SA Firefighter

General Discussion => Incident Operations => Topic started by: bajdas on June 15, 2006, 02:45:49 PM

Title: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: bajdas on June 15, 2006, 02:45:49 PM
13:47:58 15-06-06 SHQ: CFSRES: SEAFORD RESPOND CHANGE OF QTRS TO MORPHETT VALE STATION - FROM MAWSON DO. <

13:44:00 15-06-06 KANG: *CFSRES: MORE CREW REQUIRED RESPOND KANGARILLA STATION

13:35:19 15-06-06 MRPH: *CFSRES: DRIVER REQUIRED RESPOND MORPHETT VALE STATION

13:34:07 15-06-06 MRPH: *CFSRES: MORE CREW REQUIRED RESPOND M/ VALE STATION

13:32:19 15-06-06 SHQ: BRENTO PLS CONTACT SOC ASAP... >

13:31:24 15-06-06 2ND ALARM HOUSE FIRE GOING WELL CREWS REQUIRED TO MAN STATION - H/V STATION

13:28:09 15-06-06 M/VALE RESPONSE: *CFSRES: RESPOND MORPHETT VALE 24 TO 50 PINE ROAD WOODCROFT, REQUESTED FOR WATER BY GROUP DUTY OFFICER - ALL AVAILABLE CREW PLEASE RESPOND TO STATION NOW - LT 1 Matthew Bonser

13:26:24 15-06-06 SHQ: URGMSG KANGARILLA 34 RESPOND DOMESTIC, 50 PINE RD, WOODCROFT. ASSIST HAPPY VALLEY WITH 2ND ALARM HOUSE FIRE... >

13:25:50 15-06-06 M/V INFO: FOR INFO M24P IS RESPONDING TO A 2ND ALARM HOUSE FIRE AT WOODCROFT, WILL BE TIED UP FOR SOME TIME. MORPHETT 24 MAY BE NEEDED FOR WATER - ANYONE ELSE AVAILABLE PLEASE RESPOND TO THE STATION NOW OR ANY OTHER CALLS. LT 1 Matthew Bon

13:24:33 15-06-06 SHQ: GARY PLS CONTACT SOC ASAP... >

13:22:18 15-06-06 SHQ: URGMSG MAWSON TANKER RESPOND DOMESTIC, 50 PINE RD, WOODCROFT. ASSIST HAPPY VALLEY WITH 2ND ALARM HOUSE FIRE... >

13:19:11 15-06-06 SHQ: URGMSG CLARENDON RESPOND DOMESTIC, 50 PINE RD, WOODCROFT. ASSIST HAPPY VALLEY WITH 2ND ALARM HOUSE FIRE... >

13:08:37 15-06-06 HPPY: *CFSRES: EXTRA CREW REQUIRED RESPOND HAPPY VALLEY STN

13:07:39 15-06-06 MFS: RESPOND DOMESTIC FIRE 15/06/06 13:06,50 PINE RD,WOODCROFT, MAP 177 N 6 ,,2ND DEFAULT,8124*CFSRES:

13:01:28 15-06-06 MFS: RESPOND DOMESTIC FIRE 15/06/06 13:00,50 PINE RD,WOODCROFT, MAP 177 N 6 ,,FIRE IN THE HOUSE,8032*CFSRES:
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: fire03rescue on June 15, 2006, 02:46:51 PM
and now

SHQ: FYI: H.VALLEY, MORPH.VALE, CLARENDON, KANGARILLA & MFS IN ATTENDING GOING 3 STORY HOUSE FIRE, RO AUSTIN & MLO RAGLESS GOING FORWARD. SAFTEY MSG'S ISSUES DUE TO UNSOUND BUILDING.FIRE CAUSE ATTENDING- RDO DOWLING
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: probie_boy on June 15, 2006, 03:39:11 PM
nice one. Sounds like a mansion going up. Good to see our alarms sytem works though
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: bajdas on June 15, 2006, 04:34:34 PM
Salvage work now....

15:24:05 15-06-06 MFS: RESPOND To 15/06/06 15:22,5 PINE RD,WOODCROFT, MAP 177 N 6 ,,CFS REQUIRE YOU FOR ROOF STRIPPING AND OTHER WORK AFTER HOUSE FIRE,8032*CFSRES:

15:25:33 15-06-06 MFS: RESPOND To 15/06/06 15:24,5 PINE RD,WOODCROFT, MAP 177 N 6 ,,,72820*CFSRES:
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 15, 2006, 09:55:43 PM
nice one. Sounds like a mansion going up. Good to see our alarms sytem works though

alarms system?

Quote
15:24:05 15-06-06 MFS: RESPOND To 15/06/06 15:22,5 PINE RD,WOODCROFT, MAP 177 N 6 ,,CFS REQUIRE YOU FOR ROOF STRIPPING AND OTHER WORK AFTER HOUSE FIRE,8032*CFSRES:

lol... good to see they sent the right ppl... happy valley CFS. quickly rectified with Noarlunga (or sturt??) being sent later...
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: calspec on June 15, 2006, 11:58:50 PM
Go figure.   Mets in their infinite wisdom responded one solitary CFS station to a going domestic?? and in the metro area as well. What the...

It was only when HVCFS called Mets back to default (insufficient crews, initially) that Mets reponded other brigades....or maybe they just saw the smoke and decided to send 431.  HVCFS did get going only a few minutes later to be first CFS crew on scene - just behind MFS, others weren't far behind.  All in all a good turn out and a job well done by all who attended.

As for the SES page going to HVCFS, who knows what happened there?
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 16, 2006, 12:30:29 AM
all comes back to the database,,,
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: rusty on June 16, 2006, 04:05:53 AM
Go figure.   Mets in their infinite wisdom responded one solitary CFS station to a going domestic?? and in the metro area as well. What the...

That particular street has been entered in the MFS database as a single brigade response, specifically so, (normally the MFS computer would recommend 2 callsigns but in this case it only recommends 1). Therefore the response is correct according to the local brigade response plans. Don't bag people/groups when you don't have the facts...

It was only when HVCFS called Mets back to default (insufficient crews, initially) that Mets reponded other brigades....

That's how the system is supposed to work.


or maybe they just saw the smoke and decided to send 431. 
After years of CFS doing the smoke-chasing...
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: calspec on June 16, 2006, 06:19:21 AM
Slow down there slugger.  No one is bagging anybody.  OK so maybe the "database" is in dire need of an upgrade - we'll just leave that in the hands of Safecom then.  Facts? the fact is only one brigade was responded, as stated.  In my limited experience I do not understand how any domestic dwelling in the metro area could be listed as only requiring a single unit response.  I'm sure the owners of affected outer metro properties would be interested to know that.  Also considering that there is no water supply within about 500m of that particular house, how the heck is one appliance (or even two for that matter) going to be any use at all without water?
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: rusty on June 16, 2006, 06:51:51 AM
Like I said...the single unit response was according to local brigade response plans. If the database is to be updated the request must come from the local brigade and group.
If a job requires extra or special resources, such as a BWC, then that request comes from the IC or via a greater alarm system.
The bagging was implicit and blatant in your sarcastic remark about "mets in their infinite wisdom..."
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 16, 2006, 07:29:51 AM
good call rusty...

as i said, all comes back to the database.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: strikeathird on June 16, 2006, 04:41:38 PM
Fair call rusty.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: mattb on June 17, 2006, 10:54:23 AM
Rusty is correct, the database only had one brigade listed for a 'Structure - Domestic'.

This was incorrect for that zone and has now been rectified. There is no reason why that response for that zone had been changed as it was contrary to the brigade response plans and CFS COSO's.

The only possible explanation is that the recent importing of the SES data into the BOMS database caused a couple of 'glitches' to occur. Apparantly this is not the first time this type of 'out of the ordinary' response has happened (I seem to recall a couple of times Stirling have been responded to MVA's on the other side of Mt Barker).

Anyway it's fixed now and so we can all move on.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: Toast on June 17, 2006, 03:13:46 PM
I must say that to have to wait 30 mins for a second BA crew at a going domestic may suggest a boost to daytime BA trained members in that area...  :-o
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 17, 2006, 09:04:22 PM
personally ive noticed quite a few "glitches" in response data lately... mainly rescues...
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: strikeathird on June 18, 2006, 12:16:21 AM
I must say that to have to wait 30 mins for a second BA crew at a going domestic may suggest a boost to daytime BA trained members in that area...  :-o

Where'd you pull that figure from ?
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: Toast on June 18, 2006, 11:29:43 PM
Listening to the incident unfold. Happy valley initailly defaulted, Morphett Vale had no BA, Christies Downs 431 was the only appliance with BA operators on board to arrive. Around 25-30 mins after arrival, the interior attack crew suggested to the OIC that he have a relief BA crew come in as they were low on the good ol' O2, they were met with the response that they were still enroute to the incident. I believe they ended up coming from Clarendon, Happy Valley 14 and Kangarilla
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 19, 2006, 12:15:44 AM
still better than most country areas


we all have our bad days
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: calspec on June 19, 2006, 12:36:10 AM
This is my point of view only. I don't have exact times but can cross check with the report later.  HVCFS arrived with 2x BA some time after MFS, but certainly not that far behind.  They joined mets for internal attack. Some time later, crews started calling for backup BA. This could be your 25-30min that you heard. HVCFS sent a further two BA crew to incident in HV14 with back up cylinders to boost HV24P's 4 centurion sets and 4 spare cylinders.  Total 6 BA crew on scene.  Morphett Vale and Clarendon were utilised for pump and water carting respectively.  Kangarilla were stopped prior to arrival.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: probie_boy on June 19, 2006, 12:22:06 PM
hey does anyone have pics of this bad boy, i missed it on the news
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: PF_ on June 19, 2006, 06:20:21 PM
Didnt miss much
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: strikeathird on June 19, 2006, 06:59:51 PM
At the end of the day, we are vollies, job well done.


Lets let the criticising rest, and focus on your own "big one" that you will get one day, and hope that everything under the sun unfolds right for you!
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on June 19, 2006, 08:45:15 PM
Didnt miss much

mmm three story house going well from what i understand... cant have missed a thing.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: PF_ on June 19, 2006, 09:05:53 PM
well, the news didnt show a lot of that so no really didnt miss a thing. :-)
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: Laska on June 21, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
Morphett also sent up 2 BA operators in their 14. Kangarilla was responded but didn't have crew to go.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: TillerMan on June 29, 2006, 08:45:45 PM
It's like anything, i know sometimes stirling and other rescue brigades go to rescue's with only 1 or no rescue trained people but have plenty of other nuffers rock up..

Like someone else said we all have our bad days, no doubt if the call was the day before or after there wouldn't have been a problem but as we all know the big jobs don't happen when it's convenient.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: pumprescue on July 05, 2006, 07:36:23 PM
Every brigade has their day, problem is brigades are too proud to get help and default even if they don't have the appropriate crew, do the right thing, wait for 4-6 mins and if no one is there by 4 i would seriously be defaulting, doesn't mean you cannot attend just make sure you have back up, if unsure transmit the box.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: rescue5271 on July 05, 2006, 07:51:01 PM
If no crew default and if  you only have a small crew 2/3 members show up roll and see what you can do till back up arrives.You still have water and mann power that can be used
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on July 05, 2006, 09:23:33 PM
transmit the box.


crank
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: PF_ on July 06, 2006, 07:55:35 AM
Whats with this crank word, what is a crank anyway  :lol:
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: TillerMan on July 08, 2006, 02:59:08 PM
Clearly not you.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: PF_ on July 08, 2006, 03:10:43 PM
Ill take that as a good thing.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: Toast on July 08, 2006, 03:46:47 PM
Apparently its used in the service, as the opposite of its meaning. I still prefer its original meaning, it works well with those who use it.
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: PF_ on July 08, 2006, 05:42:01 PM
which is?
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: Crankster 34 on July 10, 2006, 01:37:52 PM
Well the official definition of a crank goes something like this;

"Crank" is a pejorative term for a person who

holds some belief which the vast majority of his contemporaries would consider counterfactual, clings to this belief in the face of all counterarguments or evidence presented to him.

The term implies that

a "cranky" belief is so wildly at variance with some commonly accepted truth as to be ludicrous, arguing with the crank is useless, because he will invariably dismiss all evidence or arguments which contradict his cranky belief.

Common synonyms for "crank" include kook and crackpot.

The word quack is usually reserved for someone who promotes a medical remedy or practice which he knows to be ineffective.


In the fire service I think you can safely say that a crank is someone that lives breathes and eats fire. Someone that is extremely passionate about the service and will generally put up strong arguments for change. Don't try to argue with a crank because they will always completely baffle you with technical specifications and useless information that will make you believe they really know what they are talking about.

I would say that many of the busier brigades would have a reasonable level of crankness, however the further afield you travel the less cranky they seem.

..... CRANKS OF THE WORLD UNITE .....
Title: Re: 2nd alarm house fire at Woodcroft
Post by: medevac on July 10, 2006, 02:01:02 PM
CRANK = HARDCORE FIRE NUT