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 - 6739264

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 70

It has taken off!

... That's kind of what aircraft do...

All Equipment discussion / Re: Sirens on american vehicles
« on: March 18, 2012, 10:35:40 PM »
Having a very loud siren, and a truck doing no better speed than a B-Double going up a hill is sometimes embarassing.

Well, uh, turn it off?

All Equipment discussion / Re: Sirens on american vehicles
« on: March 18, 2012, 03:31:13 PM »
Maybe the americans could have loctronic sirens on their appliances instead of the Q siren and horn although i guess we could adapt to having their powercall siren on our appliances

I think your argument is flawed. This is primarily due to the Powercall being a fantastic siren and the Loctronic siren being nearly one of the worst ever invented. "Mix" - For when you're too lazy to operate a siren correctly.


All Equipment discussion / Re: Thermal Imaging Camera
« on: March 06, 2012, 08:45:12 AM »
I'm not a huge fan of the Argus 4, but at the same time, it's a TIC and you'd rather have a mediocre TIC than not one at all.

If you can try and get an in-truck charging system. Yes its more money, but it ensure that the TIC is ready to go anytime. Not to mention, get it mounted either in the cab or in the CABA locker.

SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: February 25, 2012, 08:38:08 AM »
Shame we gotta find this out on here...

We were told 2 Group Meetings ago, so your GO's and Captains would have known.

But it wont impede our business, just improve it, so I don't see that it is necessary to pass it on to all FF's.

So the naming conventions for appliance types has changed and you don't see it as necessary to pass it on to the people who are riding the trucks and using the radios?

SA Firefighter General / Re: SACAD
« on: February 11, 2012, 05:30:40 PM »
How hard is all of this?

Can the CFS grow up and become a real fire service? Lets hope so. Lets use the Alarm Response SOP like we are meant to. If you don't need the resources then just put a stop on them. If you need a specific specialist resource, just call for it. It's not hard.

If people are open and embrace the new system, rather than just trying to smash the old square peg in the new round hole, we might actually move forward. Anyone remember all the crying and sob stories about the wrong trucks being responded to calls in a certain brigades area and people wanting SACAD to fix the issue? Now SACAD IS fixing the issue and consequently it's opened up a number of large glaring holes in people's perfect little empires and people don't like it.

Grow up, and get with the times.

1) If you have a grievance, as has been said before, LODGE THE FORMS. Of course there will be teething problems.

2) If you're trying to do something the "good old way" and it's not working - LEARN how to operate under the new system before you whinge about it. If it's still not working as intended, see point 1.

3) Yes, CFS shot themselves in the foot and are continuing to shoot themselves in the feet and legs by feeding everybody different information. Once the hierarchy sort that mess out, and people put in their grievance forms, we might actually see SACAD working as intended.

4) It's not hard.

Totally agree with Big Al. Has there ever been the thought of trialing the CFA "Make" system???

Have you thought about working for SACFS HQ? Yep, lets trial an outdated system that is inferior in every way to the Greater Alarm Response Procedure - Sounds like you're perfect HQ material ;)

Question: Whose idea was it to break up the daily incident number system into ....god knows another groups..

Isn't the whole point of the DIN, for the comcen to differentiate between each and every job.

I would have thought each DIN, has a different AIRS incident number.



As the COQ is an action caused by Incident 0001 ;)

And CoQ's have a different AIRS code to a structure fire...

A CoQ should have it's own DIN no? It is a discrete appliance movement after all.

SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: December 21, 2011, 07:22:37 AM »
bit tuff :?

Do you meet the CFS Physical Requirements?

HAZMAT / Re: First alarm response
« on: December 11, 2011, 05:21:17 PM »
What i find odd is that there is only provisions for first and second rescues in cad, if you need a third and the rarest occurences fourth rescue comms have to go to Region as to who gets responded.

Fourth RCR gets a Strike Team of RCR (Not "Rescue" just RCR) Appliances. ;)

HAZMAT / Re: First alarm response
« on: December 11, 2011, 10:45:36 AM »
Ah yes, the two SOP's that contradict each other... Where does the "Crew leader" or IC go? What are they called? Do they take an airset? They have to investigate the zone AND stay in the CP at the FCR...

I can't wait till I get my Crew Leader magical teleporting powers.

Curious, how do you force entry to a fire affected location armed with an Entry Control Board and bag of hose?

HAZMAT / Re: First alarm response
« on: December 11, 2011, 09:16:06 AM »
Do we then further ask about responses that come out with ==Alarm level updated to 2== but don't actually consist of a 2nd Alarm assignment?

What kind of incident was that for?

So far, multiple. RCR is a pretty noticeable one. If an appliance can't get on the road, or there is a lack of operators so the next Rescue/Fire appliance is turned out, that doesn't make it a 2A response. But we are seeing a single resource paged out with ==Alarm level updated to 2== attached to the message. I'm sure its just teething issues, but it does make it a little unclear if its a "big job" or if its just a scramble to fill the first alarm response.

Slightly off the Hazmat topic, but what do I get for a 4th alarm RCR? The SOP states Strike Team Response, and a Strike Team is defined as 5 resources of the same type. Do I get 5xRescue Resources to a 4th alarm RCR?

Specifically for Hazmat as pumprescue suggested, does a 2nd alarm now get me 3xHazmat Resources + The State Hazmat or just 2 more Hazmat resources + State Hazmat as per the SOP's for 2nd alarm?

Why do SAMFS SOP and SACFS SFEC prescriptions reference A,B,C,Special & Other Risk, yet SACFS SOP has Very High, High, Significant, Medium and Low/Very Low risk?

Why is there no response schedule for Structure Fires? We have a goddamn response schedule for VEHICLE FIRES but not for structures? The only thing we get is "If its a CABA incident, ensure 4xCABA sets per alarm level"

I think I'd better go get breakfast...

HAZMAT / Re: First alarm response
« on: December 10, 2011, 10:58:52 AM »
Do we then further ask about responses that come out with ==Alarm level updated to 2== but don't actually consist of a 2nd Alarm assignment?

SA Firefighter General / Re: CFS using K-codes
« on: December 09, 2011, 08:08:06 PM »
How about a button box?


Country Fire Service / Re: OPS Bulletin 29 - PPV Use
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:57:30 PM »
I was going to quote and specifically deal with parts of your post, but I think that perhaps it'll be easier if I just post a different view on things.

I for one am glad to finally see some positive action being taken to consolidate our fireground practices.

Over the past few years I have on many occasions seen PPV fans in use at CFS incidents. This has been over a number of groups, with a number of different brigades. The vast majority of the time, the fans have been used incorrectly, either leading to a significant increase in fire behaviour, or a severe contamination of the area they are trying to "ventilate". It is obvious that the CFS need to develop a Tac Vent package, and as you are obviously aware, this is/has been done, but is still facing a number of hurdles.

Now, from my experience with Positive Pressure Attack, it requires a very switched on, and highly trained crew to implement in a safe and efficient manner. If your brigade happens to have this, then more power to you. Frankly I'd love to see the material you teach and instruct. PM? Anyhow, I believe that broadly the CFS as a whole does not possess this, and as a risk minimisation strategy, have produced this ops bulletin.

It should perhaps be pointed out that there are also a number of career fire & rescue agencies in the country that have very similar thoughts on the topic. Now, with this and their training budget/instructors/materials/research/facilities in mind, if they struggle to train their crews to a level of competence that they believe is adequate to use PPA on the fireground, how on earth can CFS come close when we don't even teach basic ventilation anymore?

We, as a service, are struggling to reach every CABA operator and teach them the basics of structural fire behaviour. We also struggle to use PPV fans correctly for the simple task of post fire ventilation. PPA requires a high level of knowledge, understanding and recognition of structural fire behaviour and a higher level of knowledge of use of PPV fans, as well as reading the burning regime and vent profile of a building. If we cannot achieve basic competence in any of these areas, how can it be safe to allow the service to utilise a practice that requires a HIGH level of competence?

I understand that you may have a very well drilled and instructed brigade, but perhaps its best to think outside of your patch and look at the service? We need to hone our basic skills and understanding rather than try to implement ideas that are not officially endorsed or instructed and can be VERY dangerous.

I don't think some people realise just how close we have come to some major extreme fire behaviour events, and so far it has merely been luck that nothing has happened.

All Equipment discussion / Re: Scanner
« on: November 26, 2011, 06:11:27 PM »

All Equipment discussion / Re: lighting-stowege
« on: November 05, 2011, 10:59:18 AM »
4x Goliath lights. Very good lights, cold to touch, easily strapped to anything or sat in their stand. Cheap as well compared to some of the systems mentioned above, and far more appropriate for close quarters work, eg: RCR

Country Fire Service / Re: brigade promotional stuff
« on: November 01, 2011, 07:34:28 PM »
Standard PPC issue, so your saying that EVER firefighter in the state should have one issued....if thats the case then something is very wrong !

I prefer blue myself  :-P
Yep...just check the uniform manual....

Is that the same uniform manual that states "Long Socks" are part of both Structural and Rural firefighting ensemble? I haven't been issued my socks yet...

Them SOP's sure are tough to follow.

SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: August 31, 2011, 08:14:43 AM »
What does the P stand for then?

Pumper - Referring more to it's urban/specialist stowage than to its pumping abilty.

Still, why not call it a 24P or 34P, which is its official callsign, rather than call it "Pumper" which referres to a larger, heavy pumper that is an urban specific resource?

Just because you run a 34P with Hazmat stowage does not make it "Brigade xyz Hazmat"

SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: August 27, 2011, 09:34:24 PM »

Dalkeith has a Pupmer?

And it has two HP lines?

Goddamned volunteers...

they had issues with a seal if i recall correctly it was repoved to find a replacement i think

Did I miss the part where Dalkeith has a pumper?

Again, as far as I know, Dalkeith only has a 34P, and unless that girl can spit 2500kpa outta those side lines, then they are NOT High Pressure lines.

Its not hard kids, stop calling your appliances things that they are not.


SA Firefighter General / Re: Volunteer Exodus Sparks Emergency
« on: August 22, 2011, 12:16:50 PM »
Yes the crusty out of touch GO's certainly make life hard, but if you don't like them then vote them out !!! Oh that's right some groups can't break dynasties !!

The sooner they make a PID for roles then better !

PID already exists!

SA Firefighter General / Re: WA Fire Chief Booted - FESA on the Skids
« on: August 17, 2011, 04:08:00 PM »


SA Firefighter General / Re: Ammusing pager message.
« on: August 10, 2011, 04:32:20 PM »

Dalkeith has a Pupmer?

And it has two HP lines?

Goddamned volunteers...

Country Fire Service / Re: Who is looking after our media section
« on: July 30, 2011, 12:35:49 PM »
Do we really need media attention on jobs that do not paint the service in a terribly positive light?

Sure it may highlight the deficiencies in training, but to the average person it simply reinforces the "Dad's Army" Bushfire brigade image.

Country Fire Service / Re: Spot the Chief
« on: July 25, 2011, 07:30:14 PM »
I met him... and he even spoke to me!

(as he rushed past)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 70