SA Firefighter

Giving the old girl a good work out I see....

11:47:38 06-04-07 MFS: RESPOND Private Alarm 06/04/07 11:46,2 SEAFORD RD,OLD NOARLUNGA, MAP 195 K 13 ,,SMOKE DETECTORS ON EAST AND WEST SIDE OF SHOP CALLED WOOD N LOGS,DAILY INC. NO. 22,8334 8124 431*CFSRES:

12:50:01 06-04-07 SHQ: *CFSRES: SEAFORD & MORPHETT VALE RESPOND UNKNOWN FIRE, STARBOARD RD, SEAFORD. FIRE IN REAR OF YARD. < 06/04/2007 12:49:48PM

17:50:10 06-04-07 SHQ: CFSRES SEAFORD & MORPHETT VALE RESPOND BUILDING FIRE 22 GRIFFITHS DR, SEAFORD - KITCHEN > 06/04/2007 5:50:00 PM

19:52:51 06-04-07 SHQ: *CFSRES: SEAFORD & MORPHETT VALE RESPOND TO RUBBISH FIRE CHURCH HILL ROAD, OLD NOARLUNGA < 06/04/2007 19:52:41

22:35:39 06-04-07 MFS: RESPOND GRASS FIRE 06/04/07 22:35,COMMERCIAL RD,SEAFORD, MAP 205 J 1 ,,NEAR KFC,DAILY INC. NO. 57,8334 8124 431*CFSRES:

5 Calls in a day, NOT BAD, got to be some sort of record?  Pumper would have been despatched to the majority of those I would imagine.  Oh, and by "NOT BAD" I mean for enthusiastic members of a volunteer brigade, Not Good for those affected by the incidents in any way   

I really don't see how or why Seaford CFS's work load or call rate would suffer to any great extent if and when there is a Mets unit operating in the area, either from their own station or from a day crew/truck stationed locally.

Seaford is an EMA brigade, surely they will continue to be responded to jobs that come up in their area, be they urban or rural jobs. So they may be co-responded with MFS more often than they do now, so what - we can all work with MFS with out any reason for prejudice or concern.  Heck we are all about the same thing, serving the community and putting out fires, saving property, reducing losses etc etc.  An extra truck at a job can only be a gain not a loss. The most important factor in "Serving the Community" is the last bit - the Community.  If the community groups have got together any shouted for an improved service - and that is NOT a reflection in anyway of Seaford, then let them get a red truck.  To some extent the community is responsible for its own fire response times - after all who is it that serves as CFS members - the local community

CFS was never intended to be able to respond as quickly as permanently manned MFS stations, and to cop any flack for not getting to a going fire as quick as would be expected of a premanent crew is REALLY BAD FORM!

Go Seaford, enjoy your new urban appliance.  Hopefully it serves you better than it did Mt Barker. As for the future, who knows what that holds with SACAD, SAFECOM etc, I expect that there could be significant changes to the way incidents are responded to across the board.   My guess is you'll retain an urban appliance and one rural - probably 24, maybe a 34 or 34P in the not to distant future and Logistics will return to the third bay.

Hey, but that' just a personal point of view.  End Rant

That is total accumulated time logged on, since you joined the site.  An hour a day for 24 days would be 1 day logged on.

Any additional crew that can respond during the day, that are BA qualified, are always welcome.  No brigade would enjoy having to default because of a lack of numbers.  So to get additional qualified AND experienced crew is good, very good.

It may mean, however, that some less experienced crew members may start missing the truck again.  You can't have the best of both worlds, we will find what bests fits for our brigades needs, I have no doubt.

Oh yeah, the "Four Cranks"...No wait, we've lost one to the MFB.

Well, things have settled down a little on this side of the fence (touch a really big piece of wood), while over there, there are a lot of buggered firefighters.  So it would seem logical.  But yes keep some crews ready locally.

Why not just supply personell, utilising equipment already on scene to give the current ff's a break.  No real need to deplete our own existing resources.

Eden Hills
Hahndorf
Happy Valley
Millicent
Mount Barker Rescue
Murray Bridge Pumper

But what about Naracoorte?  Isn't that classed as a Type II as well?  All be it an earlier version.

NEW???

That was a quick turn around.  Must of just rebadged HV24P, gave it a quick clean and checked its kit.  Good luck with it!

It is the same vintage as the 24P they lost to Littlehampton.  Wouldn't think there would be much difference.

What is their short term plan?  Hold onto Hahndorf pumper or use 24P as their primary urban appliance and give the type 2 back?

I belive the pumps are the same. Darley HE500.  This is in the 2005 specs as taken from Sept 05 Volunteer mag.  2006 spec may or may not be the same.  2 in/2 out arrangement also very limiting in urban fires.

Yes, I was wandering the same thing.  She can only get a thumbs up for her efforts during the week in SA.  What a machine.  With the results achieved for each and every drop, shame she is so expensive to maintain and operate, as we could do with one stationed permanently in SA.  Our little old budget just wouldn't cope.

As mentioned in another thread, the "un-named" Type 2 is currently at Happy Valley - just sitting in one of the bays, all locked up.  Fully kitted ready to go, but not.  No suggestion that it is intended to be there permanently (We can only hope). The question begs asking though...Why store it in Happy Valley's third appliance bay - the 14 has been renegated to the trailer shed, unless there is a hidden agenda.

As for Scania's.  if they are good enough for MFS then they would make a damn fine Urban CFS unit.  It only takes one cashed up brigade to go out on a limb and bring one in, for HQ to stand up and take notice.

Personally, I would be happy with Mets hand-me-downs (circa '95) Scanias, as they are replaced.  Still plenty of life in 'em yet. Especially at about a quarter the cost of a type 2.  Type 2's are good but... BA seats, auto trans, extra Pony's, storage capabilities and build quality would suggest to me that Scania's are probably better.

If Burnside (or anyone, for that matter) can set the standard with a Scania then GO FOR IT.

I am seeing a pattern, but I'm not sure its hard and fast.

Where brigades have specialist units (particularly hazmat and BWC) and that resource is required at an incident, then that code is sent.  For "general" incidents then a different code may be sent.

Some examples, Burnside 2928 for a hazmat response, but maybe 2932 or 2924 for other incidents - I am still monitoring the paging site to confirm.  The suffix, as mentioned, was determined by what was the mainstream appliance for that brigade when the database was set up.  Or does Burnside bet paged 2928 regardless and then select appropriate resource by the info given in the page? Again, 28 because they were a Hazmat brigade.

Happy Valley did have a 32 appliance (later changed to pumper designation) but now with a 24P and 34.  Code 8032 is still used for all MFS paged turnouts.  HV do not have RCR, Haz or BWC.

Very few incidents would specifically require a 14 response, so no code is used to reflect that - unless there are brigades around that only had a 14 unit when setting the database - but none come to mind.  14 is almost always a backup to the primary responding appliance.

Stirling get paged with 9019 regardless of incident - is that because they were a RCR brigade at the time the database was set up (and still are), and/or because they carry RCR equipment on their primary appliance (Pumper)?

Of course I may have this all wrong, but I haven't been studying the paging site THAT closely, regardless, these are my interpretations and opinions only, not based on any written fact or document. 

Top stuff, 2090, Will definately keep a print of that,

I can update: 8032 for Happy Valley

Cheers,

Calspec