SA Firefighter

General Discussion => SASES => Topic started by: Darren on September 03, 2010, 01:21:27 PM

Title: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 03, 2010, 01:21:27 PM
12:44:23   03-09-10   SCC: *CFSRES: TASK NO 11 , RESPOND FLOODING, 4 ALEXANDER ST, WALLEROO , BUILDING FLOODED, CHRIS WALL, 0407973887, P2, PTB, BUTE UNAVAILABLE - SES Pt Broughton Response


When will they ever learn.....copper triangle has no SES within a bazillion kms hence the agreement that the local fire service attends with a note to the SES state duty officer even we know that and we are supposed to be the dumbest people ever....how many times do we bang on about doing this right. Those in glass houses are quick to throw stones! God help us if we throw one back!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Bagyassfirey on September 03, 2010, 03:15:02 PM
03-09-10 14:41:26 Crew availability required from all members. Contact duty officer on 82777411. Currently 10 outstanding jobs. - SES RO

Ask for some help maybe......
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: boredmatrix on September 03, 2010, 04:04:30 PM
and even then it's still lights and sirens attendance at cars into houses that firies have been sitting at for 45 mins and ambo's have long gone!!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: chook on September 03, 2010, 04:10:26 PM
We had the first Warning order for this event on the 23rd August - no panic find out what crews, gear, threats there are & just wait! And with regular updates as well! So it shouldn't be a surprise for anyone :wink:
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Bagyassfirey on September 03, 2010, 04:20:01 PM
03-09-10 15:47:18 MFS: *CFSRES INC152 03/09/10 15:46,RESPOND Flooding/Salvage,WALLAROO MFS,WALLAROO MAP 0 0 0 TG194,CNR OF OWEN TCE AND WYLDMAN,WAL671 KAD661 - MFS Wallaroo Response

someone must have been listening!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: safireservice on September 03, 2010, 04:25:33 PM
So what does this mean?

MFS: *CFSRES INC149 03/09/10 15:36,RESPOND DOMESTIC FIRE,122 GOODMAN RD,ELIZABETH SOUTH MAP 61 K 6 TG182,WATER ENTERING THROUGH CEILING IN LOUNGE,, CEILING STARTING TO CRACK.,ELZ331 ELZ339

Fat fingers in comms?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alan (Big Al) on September 03, 2010, 05:01:09 PM
1909032 16:26:11 03-09-10 MFS: *CFSRES INC172 03/09/10 16:25,RESPOND Flooding/Salvage,ASHBOURNE CFS,ASHBOURNE MAP 0 0 0 TG142,RESPOND TO ASHBOURNE STATION. CONTACT ST,RATH STATION FOR FURTHER DETAILS,CLAY00
CFS Clayton Response

Just make sure you keep it in your group before you call for closer resources  :wink:

Honestly CFS can be just as bad at this sometimes as well as SES  :|
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 03, 2010, 05:22:11 PM
picky....picky... :cry:
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alan (Big Al) on September 03, 2010, 05:34:57 PM
No not really
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 03, 2010, 08:43:03 PM
Looks like they are having the night off to, clearly a non essential service....its ok the fire service will pick up the slack, which more than likely wouldn't be there if things were triaged!!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: piriejono on September 04, 2010, 12:03:04 AM
For info that job at the copper triangle paged to Pt Broughton was passed onto MFS via SCC after the Nth SES RDO rang SCC, Port Broughton then got a stop call other then transporting a bundle of sandbags down to Kadina.

I am aware of this as i was in the North SES HQ this afternoon.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Robert-Robert34 on September 04, 2010, 10:07:35 AM
Seems like information gets cross wired alot these days  :|
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 04, 2010, 12:18:54 PM
For info that job at the copper triangle paged to Pt Broughton was passed onto MFS via SCC after the Nth SES RDO rang SCC, Port Broughton then got a stop call other then transporting a bundle of sandbags down to Kadina.

I am aware of this as i was in the North SES HQ this afternoon.

Still happening, and I know its not your fault....
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Zippy on September 04, 2010, 12:51:27 PM
SACAD....where art thou...now?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Bagyassfirey on September 04, 2010, 01:15:43 PM
SACAD....where art thou...now?

apparantly trial from october over the Summer and live May 11
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Zippy on September 04, 2010, 01:23:39 PM
What will SES being doing with the SCC when it comes to SACAD???  As i personally think, sacad can only be successful if every, every, ESO moves over to it.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Pipster on September 04, 2010, 02:08:16 PM
SACAD....where art thou...now?

apparantly trial from october over the Summer and live May 11

Yeah, but which year??   :evil:

Pip
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: 6739264 on September 04, 2010, 06:23:44 PM
SACAD....where art thou...now?

apparantly trial from october over the Summer and live May 11

Sure, just without Fire Service integration...

Atleast another 12-18 months for the Fire Service to go live.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 04, 2010, 08:34:49 PM
Is it really necessary to even post this thread though Darren? It is common knowledge that as soon as the SES SCC opens, all correct call taking procedure, triaging of jobs and even SES SOPs go flying out the door...

I mean honestly, it seems to me that they don't even know there own response priorities...? How many P1s have gone out in CFS and MFS response areas as SES only?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: misterteddy on September 04, 2010, 09:19:03 PM
saw Mr Arnold today with a set of chaps on.....one would have thought there was better employment for someone of his standing in an Ops room somewhere
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 04, 2010, 11:13:10 PM
What will SES being doing with the SCC when it comes to SACAD??? ....

Large modification already announced...
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 05, 2010, 01:16:27 AM
Something needs to be done about asking for help, not leaving it to late in the night when not only are SES tired, the CFS/MFS are to. Like today, clearly obvious it was busy yesterday and last night, get a strike team happening to avoid massive back logs that happen.

The triaging is poorly done now, save a lot of hassle that way.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: rescue5271 on September 05, 2010, 07:12:57 AM
Every time there is  large storm damage or flash flooding we keep going around and around and around and we all post the same thing...Will SACAD really help things along??? Will one call centre be able to cope with all work load???


I could sit hear and point out wrong protocols for the jobs we have had but what is the point when all we hear is SACAD will fix it and yes we have heard its coming but in what year.....At the end of the day if you need more appliances then ask for them its not that hard to contact the regional duty officer....
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: chook on September 05, 2010, 04:17:12 PM
Correct Bill & Darren, I want to know what happen to introducing something like Request for Assistance? We used them in NSW (I was part of the SA team then) during the Newcastle storm event (over 19000 calls split between Sydney & Newcastle) & everyone I spoke to thought they were a great idea. Obviously since then, nothing! We use them here & now its all online, simple system that not only allocates tasks, triages & if used properly gives a unit, region & state HQ a very clear idea what is committed (right down to the name of the team leader). Its a good system that works! I'm just not sure why SA didn't adopt it. And yep I'm not sure why a senior officer is in chaps either :-). Anyway I could go on for hours about things but I won't! Hopefully one day someone will look over the border & see how other services run an event (we have learn't a lot since 2007 :-D ) by the way we don't use pagers - they are for Rescue squads only! bye 4 now
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 05, 2010, 06:43:39 PM
I typed a large 'pissed off' reply to the lot of you, esp paid staff that we support.....but thought you fellow volunteers are NOT WORTH IT......

Get all the facts (which you cant because you were NOT there) before making others angry.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: 6739264 on September 05, 2010, 07:17:29 PM
I typed a large 'filtered off' reply to the lot of you, esp paid staff that we support.....but thought you fellow volunteers are NOT WORTH IT......

Get all the facts (which you cant because you were NOT there) before making others angry.

And you WERE there?

Why do you get so angry at people merely pointing out the the SES have a shocking record of service delivery to the public?

Onto another burning question that I still find unanswered:

I'm aware that the SES can/do default for RCR work, but why isn't there an adhered to default policy for Storm/Tempest jobs?

Shouldn't anything that requires a P1 response also require a timed default period? Shouldn't units not observing this and allowing jobs to stack up have actions taken against them?

If the response time doesn't matter (eg: by turning out after the current job is finished) then why does it still require a P1 response? I know this is not always the case, but it seems to be more often than not.

Why are we happy to allow a sloppy sub standard response to some of the most damaging natural events that occur?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 05, 2010, 08:45:21 PM
The thing is Andrew, we aren't having a go at you, we are frustrated with the system that still hasn't learnt time after time with all the massive storms days of late. There is no plan, we just seem to send jobs through and hope for the best.

I think the SES in this state need to invest in new systems to deal with days like we have had of late.

For example, Up until 2007 my brigade averaged 5 tree calls per year. We only had 1 chainsaw. In the last 2 years we did 98 tree's down in our area, all due to the new response protocol, which worked as it freed SES up for other calls. It just seems that on the really bad days, that response protocol goes out the window which compounds things because the poor SES unit is getting smashed with all the calls and they get hours behind in taskings whilst most fire stations are sitting there unused.

I for one actually feel like we are letting the public down and letting our fellow SES vols down by sitting at home whilst they get hammered. Most metro CFS stations have 2 trucks so could still provide fire cover whilst sending trucks off to assist SES in keeping up with jobs and maybe freeing up senior SES vols to reccy jobs and weed out some of the crap.

I like chooks system, wonder why it hasn't been adopted here yet.

SES HQ needs to look hard at these large storm days and work out a better system. The way things are currently run only burns out the SES vols and you issues where units go offline after a certain time.

I don't know what you need to do, but something needs to happen, maybe a round table with all 3 agencies. It can't keep going how it is. Its not fair on you guys!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: chook on September 05, 2010, 09:12:31 PM
Andrew i apologise if I offended you. As you know I'm the last person to have a go at volunteers (which I wasn't).However I'm also aware (from our intelligence) that that was the first of 3 possible events for September. I'm also open to different ideas & have worked under centralised control (SA) & local control (NSW) & I have a fair idea which is more efficient Finally have a look over the border - ask yourself this Could your system handle this? Remember their operations will continue for some time. And we are possibly as well Again sorry mate
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Mike on September 06, 2010, 08:42:42 AM
Do SCC and Adelaide Fire have the ability to communicate freely when both are operational?
How many areas opened an LEOC?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 06, 2010, 08:58:36 AM
Not freely, in so much as they are 2 floors below and its often hard to get through on the phone. One would think one of the dispatchers would take the priority 1 jobs up to fire service or ring them through when they happen. Or stranger still, maybe have a runner ? Anyway, need to have some proper debriefs !
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 10:50:55 AM
Not freely, in so much as they are 2 floors below and its often hard to get through on the phone. One would think one of the dispatchers would take the priority 1 jobs up to fire service or ring them through when they happen. Or stranger still, maybe have a runner ? Anyway, need to have some proper debriefs !

Darren, get your facts right please.

Any life threat calls received by SES SCC, the caller is requested to call 000. We do not take the call.

A MFS Ops letter gives a fax number for tasks to be transferred to Adel Fire for dispatch. I believe this is on the MFS ComCen Supervisors desk.

This was used for 100's of taskings on Saturday for tree downs.

SAPOL ComCen also fax their call receipt data to SES SCC for SES dispatch.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 10:52:14 AM
Andrew i apologise if I offended you. As you know I'm the last person to have a go at volunteers (which I wasn't).However I'm also aware (from our intelligence) that that was the first of 3 possible events for September. I'm also open to different ideas & have worked under centralised control (SA) & local control (NSW) & I have a fair idea which is more efficient Finally have a look over the border - ask yourself this Could your system handle this? Remember their operations will continue for some time. And we are possibly as well Again sorry mate

That is why it is changing in a major way in the next two months.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 10:57:14 AM
.....If the response time doesn't matter (eg: by turning out after the current job is finished) then why does it still require a P1 response? ...

Your definition of a P1 response is a life threat....SES SCC do not handle calls for this. The caller is told to call 000.

The taskings going from SES SCC are storm & tempest. For example, I believe tree downs on roads were handled via MFS ComCen on Saturday.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darius on September 06, 2010, 10:59:53 AM
Any life threat calls received by SES SCC, the caller is requested to call 000. We do not take the call.

ha good one.  But of more interest to me is all the problems with Adelaide Fire over the weekend.  Once again we had phone calls to them ringing out, big delays answering the radio, refusal to respond brigades, hanging up on 000 callers and brigades / group officers etc.  I know they're busy but why is AF management continually unable to staff the comcen appropriately?  after all it's not like everyone didn't have enough warning.  Once again if it wasn't for groups and brigades managing everything themselves, and papering over the cracks, it would have been far worse.  Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 11:00:03 AM
saw Mr Arnold today with a set of chaps on.....one would have thought there was better employment for someone of his standing in an Ops room somewhere

So a paid officer cannot volunteer when he is not at work....then said volunteer is not allowed to operate a tool to do a tasking....how many CFS paid staff volunteer with a brigade and hold a hose or put on a BA set ?????
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 11:06:07 AM
...I think the SES in this state need to invest in new systems to deal with days like we have had of late....

Darren, I makes me worried ...< WITHDRAWN posting >
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darius on September 06, 2010, 11:28:22 AM
...I think the SES in this state need to invest in new systems to deal with days like we have had of late....

Darren, I makes me worried if you do not know of the changes happening at MFS ComCen (I thought that was your workplace). Two things holding the changeover and everything else is installed, tested & waiting to go. Affected SES volunteers were officially told three months ago.

is it secret?  why don't you just say what you've been told?
(I can only assume you are referring to the SES SCC ceasing to do CRD? and long past time too in my opinion, the problem is Adelaide Fire can't handle what they do now let alone giving them more to do)
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Robert-Robert34 on September 06, 2010, 11:42:29 AM
Quote
Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.

At this rate there may not be a summer  :roll: unless this pesky rainfall buggers off
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2010, 12:08:05 PM
Hahaha todays even better...  :roll:
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2010, 12:12:26 PM
Your definition of a P1 response is a life threat....SES SCC do not handle calls for this. The caller is told to call 000.

The taskings going from SES SCC are storm & tempest. For example, I believe tree downs on roads were handled via MFS ComCen on Saturday.

Mate, i believe Darren would have been referring mostly to 'storm & tempest' events that per the "SES PAGER INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS" sheet, reccomends a P1 response. When we at Adelaide Fire dispatch these we are told to respond local fire and ses, and yet ses scc bang out 'P1' responses constantly as SES only. I guess this is a point many want cleared up. Apart from the fact your system on level 3 cannot dispatch fire, why do SES suddenly go to these alone?
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2010, 12:14:51 PM
ha good one.  But of more interest to me is all the problems with Adelaide Fire over the weekend.  Once again we had phone calls to them ringing out, big delays answering the radio, refusal to respond brigades, hanging up on 000 callers and brigades / group officers etc.  I know they're busy but why is AF management continually unable to staff the comcen appropriately?  after all it's not like everyone didn't have enough warning.  Once again if it wasn't for groups and brigades managing everything themselves, and papering over the cracks, it would have been far worse.  Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.

Unfortunately there is a schedule that gets us more staff dependant on FDIs during the FDS. No such thing exists for other events.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 06, 2010, 12:42:36 PM
Your definition of a P1 response is a life threat....SES SCC do not handle calls for this. The caller is told to call 000.

The taskings going from SES SCC are storm & tempest. For example, I believe tree downs on roads were handled via MFS ComCen on Saturday.

Mate, i believe Darren would have been referring mostly to 'storm & tempest' events that per the "SES PAGER INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS" sheet, reccomends a P1 response. When we at Adelaide Fire dispatch these we are told to respond local fire and ses, and yet ses scc bang out 'P1' responses constantly as SES only. I guess this is a point many want cleared up. Apart from the fact your system on level 3 cannot dispatch fire, why do SES suddenly go to these alone?

Sorry, my information is wrong then...
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Zippy on September 06, 2010, 02:27:51 PM
Any life threat calls received by SES SCC, the caller is requested to call 000. We do not take the call.

ha good one.  But of more interest to me is all the problems with Adelaide Fire over the weekend.  Once again we had phone calls to them ringing out, big delays answering the radio, refusal to respond brigades, hanging up on 000 callers and brigades / group officers etc.  I know they're busy but why is AF management continually unable to staff the comcen appropriately?  after all it's not like everyone didn't have enough warning.  Once again if it wasn't for groups and brigades managing everything themselves, and papering over the cracks, it would have been far worse.  Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.


Well, Adelaide Fire was in multiple incident procedure over the weekend.....

That means, 000 calls for establishing firecalls and GRN for short mobilisation messages & urgent precise upgrade messages only...i would think.

There were so many manual turnout messages by brigades that should have happened via 000.

I recall hearing emerg tones and a general broadcast on all CFS regional channels occuring twice, general gist being: "wait out wait out, pretty much only talk to us if urgent"....

CFS has to deal with its radio protocol as well, massively.   A lot more over the air discipline will go a long way.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: jaff on September 06, 2010, 03:00:17 PM
The only constant is change and that will happen!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alan (Big Al) on September 06, 2010, 03:16:29 PM
I heard Auburn and Williamstown come up on GRN 124 responding to or asking for pages to be sent out! Why was this? was region 2 running through region 1 talkgroup? just curious is all  :-)
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Pipster on September 06, 2010, 04:29:50 PM
Any life threat calls received by SES SCC, the caller is requested to call 000. We do not take the call.

ha good one.  But of more interest to me is all the problems with Adelaide Fire over the weekend.  Once again we had phone calls to them ringing out, big delays answering the radio, refusal to respond brigades, hanging up on 000 callers and brigades / group officers etc.  I know they're busy but why is AF management continually unable to staff the comcen appropriately?  after all it's not like everyone didn't have enough warning.  Once again if it wasn't for groups and brigades managing everything themselves, and papering over the cracks, it would have been far worse.  Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.


Well, Adelaide Fire was in multiple incident procedure over the weekend.....

That means, 000 calls for establishing firecalls and GRN for short mobilisation messages & urgent precise upgrade messages only...i would think.

There were so many manual turnout messages by brigades that should have happened via 000.

I recall hearing emerg tones and a general broadcast on all CFS regional channels occuring twice, general gist being: "wait out wait out, pretty much only talk to us if urgent"....

CFS has to deal with its radio protocol as well, massively.   A lot more over the air discipline will go a long way.


I saw the pager messages, heard the radio messages, re we are in multiple incident procedures....but as yet, haven't found a reference in SOP's etc, as to what that is meant to be.

Having said that, it was pretty clear that Adelaide fire was swamped, and hence I didn't bother trying to get jobs put through to Adelaide fire, for dispatch to my brigade......I just paged it myself...

Not ideal, but since the jobs were just trees on roads, a few minutes of delay getting a page out via linkq didn't really matter.

However, it shows how quickly the CRD system was swamped, and the apparent inability of the system to expand to deal with that.  (And before anyone makes the commnet - I am NOT having a go at any of the staff...they were obviously getting flogged, but listening to them on the radio, they were doing well under pressure)

Brigade & Group control centres were effectively doing their own thing - with many of the calls attended by brigades coming direct from members, who had been contacted by neighbours / other residents who knew they were in the CFS, and contacted them direct for assistance.

Pip
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: wicky on September 06, 2010, 04:35:33 PM
saw Mr Arnold today with a set of chaps on.....one would have thought there was better employment for someone of his standing in an Ops room somewhere

He is also a volunteer who doesnt mind helping is SES unit.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darius on September 06, 2010, 05:28:14 PM
I heard Auburn and Williamstown come up on GRN 124 responding to or asking for pages to be sent out! Why was this? was region 2 running through region 1 talkgroup? just curious is all  :-)

R1 Ops 124 and R2 Ops 093 were patched together by Adelaide Fire. SAAS do it all the time but in reverse, ie. when it's quiet they patch their north and south talkgroups together so one operator can easily do both, when things get busy they unpatch and put one operator on each talkgroup.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Zippy on September 06, 2010, 06:33:54 PM
Any life threat calls received by SES SCC, the caller is requested to call 000. We do not take the call.

ha good one.  But of more interest to me is all the problems with Adelaide Fire over the weekend.  Once again we had phone calls to them ringing out, big delays answering the radio, refusal to respond brigades, hanging up on 000 callers and brigades / group officers etc.  I know they're busy but why is AF management continually unable to staff the comcen appropriately?  after all it's not like everyone didn't have enough warning.  Once again if it wasn't for groups and brigades managing everything themselves, and papering over the cracks, it would have been far worse.  Can't wait til summer when it gets serious.


Well, Adelaide Fire was in multiple incident procedure over the weekend.....

That means, 000 calls for establishing firecalls and GRN for short mobilisation messages & urgent precise upgrade messages only...i would think.

There were so many manual turnout messages by brigades that should have happened via 000.

I recall hearing emerg tones and a general broadcast on all CFS regional channels occuring twice, general gist being: "wait out wait out, pretty much only talk to us if urgent"....

CFS has to deal with its radio protocol as well, massively.   A lot more over the air discipline will go a long way.


I saw the pager messages, heard the radio messages, re we are in multiple incident procedures....but as yet, haven't found a reference in SOP's etc, as to what that is meant to be.

Having said that, it was pretty clear that Adelaide fire was swamped, and hence I didn't bother trying to get jobs put through to Adelaide fire, for dispatch to my brigade......I just paged it myself...

Not ideal, but since the jobs were just trees on roads, a few minutes of delay getting a page out via linkq didn't really matter.

However, it shows how quickly the CRD system was swamped, and the apparent inability of the system to expand to deal with that.  (And before anyone makes the commnet - I am NOT having a go at any of the staff...they were obviously getting flogged, but listening to them on the radio, they were doing well under pressure)

Brigade & Group control centres were effectively doing their own thing - with many of the calls attended by brigades coming direct from members, who had been contacted by neighbours / other residents who knew they were in the CFS, and contacted them direct for assistance.

Pip



Guess that comes to CFS HQ asking MFS for an explaination and then diseminating the procedure down to brigade level.

MFS Area radio protocol reduces to K Codes, Upgrades & Stop only.  No sitreps nor full stop messages, from what i listened to yesterday.

And yeah, you might here adelaide fire talking to thin air on occasions (when talking onto all channels simultaneously)...
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Darren on September 06, 2010, 06:43:05 PM
Patching together helps people realise we talk to more than one region. It can be painful as you often miss calls as people are all talking at once, but have no idea others are talking.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 06, 2010, 07:21:43 PM
saw Mr Arnold today with a set of chaps on.....one would have thought there was better employment for someone of his standing in an Ops room somewhere

He is also a volunteer who doesnt mind helping is SES unit.

Yeh, i too can't see an issue with this. Mr Ted, seems to me your just another knocker.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: misterteddy on September 06, 2010, 08:45:11 PM
ahh well Alex...if i was.....theres plenty of individuals round that give me free ammo

My POINT was in relation to the crapfight mentioned about SCC operating procedures. We were in a period of an "extreme weather event" yeah?......doesnt that mean the SES hierachy should be attending to hierachy things...like management of calls, resource tracking, operational crew relief etc etc....not doing menial tasks that any basic member can do

Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: 6739264 on September 06, 2010, 09:04:13 PM
ahh well Alex...if i was.....theres plenty of individuals round that give me free ammo

My POINT was in relation to the crapfight mentioned about SCC operating procedures. We were in a period of an "extreme weather event" yeah?......doesnt that mean the SES hierachy should be attending to hierachy things...like management of calls, resource tracking, operational crew relief etc etc....not doing menial tasks that any basic member can do

Good grief no! Next extreme bushfire mega disaster extravaganza that SA experiances, I would very much to hope to see Euan with his McLeod Tool and box of matches!

Bash your "IMT" and other crazy "managerial" acronyms up your clacker. We need the REAL man doing REAL work.

(On a farm unit)
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: misterteddy on September 06, 2010, 09:12:24 PM

Yeh, i too can't see an issue with this. Mr Ted, seems to me your just another knocker.

damm....and I was hoping Numbers was gonna be a knocker too  :oops:. We all know that like boots, knockers perform better as pairs  :-D
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alan (Big Al) on September 06, 2010, 09:26:57 PM
I heard Auburn and Williamstown come up on GRN 124 responding to or asking for pages to be sent out! Why was this? was region 2 running through region 1 talkgroup? just curious is all  :-)

R1 Ops 124 and R2 Ops 093 were patched together by Adelaide Fire. SAAS do it all the time but in reverse, ie. when it's quiet they patch their north and south talkgroups together so one operator can easily do both, when things get busy they unpatch and put one operator on each talkgroup.


Thanks darius,, i tried to get throught to adelaide fire to book mobile for a job but gave up when there were about 7 different brigades trying to talk all at once!!
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 07, 2010, 07:59:48 AM
ahh well Alex...if i was.....theres plenty of individuals round that give me free ammo

My POINT was in relation to the crapfight mentioned about SCC operating procedures. We were in a period of an "extreme weather event" yeah?......doesnt that mean the SES hierachy should be attending to hierachy things...like management of calls, resource tracking, operational crew relief etc etc....not doing menial tasks that any basic member can do



Just saying mate, plenty of CFS ROs and state staff get out on the trucks on fire ban days and so on, when they are neither on call or required for a night shift. At the end of the day there are only so many IMT positions to fill and so many on-call positions.

re; patching TGs, technically frowned upon by the NOC. But wouldnt it be nice if we could patch SES & CFS local TGs together for some jobs.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Mike on September 07, 2010, 08:09:41 AM
re; patching TGs, technically frowned upon by the NOC. But wouldnt it be nice if we could patch SES & CFS local TGs together for some jobs.

But that would make sense... besides, we cant have orange/yellow talking to each other, the world might end!  :wink:
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: misterteddy on September 07, 2010, 08:44:45 AM

Just saying mate, plenty of CFS ROs and state staff get out on the trucks on fire ban days and so on, when they are neither on call or required for a night shift. At the end of the day there are only so many IMT positions to fill and so many on-call positions.


I think the gentleman concerned has a role a little more substantive than the equivalent of a CFS RO. Fiddling while Rome burns, even if there are others doing things to help, isnt much of a defence when it comes to the public seeking answers.....just ask Mr Rees in Victoria
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Benji on September 07, 2010, 11:50:38 PM

re; patching TGs, technically frowned upon by the NOC. But wouldnt it be nice if we could patch SES & CFS local TGs together for some jobs.

The new portables issued to SES allow us to select fire service talk groups, which can be a great help.. Only becomes an issue when you are trying to deal with 3 groups, our local tg and regional tg - way to many radios to carry ;)
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: mattb on September 08, 2010, 10:29:54 AM
Quote
The new portables issued to SES allow us to select fire service talk groups, which can be a great help..

I wasn't aware that the SES now had access to CFS talkgroups. Are all units equipped with these ?

What protocols are in place for SES communicating with CFS brigades on local talkgroups (i.e. have you been given a list of talkgroups that we use, callsigns, radio procedure etc).

I know that many of the gurus in each unit would be familiar with the local communications systems for nearby CFS units, but how does the joe blow SES vollie who is in charge of the truck know who to talk to and when to change to a CFS talkgroup ?

BTW I'm not knocking it as I think it is a good idea, I'm just wondering what processes and training are in place to facilitate this.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: bajdas on September 08, 2010, 12:41:29 PM
Quote
The new portables issued to SES allow us to select fire service talk groups, which can be a great help..

I wasn't aware that the SES now had access to CFS talkgroups. Are all units equipped with these ?

What protocols are in place for SES communicating with CFS brigades on local talkgroups (i.e. have you been given a list of talkgroups that we use, callsigns, radio procedure etc).

I know that many of the gurus in each unit would be familiar with the local communications systems for nearby CFS units, but how does the joe blow SES vollie who is in charge of the truck know who to talk to and when to change to a CFS talkgroup ?

BTW I'm not knocking it as I think it is a good idea, I'm just wondering what processes and training are in place to facilitate this.

Some of the new handhelds have a D setting which is CFS talkgroups. Other people will be able to advise how wide spread this option is in the new mobile and handheld radios.

Thus A is multi-agency, B & C is SES and D is CFS.

Have a discussion with your local SES Unit that you work with to find out protocols. I do not know them.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Mike on September 08, 2010, 12:53:08 PM
Information recieved with the portables is that CFS talkgroups should not be accessed as there is debate about 'who pays'.
Regardless of the accuracy of that statement, this has successfully been ignored in our area so far, with no complaints as yet.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Zippy on September 08, 2010, 01:49:29 PM
....It costs???  I thought there's a standard contract in regards to the SAGRN..  This sounds quite odd.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Mike on September 08, 2010, 02:15:14 PM
Im not convinced the information is accurate.... But that is what the boss has passed on...
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alex on September 08, 2010, 06:15:13 PM

Just saying mate, plenty of CFS ROs and state staff get out on the trucks on fire ban days and so on, when they are neither on call or required for a night shift. At the end of the day there are only so many IMT positions to fill and so many on-call positions.


I think the gentleman concerned has a role a little more substantive than the equivalent of a CFS RO. Fiddling while Rome burns, even if there are others doing things to help, isnt much of a defence when it comes to the public seeking answers.....just ask Mr Rees in Victoria

We'll have to agree to disagree then, but at the end of the day he is a state training officer who is on call 1 out of 4 weeks as state duty officer.
Title: Re: Again response protocol not followed!!!!
Post by: Alan J on October 16, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
....It costs???  I thought there's a standard contract in regards to the SAGRN..  This sounds quite odd.

Don't know about the new contract between DAIS & Motorola, but under the old
one, every "conversation" cost something like 10c or 12c.

Each transmission was deemed to be part of a "conversation" on a TG if made
within about 6 seconds of the previous transmission. When a gap greater than
6 seconds occurred, it was deemed to be a new "conversation", and a new charge
incurred.  Each 'conversation' was chargeable to the organisation which 'owns'
the TG.

I imagine the new contract would be similar. I understand Motorola were able to
win it by offering the govt big discounts on the new hardware compared with
their resellers. They'll need to make up the $$ somewhere...