Quote from: uniden on January 24, 2008, 06:57:05 PM
19:58:33 24-01-08 MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC084 24/01/08 19:58,RESPOND GRASS FIRE,MAIN NORTH RD,ELIZABETH DOWNS MAP 52 A 12 TG182,ADEL BOUND SOUTH OF ULEY RD ON LHS,SAIR55 ELZ331
Is it just today that this has started happenning??
Yeh, automatic GRN GO-TO channel listing. Hopefully should work well even if its two brigades responding to a location along a border.the listed talkgroup should be the incident talkgroup ;)
Im very confused as to why the first bits of the message are now:
MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC061 - DATE
Should just be MFS: *CFSRES INC#61: RESPOND
would be great if the DATE was put at the end of the message ;)
WITH ALL THIS, STILL REMEMBER TO BOOK MOBILE WITH ADELAIDE FIRE ;)
Quote from: uniden on January 24, 2008, 06:57:05 PM
19:58:33 24-01-08 MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC084 24/01/08 19:58,RESPOND GRASS FIRE,MAIN NORTH RD,ELIZABETH DOWNS MAP 52 A 12 TG182,ADEL BOUND SOUTH OF ULEY RD ON LHS,SAIR55 ELZ331
Is it just today that this has started happenning??
Seems to have started this afternoon. Good idea until they start putting TG182 on calls in CFS area. Have had a few try to tell us to use TG 182 in the past in CFS area. They ended up talking to themselves.
just another fact of the BOMS not suiting the CFS. Combining MFS protocol with CFS Protocol just doesnt mix well.
Tell me why Zippy?
Isn't a case of a bit of give and take? Mind you we can't talk to either of you guys which means we can't up or down grade responses when we get there first :wink: Well not easily anyway (switching channels & contacting Adelaide fire can be a pain).
cheers
Why SES dont have the CFS Channels programmed in..who knows!
Multi Agency Talkgroups dont get utilised enough ey...
MFS like's to operate in one small set of Talkgroups, while CFS its a multitude mostly due to reducing the strain on the GRN system....hence they are completely opposite. And it is generally the MFS operators who seem to have confused the two sets of operational/response procedures. (the Ex CFS ones do a great job...cranks ;))
Note: i could be incorrect, or saying things that i know are incorrect...i call this..."its been a long day"...
...Also who really wants to weed through a lot of pager message jargon that isnt helpful e.g RAMCO ,RAMCO MAP 0 0 0
Stop for Rant # 283
Maybe I mis- interpreted your post Zippy.....are you saying RAMCO was the pager message jargon, or the other bits of the message....? :|
Pip
Ah Zippy you are right of course but that is because everyone was allowed to set up their GRN to suit themselves. Not much point having a government radio network that can't talk to each other (putting aside Multi agency).
Multi agency is hard rub for some, interestingly last debrief I was at highlighted the problems with communications - solution give everyone another services hand held :-(.
The issue you describe, as well as many others is each thinks their way is best without look at alternatives.
I agree the extra bits in the message are not required (fat fingered maybe?)However the TG idea is good - at least everyone is on one channel once there you can all go to your CFS TG.
Communications is one of those areas which should be standard across all of the emergency services, it is time that our collective senior managers did something about it! It would be nice that by next fire season I'm able to talk to the fire services command at an incident without having to carry two (or more) hand helds.
cheers
Pip....was outlining the Map/Location being useless as its mearly the Town name Repeated Twice...and Map 000 0 0...how useful
:|
Weeding out the Job Details just gets harder and harder...well not hard...just takes more time for the brain to put it all together.
Personally i believe that it would have been better to just go from CFS SOCC to the SAFECOM COMCEN at the time the software for SACAD was implemented. Save a lot of screwing around.
Warning....another rant....ignore it if it looks silly :PQuoteMFS: MFS *CFSRES INC072 24/01/08 17:05,RESPOND To,PRINCES HWY,GLEN OSMOND MAP 131 H 12 TG182,TRUCK LEAKING SOMETHING - INVESTIGATE,BURN19 GLO441
From this message the important stuff i get from it is:
It is Incident #72
Its either on Glen Osmond Road, Glen Osmond or the Freeway, Glen Osmond
The Talkgroup for comm's is 182, which i doubt is correct for Burnsides role.
and, The most important information: Truck leaking something, investigate.
In Airsource:
MFS: CFSRES INC#72: RESPOND TRUCK SPILLAGE INVESTIGATION, GLEN OSMOND RD, GLEN OSMOND, *GRN 150*, BURN19 GLO441:
Hopefully that puts my thoughts into how to appreciate delicate information to make sense for Pagers, not just MDT's.
that's on the freeway not glen Osmond road zippy and it is MFS turf from th tunnels down so 182 is fine.
Plus does it matter what tg is assinged as long as we can talk to each other so what.
Actually, SAMFS area ends at the Mt Osmond Overpass, (and Gleneagles Rd), but as bittenyakka said, its still in MFS area.
Just a quick question has this "new" format been introduced with any consultation or has it just been "done"?
And do they really have to have MFS twice at the start?
ah ha....good point safireservice2009 :evil:
We were asked/told about it a while ago...
The talkgroup will be that of the primary brigade.
Quote from: Mike on January 25, 2008, 11:17:15 AM
We were asked/told about it a while ago...
The talkgroup will be that of the primary brigade.
More than likey told it will happen.
Im surprised it's not MFS: MFS MFS MFS MFS *CFSRES: RESPOND GRASS FIR.... just so we know where it came from. :-D
Or they didnt try changing it to *MFSRES:
Just noticed a few pages going out now about the new format. Looks like a case of its done, now we'll tell you about it.
SOP 10.14 the grn talkgroup of the primary brigade will be included on the initial page and subsequent alarm upgrades.
This SOP has been around and agreed on for about 2 to 3 months, but software upgrades at Adelaide Fire have been delaying its introduction till now.
Cheers Jaff
Yep we weren't told about the extra bit either! And great you have an SOP describing whats going on however does that include everyone? As what talk group you guys work on doesn't mean squat to us :-D (refer to earlier post).
Anyway thats democracy at work - again!
cheers
What happens if it's a CFS/SES response, isn't it primary for both the brigade and the unit?
That was my point TG123 dosn't mean much to us same as B23 doesn't mean anything to you guys.
So it would have MFS:MFS Blah blah blah TG123(or what ever it is) TGB23(or what ever). I stand by what I said earlier for you guys with the same radio setup its fine, but for us ther is no point.
cheers
Its just another wave in a turbulent storm on the high seas :)
How lonng a format do we have to have.......
MFS: INC# 055 RESPOND RCR PRINCES HIGHWAY,GLEN OSMOND TG182 GLO441,BRN19 *CFSRES:
SIMPLE
Thats a great way of doing it SA Firey.....almost too simple
Go the armchair guru's !!
The jobs in MFS areas should really be TG150 shouldnt they? Not 182 the chit chat channel. MFS stations were advised of the change to the format on the day that it started by email.
Quote from: pumprescue on January 25, 2008, 03:31:15 PM
Go the armchair guru's !!
you have a thing for arm chairs don't you? What was said makes perfect sense!
You don't need half the crap that is at the start of the message. You don't even need to know that it came from Adelaide fire (MFS at the start) as the format of the message gives a strong indication.
SAAS don't have all of that stuff. If the system needs to generate all of that rubbish why can't it generate grid references?
Anyway thats my thoughts - you guys keep fighting among yourselves about what should or shouldn't commented on and maybe in 100 years there may be some improvement :wink:
cheers
Quote from: uniden on January 25, 2008, 04:01:35 PM
The jobs in MFS areas should really be TG150 shouldnt they? Not 182 the chit chat channel. MFS stations were advised of the change to the format on the day that it started by email.
I would have thought 150 is the dispatch channel, and the incident channel is 182. Similar to how 124 is the region 1 'dispatch' channel and then there are local group talkgroups for incidents.
But MFS appliances report back to comms on 150 same as regional stations report back on their own channels. ie
17:35:37 25-01-08 MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC060 25/01/08 17:34,RESPOND RUBBISH FIRE,33 BASTYAN CR,WHYALLA MAP 0 0 0 TG192,IN LANE BEHIND NO.33,SAIR55 WHY529
Mmmm, good point
Quote from: pumprescue on January 25, 2008, 03:31:15 PM
Go the armchair guru's !!
Well we do have the best vantage point to view it all lol...
Comcen cant see it, Fireground Cant see it, but the players at home can!
Quote from: uniden on January 25, 2008, 04:01:35 PM
The jobs in MFS areas should really be TG150 shouldnt they? Not 182 the chit chat channel. MFS stations were advised of the change to the format on the day that it started by email.
Well you would think so but here is an example
MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC085 24/01/08 20:36,RESPOND Private Alarm,143 OLD SOUTH RD,REYNELLA MAP 177 A 5 TG182,NATIONAL STORAGE 1ST FLOOR STORE AREA 4,OHH421 HPPY00 STM401 CFS Happy Valley Response
Quote from: SA Firey on January 25, 2008, 01:20:51 PM
How lonng a format do we have to have.......
MFS: INC# 055 RESPOND RCR PRINCES HIGHWAY,GLEN OSMOND TG182 GLO441,BRN19 *CFSRES:
SIMPLE
Quote from: chook on January 25, 2008, 04:10:54 PM
Quote from: pumprescue on January 25, 2008, 03:31:15 PM
Go the armchair guru's !!
you have a thing for arm chairs don't you? What was said makes perfect sense!
You don't need half the crap that is at the start of the message. You don't even need to know that it came from Adelaide fire (MFS at the start) as the format of the message gives a strong indication.
SAAS don't have all of that stuff. If the system needs to generate all of that rubbish why can't it generate grid references?
Anyway thats my thoughts - you guys keep fighting among yourselves about what should or shouldn't commented on and maybe in 100 years there may be some improvement :wink:
cheers
well chook, for starters it definitely needs the date/time stamp somewhere in the message, its not unimportant rubbish... maybe it shouldnt be at the start of the message but it should be there...
you do need to know where the message comes from to be able to ack page, Adelaide fire may be the only CRD centre, however it becoming more often for regions and GCCs to page brigades.. a strong indication??? some brigades seem to take pride in copy-cat messaging.
SAAS dont have that stuff because they are talked through the entire details of the case when they come on air... not really as viable an option for the fire service.
oh and the UBD reference... well its nice for us brigades it works for... so the rest of ya :wink:
a nice simple format would include: DIN, Incident Type, Location, UBD Ref, Date/Time, resources responding, other details... oh... hang on, thats what weve got.
Quote20:12:56 25-01-08 MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC074 25/01/08 20:12,RESPOND Private Alarm,WOODSIDE PRIMARY SCHOOL,23 MOFFETT ST,WOODSIDE MAP 137 C 4 TG100,SECURITY ON WAY - NO ETA,WDSD00 CFS Woodside Response
The new system has already failed ;) Woodside definitely ain't in Region 2. Ah well...just meant the comcen operator "ahhh ummmm'ed" for about 10 seconds :evil:
I would personally kill for a grid reference somewhere on the page. especially as it quite often takes a while to translate the spelling of the location of the incident to tie in with a road in our area. I loved it when was asked what a grid reference was when I personally called in an incident to Adelaide Fire. I like that it says when it's come from Adelaide Fire, it usaually means all other services have already been notified
Yes Mack thats what we have + MFS,MFS,CFSRES(yes I know you need that bit).
Now I don't know about you but I still think we can get rid of the MFS MFS bit!
And yep the UBD thing is metro based - or is it?
Country SAAS get a Grid reference - instead of Map 0,0,0.
And of course date time stamp is important, as is other resources, as is location.
And if brigades/ groups are copy catting the format for there own messages, isn't that an internal issue for you guys to sought out?
I know you guys are big on procedures, SOP's, FGP's surely you could write one that said "Don't use this format".
Again personally I put the "crap filter" on when I read these pager messages - e.g. I ring Adelaide fire, quote incident number, ask for additional info. Then arrive at Unit brief the crew who have already worked out the location 98% of the time & start planning a course of action including planning for additional resources, tatics etc.
So if the system wants to put a whole heap of stuff that does not affect the conduct or outcome of the operation - so be it!
Care factor? not very high :-D I still stand by my original comment which was" I agree with Zippy".
Cheers
Quote from: chook on January 26, 2008, 08:55:14 AM
Country SAAS get a Grid reference - instead of Map 0,0,0.
i thought we'd been over that... they only ever get a UBD referance or a rapid number.... and when the rapid number is available to CFS/SES/MFS its usually on the page... Id love to here otherwise though, as it would be great for there service.
Quote
Care factor? not very high :-D I still stand by my original comment which was" I agree with Zippy".
Cheers
No problems.
btw, from everything ive heard having the message start with "MFS: MFS" is just a minor computer issue, not the correct format for the messages.
my 2 cent worth
i dont really care what they put on the page as long as i know where i am going and what i am doing!!
other then that who cares!! :-D :-D :-D
With this example:
MFS: MFS *CFSRES INC085 24/01/08 20:36,RESPOND Private Alarm,143 OLD SOUTH RD,REYNELLA MAP 177 A 5 TG182,NATIONAL STORAGE 1ST FLOOR STORE AREA 4,OHH421 HPPY00 STM401
Apart from 'MFS' being repeated, I cannot see *any* issues with he page at all. It gives all relevant information. It's really the bare minimum info that you would want.
For those who want something like the shorter:
MFS: INC# 055 RESPOND RCR PRINCES HIGHWAY,GLEN OSMOND TG182 GLO441,BRN19 *CFSRES:
Its a terrible page, no time/date stamp, no further information, no mention of any other details or the lack of.
There needs to be a fix for areas that have no UBD coverage, and pages need to be able to hold more information especially when trying to give further details or exact locations.
Dare I suggest?
MFS: INC085 24/01/08 20:36,RESPOND Private Alarm,'NATIONAL STORAGE',143 OLD SOUTH RD,REYNELLA (MAP 177 A 5) ALARM: 1ST FLOOR STORE AREA 4, FIP LOCATED INSIDE LEFT - MAIN FOYER, KEYS #13, SECURITY NOTIFIED, GRN182 - OHH421 HPPY00 STM401 *CFSRES
Quote from: 6739264 on January 30, 2008, 01:32:16 PM
Dare I suggest?
MFS: INC085 24/01/08 20:36,RESPOND Private Alarm,'NATIONAL STORAGE',143 OLD SOUTH RD,REYNELLA (MAP 177 A 5) ALARM: 1ST FLOOR STORE AREA 4, FIP LOCATED INSIDE LEFT - MAIN FOYER, KEYS #13, SECURITY NOTIFIED, GRN182 - OHH421 HPPY00 STM401 *CFSRES
Unfortunately I think this would be two to three pager messages...I think the pager can only cope with 132 characters per message...the techs are balancing as much info as possible within a single pager message.
:roll:
Quote from: bajdas on January 30, 2008, 04:30:45 PM
Unfortunately I think this would be two to three pager messages...I think the pager can only cope with 132 characters per message...the techs are balancing as much info as possible within a single pager message.
Yes, thats part of the problem. You get a cut down message full of abbreviations and vital information is left out. We may as well overhaul the whole technology to allow the transmission of more information. Its not hard and is done elsewhere around the country and the globe.
Sorry for offending you with a suggestion of new technology SA Firey. :roll:
Not sure if this should be a new topic, but curious on the 'date time' within the pager message.
I assume this is the date time that the telephone call was first received or what does it refer to ??
If the date time refers to when the pager message was created, it seems to be a watse of space for me. You can view that on the pager device.
yeh definately is the creation of message date, the format suits MFS Appliance MDT's not CFS Pagers unfortunately.
Sorry for offending you with a suggestion of new technology SA Firey.
Always happy to embrace new technology but was referring to the thread going around in circles :lol:
QuoteI think the pager can only cope with 132 characters per message.
I think you will find it is actually 233 charcters.