K-codes for action taken

[Jono]

Can anyone give me a list of the K-Codes for the action taken at a job? They only recently started to use them I believe???

[Jimmy_91]

See Matt B's site.  :wink: :-D

http://users.sa.chariot.net.au/~mattb/scan/mfsfreq.htm

[CFS_Firey]

Jimmy - they're the K-codes, not the action taken codes...

[safireservice]

There is a section in there with the codes he requires

[filtered]

It's been explained to me by someone in the know that they're an expanded list of what is on the CFS AIRS reports.

For situation found - the number relates to the incident type number on the AIRS code.

For action taken - the number relates to the numbers found in the "action taken at incident" on the second page (Block A3) of the AIRS report. In cases where the number is not on there (like 15), the first number relates to the categories - so 15 is in the extinguishment series.

I don't have a list, but it's a start to work it out...

[CFS_Firey]

There is a section in there with the codes he requires

Thanks, found it.

http://users.sa.chariot.net.au/~mattb/scan/SAMFS stop codes.pdf

[6739264]

The only ones of those that are really of any use are the 700 series for AFA's. The rest are best passed in plain english in stop messages.

It needs to be noted that they are NOT K-Codes.

Eg: "Adelaide Fire from Pumper XXXX Stop for [Address] Code 756, Over.

[CFS_Firey]

They actually use it in the format:

"Stop for incident ##, situation found ###, action taken ### over."

[6739264]

They actually use it in the format:

"Stop for incident ##, situation found ###, action taken ### over."

I mourn today, as communications have taken a large leap backwards.

[SA Firey]

Does not apply to us as CFS are not permitted to use K-Codes or the new action taken ones.....YET

[safireservice]

Does not apply to us as CFS are not permitted to use K-Codes or the new action taken ones.....YET

So who was the person on Stirling Rescue yesterday who booked K1 to a job? Was it you 67932654?

[rusty]

Just to clarify, the stop codes (action taken, situation found etc) are not K Codes and have not been developed by the MFS... They are a national standard code developed for AIRS, and even appear in CFS Fire Reports, though in the CFS we work the other way around, entering the choice from the picklist which then populates the code...
Further into the future as mobile networking is improved, those codes may not even be transmitted over the radio, but the S/O may enter it directly into the fire report from the MCT (mobile computer terminal) in the appliance.
The codes help Adel Fire operators enormously in cutting down verbose S/Os who waffle their sitreps and stop messages with unnecessary detail, cutting down radio traffic. This should also allow the radio operator to respond quicker to CFS radio traffic on other talkgroups, so we benefit too.

[6739264]

Does not apply to us as CFS are not permitted to use K-Codes or the new action taken ones.....YET

So who was the person on Stirling Rescue yesterday who booked K1 to a job? Was it you 67932654?

What leads you to that conclusion? I book mobile, not a huge fan of K-Codes, and I love my stop messages in plain English unless its an Alarm Activation Cause code, I also enjoy long walks on the beach at sunset and cuddling up with a good book and a bottle of red.

[boredmatrix]

cutting down verbose S/Os who waffle their sitreps and stop messages with unnecessary detail, cutting down radio traffic. This should also allow the radio operator to respond quicker to CFS radio traffic on other talkgroups, so we benefit too.

now if only you could try and extend this to every other agency - life with GRN would be much more palatable!!

[RescueHazmat]

Amen!

[Zippy]

Adelaide Fire, Nuffer 34P Stop for incident 69, at 42 Nuffer Street Nuffer, Situation found 180, Action Taken 15, Over.

now that'll be the day!

[fireblade]

I belong to one of those urban fringe brigades we use to use K-codes a long time ago no drama's till CFS HQ said not to so now we don't.

I agree anything that makes the system quicker and easy to use must be a good thing. SAPOL use their codes no drama's.

Plus if it makes it easier for those poor guys and girls in Adelaide Fire Comm's I say good as they must be under the pump on a regular basis.

[Zippy]

Yeh probably a reason why we dont use K-Codes, cos it would take a very long time for the entire state to learn them, and the acutal need to use them isnt really a priority.  Should be a OIC preference i say :P..

[Pipster]

Codes are great - quick & easy, makes it clear exactly what you have.....except if you don't use them all the time.....

Police use codes.  They use them all the time.   There are a few codes that only come up occasionally - and people don't know what they are, and have to check up to find out.   Newbies regularly give out the wrong code, and give the Comms Operator, and other patrols an absolute heart attack (eg instead of calling a "603" which is a traffic stop, they called a "604" which is a stolen car, which they then proceeded to tell everyone the car had two occupants, and was travelling along particular roads, and all patrols stat heading their way, ready for a chase!)

Unless you use codes all the time, and therefore familiar with them, they can become very cumbersome, and defeat the purpose of using them in the first place.

I heard a rumour some time ago that MFS wanted to get rid of the K codes, but there was some opposition to that....don't know if that was true...can someone in the know perhaps clarify...?

Pip

[chook]

The military also used  codes (mainly for positions & assets). Takes a long time to learn, however once learnt they are fantastic. And as you said must be used every time.
SES have adopted an alpha numeric codes, again for positions & assets. After some opposition they seem to be working fine. Much easier to say (Unit) 1 instead of (Unit) Unit manager :-D. I still like the friendly approach though "hey Bob whats happenin?" :evil:
However for actual incidents & action taken, it would be difficult for the reasons mentioned.
cheers

[Zippy]

Well CFS has started to use some sort of coding,  incident numbers hehe...thats eliminated stating the incident type, adress, and everything else.  I think thats probably one of the forward steps that the move to adelaide fire has given us.

[chook]

 Yep luv it :-D
Especially when you have to ring Adlaide fire in the middle of the night when you have just woken up!
"Adelaide Fire this is (Unit) responding to Incident 57 any further info?"
Rather than "Adelaide fire this is(Unit) responding to the RCR on the old Sturt hwy Monash any further info?"
While stumbling thru the darken house, finding car keys, etc etc :roll:

[fireblade]

Yeah I guess you're right I guess my brigade got good and use to them due to using them frequently being a high responding brigade and always having a folder in from of the OIC which had all the codes if he needed it.

I do agree I like the incident numbers on pagers real easy "Whatever 34P responding to incident no. three two"

Especially when your woken up in the middle of the night and it's your turn to have the brigade duty officers phone and it's the second or third job that night :-o

[6739264]

Plain English means no misunderstanding, no misreading, and a larger amount of information passed on faster.

Using them for things like AFA activations where there are a small number of common causes could well be a benefit, but I dread the thought of further implementation.

[uniden]

Pip, the K codes were changed slightly. Several were discarded and a few were slightly changed.