Hi all
Just wondering if anyone knows if SES have a AFAC standard RCR course?
I believe the course they do now is AFAC standard, was interesting when we trained with the SES and they'd come out with these in house tecniques that they'd made up and taught on courses that left a little to be desired in the safety department so hopefully with a standard AFAC RCR course both agencies get the desired safe training. :|
thanks i knew they did some weird stuff in house wasn't sure if they had changed their ways
Full TRK course released last year and is now the standard training for all SES RCR training.
Yes SES do have a standard RCR training which differs from the CFS RCR manual. however in rural area's RCR practices leave alot to be desired. How ever they always seem to do well in the RCR comps so it can;t be all that bad
Quote from: cleland.j on September 21, 2006, 09:00:15 AM
Yes SES do have a standard RCR training which differs from the CFS RCR manual. however in rural area's RCR practices leave alot to be desired. How ever they always seem to do well in the RCR comps so it can;t be all that bad
Maybe in
some rural areas, but not all. Please try not to generalise and put everyone down; there are some of us who are damn good at what we do.
Quote from: cleland.j on September 21, 2006, 09:00:15 AM
Yes SES do have a standard RCR training which differs from the CFS RCR manual. however in rural area's RCR practices leave alot to be desired. How ever they always seem to do well in the RCR comps so it can;t be all that bad
That is what I thought a TRK course is designed to 'iron out' the practices & make the techniques standard.
Interesting that the senior paid SES training officer in charge of the RCR TRK lives at Meningie and works for the SES East Region.
I understand development of RCR TRK and the SES trucks were both designed with input from country volunteers.
Quote from: squiddy on September 21, 2006, 09:06:15 AM
Quote from: cleland.j on September 21, 2006, 09:00:15 AM
Yes SES do have a standard RCR training which differs from the CFS RCR manual. however in rural area's RCR practices leave alot to be desired. How ever they always seem to do well in the RCR comps so it can;t be all that bad
Maybe in some rural areas, but not all. Please try not to generalise and put everyone down; there are some of us who are damn good at what we do.
Yes I know we are damn good at our job coming from two RCR SES units. I'm just saying that until SES becomes standard across the board you are going to have a laps in desired RCR tecniques. CFS is equally impressive in there RCR tecniques but they have alot more paper work to back up there practices.
the last actual rescue i attended where SES were required to extricate two patients, one from each car, it took an hour for the first and another hour for the 2nd (rough estimation of times).
My thoughts are - Why didnt they call for back up rescue and why did it take so long to do what seemed to be a faily simple rescue - cut the b pillar out, remove the doors (one car required a roof roll)
but really what is the normal time for this to be carried out? surely not an hour or more
We have a similar problem with the SES up the road from us, they want to be called to all MVA's in our area and we don't hesitate to call them if we think they might be needed, but getting them to call us to back them up is a different matter it's a very rare thing for them to call us.
I asked one of the higher members in their unit one day why they don't call us and got the reply "thats not up to us thats up to the other (non rescue) CFS on scene". :|
Camo in your case i can't speculate as to why they took so long but i was always told and always follow that if there is rescue required in both vehicles then second rescue MUST BE RESPONDED....
Quote from: Camo on September 21, 2006, 06:43:12 PM
the last actual rescue i attended where SES were required to extricate two patients, one from each car, it took an hour for the first and another hour for the 2nd (rough estimation of times).
My thoughts are - Why didnt they call for back up rescue and why did it take so long to do what seemed to be a faily simple rescue - cut the b pillar out, remove the doors (one car required a roof roll)
but really what is the normal time for this to be carried out? surely not an hour or more
There's a lot of things that can cause an extrication to take a while, so without knowing all the mitigating circumstances surrounding the particular incident, its hard to know how long it should have taken. Such variables as the experience of the crew, the state of equipment, the state of overcrowding, and of course, the state of the casualty all come into effect here.
From what you've said there the time does sound quite outside of the ideal "golden hour"... Then again, what look to be simple rescues can take us a fairly long time too. I know people are going to jump on this instantly, but its a fact of life...
Quote from: Smallflame on September 21, 2006, 11:39:06 PM
There's a lot of things that can cause an extrication to take a while, so without knowing all the mitigating circumstances surrounding the particular incident, its hard to know how long it should have taken. Such variables as the experience of the crew, the state of equipment, the state of overcrowding, and of course, the state of the casualty all come into effect here.
From what you've said there the time does sound quite outside of the ideal "golden hour"... Then again, what look to be simple rescues can take us a fairly long time too. I know people are going to jump on this instantly, but its a fact of life...
I think you'll find that in our SOP's (I'd hope that the SES's arent too different, but we're getting into banjo territory) if the casualty is still trapped after 15 minutes of work by the first rescue resource, a second rescue needs to be responded. Now even if this was delayed due to paramedic intervention, there still stands the point about if the incident involves two cars, both with people trapped, then a second rescue response shall be responded
The state of the equipment should not case a HUGE delay in the cut out, unless of course you're trying to take the roof of a car off with plastic knives and forks. State of over crowding? What?
Quote from: Toast on September 22, 2006, 12:36:57 AM
I think you'll find that in our SOP's (I'd hope that the SES's arent too different, but we're getting into banjo territory) if the casualty is still trapped after 15 minutes of work by the first rescue resource, a second rescue needs to be responded. Now even if this was delayed due to paramedic intervention, there still stands the point about if the incident involves two cars, both with people trapped, then a second rescue response shall be responded
The state of the equipment should not case a HUGE delay in the cut out, unless of course you're trying to take the roof of a car off with plastic knives and forks. State of over crowding? What?
Enough with the generalisations. I know a few cfs brigades who crank up the banjos too.
Anyway, I have seen rescues take far too long thanks to the egos of those involved wanting to get in and do everything themselves. I have also seen ambos all climb into cars to deal with a casualty and push the rescuers out the way. I have seen side intrusion bars snap cutters and tips broken off spreaders.
As far as the casualty being trapped after 15 minutes, it is not always possible to work to that statistic due to the nature of the damage to the car. I don't know about your area, but when cars hit things here, metal gets folded and torn which occasionally makes it difficult to do what we need to. Yes, we have SOPs that state ideal times, but not every rescue goes according to plan. Do you live in an area where cars read textbooks and crash accordingly?
Quote from: squiddy on September 22, 2006, 07:29:47 AM
Quote from: Toast on September 22, 2006, 12:36:57 AM
I think you'll find that in our SOP's (I'd hope that the SES's arent too different, but we're getting into banjo territory) if the casualty is still trapped after 15 minutes of work by the first rescue resource, a second rescue needs to be responded. Now even if this was delayed due to paramedic intervention, there still stands the point about if the incident involves two cars, both with people trapped, then a second rescue response shall be responded
The state of the equipment should not case a HUGE delay in the cut out, unless of course you're trying to take the roof of a car off with plastic knives and forks. State of over crowding? What?
Enough with the generalisations. I know a few cfs brigades who crank up the banjos too.
Anyway, I have seen rescues take far too long thanks to the egos of those involved wanting to get in and do everything themselves. I have also seen ambos all climb into cars to deal with a casualty and push the rescuers out the way. I have seen side intrusion bars snap cutters and tips broken off spreaders.
As far as the casualty being trapped after 15 minutes, it is not always possible to work to that statistic due to the nature of the damage to the car. I don't know about your area, but when cars hit things here, metal gets folded and torn which occasionally makes it difficult to do what we need to. Yes, we have SOPs that state ideal times, but not every rescue goes according to plan. Do you live in an area where cars read textbooks and crash accordingly?
Metal folds and gets torn? Really? Thanks for such enlightening comments! I was merely quoting the times and procedures (eg: What 'should' be done) as outlined in our SOP's in relation to the two cars two hours job reffered to by Camo. And those silly ambos, I can't believe they would push the rescuers out of the way to do silly things like stabilise the patient...
Things don't always go to plan? Yes! Should one SES crew have taken two hours to extract casualties? No!
See? It's simple, no need to get narky.
I know of a CFS crew that took 2 hours to extract casualties as well.
I have seen CFS do exactly the same thing.
As for your local SES issue Mundcfs, As far as I have been told by CFS paid staff, there is no requirement to respond a second rescue to a 2 car mva. (I disagree though!). However, if there is still a problem, lodge a grievence form..... and see what happens.....
Every job is capable of having the time pushed out. This depends on many things. Limiting further injury to the casualty being first and formost (after safety of course)....
anyways...
I'd get stuck into a CFS crew as well, just for the record :wink:
Quote from: Toast on September 22, 2006, 08:30:02 AM
Metal folds and gets torn? Really? Thanks for such enlightening comments! I was merely quoting the times and procedures (eg: What 'should' be done) as outlined in our SOP's in relation to the two cars two hours job reffered to by Camo. And those silly ambos, I can't believe they would push the rescuers out of the way to do silly things like stabilise the patient...
Things don't always go to plan? Yes! Should one SES crew have taken two hours to extract casualties? No!
See? It's simple, no need to get narky.
Actually, you might want to ask the CFS about why that job took so long since they claim to have been in charge.
I think you will find that if you look at the SA road crash rescue resource directory which is used by all emergency services that there is a requirement to respond additional rescue response for each trapped person. When you do your CFS RCR course they tell you that too.
I have witnessed first hand issues with CFS, SES and MFS crews in RCR - as has been stated every situation is different!
Obviously everyone who has commented here has been on the tools and follows a standard, document and well rehearsed extrication each time they attend an MVA with RCR requirements.
Interesting to note that CFS and MFS are using an AFAC standard, whilst SES are using the new National Standard as part of the public safety training package.
In such a small state, we should all be learning from each other, training with each other and working to move forward.
I have seen a lot in innovation from both CFS and SES in RCR in the past few years - both are championing the cause and pushing RCR techniques and training forward.
We all need to remember though, competency has a shelf life and if your were trained 4 years ago, your techniques cannot be compared with those of today due to new tools, new techniques and the rapider changing car industry.
Quote from: oz fire on September 22, 2006, 03:01:48 PM
Obviously everyone who has commented here has been on the tools and follows a standard, document and well rehearsed extrication each time they attend an MVA with RCR requirements.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHAH i doubt that....
the only thing i would like to contribute is this... whoever dispatches the call, whether it be MFS or CFS are required to send one rescue and one fire resouorce regardless of size or complexity of the incident (in reality common sense should not play a role, just set responses), it is then up to the OIC to decide whether more resources are required...
and if need be then it is up to that OIC to justify there decision to the coroner.
Quote from: oz fire on September 22, 2006, 03:01:48 PM
Obviously everyone who has commented here has been on the tools and follows a standard, document and well rehearsed extrication each time they attend an MVA with RCR requirements.
Oh wow... I really hope that was tongue in cheek, because I know for a fact that some of those commenting here have never done the rcr course or even used the tools before... which generally leads me to believe that until they do so, their opinions in regards to jobs are little more than stirring the pot.
Cheers fellas :mrgreen:
each RCR job is differant,as for following the rules well come on what you learn on the RCR course may not work on the road.. So one needs to(a) be a team player.. (b) always have two rescue plans...(c) the golden rule of rescue does not apply if the person is in a heavy rescue and by that I mean truck into a tree,truck v truck or car v truck....
In country areas a high speed inpact is just that 110-120 kms into a tree or truck is one messy and long job and you may only be the only rescue brigade around for 100kms.....
Oh so we are inventing new words now. rapider?
sorry that was a bit harsh.
Quote from: ath on September 23, 2006, 10:25:01 AM
sorry that was a bit harsh.
I'll say... get back in your box :-P
Quote from: ath on September 23, 2006, 08:34:02 AM
Oh so we are inventing new words now. rapider?
Sounds like a super fast moving spider :| HEAD FOR THE HILLS!
So after all the talk in this topic back to my question. Is the SES running a AFAC Australian standard RCR course. For example if a SES rescue person was on a CFS truck and said they were rescue qualified is it all the same? I know in the passed that would have been laughed at because their rescue course did not even involve tool work.
Quote from: pumprescue on September 25, 2006, 10:15:45 AM
So after all the talk in this topic back to my question. Is the SES running a AFAC Australian standard RCR course. For example if a SES rescue person was on a CFS truck and said they were rescue qualified is it all the same? I know in the passed that would have been laughed at because their rescue course did not even involve tool work.
Since when did the SES RCR course not involve tool work? Why would a RCR course not involve tool work? Isn't that the really big part of RCR; being able to extricate someone? Don't you need tools for that? (and I don't just mean the tools that stand around thinking they know everything without having done the relevant course...)
I believe in recent times, last 12 months or so, the SES has introduced a nationally accredited RCR course. Whether or not it is the same as the current CFS course i have no idea...
Quote from: Smallflame on September 25, 2006, 04:34:19 PM
I believe in recent times, last 12 months or so, the SES has introduced a nationally accredited RCR course. Whether or not it is the same as the current CFS course i have no idea...
You should, you're a third of the way through it...
Quote from: squiddy on September 25, 2006, 03:41:57 PM
Quote from: pumprescue on September 25, 2006, 10:15:45 AM
So after all the talk in this topic back to my question. Is the SES running a AFAC Australian standard RCR course. For example if a SES rescue person was on a CFS truck and said they were rescue qualified is it all the same? I know in the passed that would have been laughed at because their rescue course did not even involve tool work.
Since when did the SES RCR course not involve tool work? Why would a RCR course not involve tool work? Isn't that the really big part of RCR; being able to extricate someone? Don't you need tools for that? (and I don't just mean the tools that stand around thinking they know everything without having done the relevant course...)
Harsh, Squiddy!
He's got a good point actually.... SES have been using the equipment since I did the training (10+ years ago) So I have no idea where that idea came from.
Quote from: Mike on September 26, 2006, 06:54:15 AM
He's got a good point actually.... SES have been using the equipment since I did the training (10+ years ago) So I have no idea where that idea came from.
Well thats what you'd imagine. The course would be pretty redundant if it were teaching RCR without the operation of tools, you could always sit and stare and hope the vehicle falls apart in the right places..
"Use the Swartz" (Spaceballs)
Quote from: Mike on September 26, 2006, 06:54:15 AM
He's got a good point actually.... SES have been using the equipment since I did the training (10+ years ago) So I have no idea where that idea came from.
I would say it comes from someone showing a lot of ignorance towards things they don't understand. I think that's the problem with a lot of the animosity between the services and why we end up having stupid little statements made like that in the first place.
Quote from: Mike on September 26, 2006, 07:11:35 AM
"Use the Swartz" (Spaceballs)
I see your Swartz is as big as mine...
Quote from: squiddy on September 26, 2006, 07:17:20 AM
Quote from: Mike on September 26, 2006, 07:11:35 AM
"Use the Swartz" (Spaceballs)
I see your Swartz is as big as mine...
Never underestimate the power of the Schwartz!
man, i just couldn't find that movie funny.
inthe case of RCR, I wouldn't give a crap if the person cutting me out of a car was trained a certain way, just as long as they weren't hurting or endangering me, and they were getting me out of there.
But orange is so passe :|
Quote from: Toast on September 26, 2006, 12:09:50 PM
But orange is so passe :|
OH NOES WE WEAR ORANGE VESTS!
Quote from: Toast on September 26, 2006, 12:09:50 PM
But orange is so passe :|
Not as sour as lemons, and from the sounds of things, you're a pretty sour fella.
The SES Course is to the National Public Safety Training standard - (PUASAR002A) Undertake road accident rescue
Interesting the only training provider registered to deliver this course in SA is Fire Safety and Training Services
CFS deliver the AFAC standrad for RCR, which when the two courses are compared does not align or meet the requirements of the National Public Safety package - few minor discrepancies!
That used to be correct but CFS are now delivering quite a bit of Public Safety units of training including RCR.
Note the national codes on the training program.
http://www.cfs.org.au/training/pdf/2006%20Training%20Poster%20A3%20V1.4.pdf
Question answered then - both CFS and SES train to the National course - however for those of you who don't understand the back ground to National Competencies - each provider can add 'modules' above and beyond the minimum requirement to meet their outcomes and as with any National training, the course will vary because different people write them - the BASICS and OUTCOMES though remain the same minimum standards
Now - when will MFS extract the digit and follow the lead of the Volunteer services and meet National standards?????????