24/34 that carries the Hazmat gear for that response) should use it's normal appliance call sign when responding to non hazmat jobs, and adopt the call sign of Blarneystone Hazmat (preferably not Blarneystone, but the brigade name) when responding to a Hazmat job, as a Hazmat resource. If the AF operator does not know what a BW is, or a Hazmat, not only should they not be seconded to Comms, I would suggest they should not even be allowed to pull on a uniform at all.

I realise that this whole concept may be a bit too simple and easy to understand, so it would never be used.

96
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 06, 2011, 06:18:17 AM »
You are able to request specific appliances, or types of appliances (I know, I did it on Saturday, and got what I asked for).

What did Western Eyre do beforehand if they needed a BWC? If they need one on the second alarm, I am sure if they ask for it, the closest one would be responded.

SACAD has some issues, which will be worked out, but I wish people would stop thinking of it as the big bad wolf that will stop the planet spinning.

97
SA Firefighter General / Re: CFS using K-codes
« on: December 05, 2011, 09:32:53 AM »
Quote
Posted on: Yesterday at 10:31:08 PMPosted by: CFS_Firey  

Quote from: Pipster on Yesterday at 11:03:18 AM
Isn't

"Adelaide Fire Strath 34P"
"Send Strath 34P"
"Strath 34P mobile incident 81"
"Roger, Strath 34P, Adelaide Fire Out"

Just as easy?

Pip


I'm all in favour of keeping things simple, but
"Adelaide Fire, Strath 34P is K3"
is a lot quicker than saying
"Adelaide fire, Strath 34P is at incident but available to respond".

There are some cases where a K code is much faster and easier.

You can even forget the 'is' part .... and even the 'Adelaide Fire' part.


Have to agree. Using callsigns at the start of every transmission is NOT required. The whole point is once you establish who is calling, and who they are calling, until an OUT is given, that is the conversation that is happening.


In phone conversation we say"Hi Pip, this is Fred calling". Pip would say oh Hi Fred, Fred doesnt then keep saying Pip at the start of every sentence, nor does Pip (not that I have spoken on the phone with her...who knows??). Hence radio does not need this either!!

98
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:13:09 AM »
Just noticed it appears SES has a separate system to MFS/CFS, their incident numbers appear to be on their own (ie at 1040, SES Inc 0002 just dispatched for a building impact, yet the MFS dispatch is on 0023 for the same job.....)

99
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: December 01, 2011, 04:51:03 AM »
well, it's Thursday morning, & so far the sky hasn't fallen nor the world ended.

However, my lawn still needs mowing, and the floors vacuuming.
So I therefore declare SACAD to be an abject failure.

 :-D



04:31:00 *CFSRES INC0999 01/12/11 04:31 RESPOND HOUSEHOLD DUTIES, ALAN J'S PLACE,MAP:ADL 999 Z72 ,TG 586,  :AIRDESK LAWNMOWER VACUUM :

Hmm, looks like they were sent.......didnt they arrive??


 :-D

100
SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: November 30, 2011, 04:43:22 AM »
For info from R2 HQ: SACAD transition scheduled for 00:00hrs 29/11/11 has been postponed by 48 hours and rescheduled for 00:00hrs thursday 01/12/2011.  :roll:

Whilst technically wrong (the time of 00:00 does not actually exist, it goes from 23:59 to 00:01 for 2 minutes) this is saying that the transition was meant to happen midnight monday night / tuesday morning and now pushed to midnight wednesday night / thursday morning.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7