Author Topic: Rope Rescue (Read 23265 times)

CFS_Firey · « **on:** January 20, 2010, 12:28:44 PM »

Are all units trained and equipped for vertical/high angle rescue? I've been told some of the hills units aren't equipped for rope rescue, but I find that hard to believe when Rescue from heights is an SES job.
It's a pity there isn't a fire-brigade.asn.au equivalent for SES...

Alex · « **Reply #1 on:** January 20, 2010, 05:06:52 PM »

Not all units are trained or equiped for vertical rescue.

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #2 on:** January 20, 2010, 08:33:08 PM »

Do you know if Sturt, Adelaide Hills, Lobethal or Strath are? (or any idea what the closest vertical rescue unit to Mt Lofty would be?)

Mike · « **Reply #3 on:** January 20, 2010, 09:16:43 PM »

Sturt = Yes
Strath = No
Loby & Adelaide Hills - Not sure, but I think: No

Other than Sturt, the next closest would be Metro South (Mitcham) or Eastern Suburbs

SA Firey · « **Reply #4 on:** January 20, 2010, 09:52:44 PM »

Noarlunga SES is also trained for Vertical Rescue

Tea Tree Gully SES=Vertical Rescue
Mt Gambier SES=Vertical Rescue

The folowing are not Vertical Rescue units

Adelaide Hills
Booleroo Centre
Burra
Bute
Campbelltown
Clare
Cummins-Gaining accreditation
Eastern Suburbs
Edinburgh
Enfield
Hallet
Hawker
Kapunda
Laura
Marla
Maitland
Minatbie
Metro South
Onkaparinga
Prospect
Port Broughton
Quorn
Roxby Downs
Saddleworth
Spalding
Snowtown
Sturt
Warooka
Western Adelaide

Alex · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2010, 12:38:40 AM »

I couldn't tell you exactly which units are or are not vertical rescue accredited, and im not sure where SAFirey has gotten his list so would not take that as gospel. Unless SAFirey can let us know?

However i would suggest that Sturt SES would be the closest resource to Stirling [since i assume this is regarding your equipment being taken away], but that STAR group are actually the authority who handle most of this role.

Perhaps it would be better to concentrate on Fire, RCR and HAZMAT training and response than trying to add another feather to the cap? I know the equipment was taken away, but as far as i know it was always brigade funded and trained and never a gazetted responsibility?

chook · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2010, 04:41:36 AM »

Yep not sure where the list came from - it doesn't mention any of the Riverland towns which all have some vertical rescue equipment - except Barmera (ropes, decenders, harnesses) & Loxton has a full compilment of eqipment including Larkin frames.
Secondly Basic recue from heights & depths is covered in General rescue & as part of the standard kit all units would have the basic gear for that task &
Finally there are vertical rescue operators scattered all over the place (I know this as I was one of them)& equipment strategically located around the state. So I think the original post has been answered.
cheers

Mike · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:08:47 AM »

Am interested about where that list came from as well.

Vertical Resue within SES is its own hot topic at the moment anyway. Apparently there was a serious accident (all details seem to have been banned from public/volunteer knowledge), which in turn prompted a major review of operations.

A lot of the units have vertical gear, but accreditaion of members is an ongoing issue.

jason · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:32:51 AM »

Quote from: Mike on January 21, 2010, 07:08:47 AM

Am interested about where that list came from as well.

Vertical Resue within SES is its own hot topic at the moment anyway. Apparently there was a serious accident (all details seem to have been banned from public/volunteer knowledge), which in turn prompted a major review of operations.

A lot of the units have vertical gear, but accreditaion of members is an ongoing issue.

Because a Lawsuit is pending.... Yeh lets just say that SES f**ked a rescue up, then tried to cover it up, didn’t call for backup until it was way too late. Now a young girl will never walk again. Leave it to the professionals STAR group/ SOT rescue paramedic’s.

Zippy · « **Reply #9 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:49:35 AM »

yeah...its a definitely a responsibility that SAPOL/SAAS should have, it would make sense to have the this as Rescue 51 and 52 are the last resort action for vertical rescue. SAAS SOT would particularly be able to deal with physical trauma in a much more up to date fashion to.

Andrew K · « **Reply #10 on:** January 21, 2010, 08:11:54 AM »

Most SES units have Vertical Access Capability, which it to get to a casualty and provide first aid, stabilise and ready for extraction, most units carry the extra gear for the extraction but may not have the accreditation, at the moment vertical rescue is a hot topic as state is making some changes so it will be interesting to see where it goes

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #11 on:** January 21, 2010, 08:23:07 AM »

Quote from: Alex on January 21, 2010, 12:38:40 AM

However i would suggest that Sturt SES would be the closest resource to Stirling [since i assume this is regarding your equipment being taken away], but that STAR group are actually the authority who handle most of this role.
Perhaps it would be better to concentrate on Fire, RCR and HAZMAT training and response than trying to add another feather to the cap? I know the equipment was taken away, but as far as i know it was always brigade funded and trained and never a gazetted responsibility?

Indeed. We've been told it's an SES responsibility, and to respond SES, although that may be because whoever wrote the memo forgot about the STAR group.
I should clarify that Stirling was never vertical rescue trained, or equipped. As I understand it, there was a spate of car over embankment RCRs which resulted in CFS members working unsafely on steep slopes. There was a need identified for equipment to make this safer, so the lowering and hauling system was purchased. As such it was to compliment the Road Crash stowage and make a task, which was going to be done anyway, safer.

I didn't want to make this a discussion about CFS though, so if you want to discuss this situation, PM me or start a new thread.

Quote from: Zippy on January 21, 2010, 07:49:35 AM

yeah...its a definitely a responsibility that SAPOL/SAAS should have, it would make sense to have the this as Rescue 51 and 52 are the last resort action for vertical rescue. SAAS SOT would particularly be able to deal with physical trauma in a much more up to date fashion to.

I don't think SOTs carry any more than they need to get access to a casualty - they don't have hauling systems for extrication.

Quote from: Andrew K on January 21, 2010, 08:11:54 AM

Most SES units have Vertical Access Capability, which it to get to a casualty and provide first aid, stabilise and ready for extraction, most units carry the extra gear for the extraction but may not have the accreditation, at the moment vertical rescue is a hot topic as state is making some changes so it will be interesting to see where it goes

Does SES consider high angle rescue to be the same as vertical rescue (equipment and training wise)?

Mike · « **Reply #12 on:** January 21, 2010, 09:30:20 AM »

Quote from: jason on January 21, 2010, 07:32:51 AM

Because a Lawsuit is pending.... Yeh lets just say that SES f**ked a rescue up, then tried to cover it up, didn’t call for backup until it was way too late. Now a young girl will never walk again. Leave it to the professionals STAR group/ SOT rescue paramedic’s.

I had heard a slightly different version on the rumour mill.....

Quote

Does SES consider high angle rescue to be the same as vertical rescue (equipment and training wise)?

Yes

Andrew K · « **Reply #13 on:** January 21, 2010, 09:48:23 AM »

jason mate

i really wish people would get their facts straight before posting, this is nothing like what you stay it was. if you want to know actually ring up and ask state rather than just passing the rumours on

jason · « **Reply #14 on:** January 21, 2010, 10:05:14 AM »

...

Quote from: Andrew K on January 21, 2010, 09:48:23 AM

jason mate

i really wish people would get their facts straight before posting, this is nothing like what you stay it was. if you want to know actually ring up and ask state rather than just passing the rumours on

Thats what I saw at the job mate... whats your interpretation then...

Andrew K · « **Reply #15 on:** January 21, 2010, 11:08:36 AM »

mate sent you a pm, i don't really think a public forum is the place to go into it, as i'm sure you wouldn't like it plastered all over the place if this had happened to your unit

wicky · « **Reply #16 on:** January 21, 2010, 04:12:40 PM »

Jason get your facts straight

SA Firey · « **Reply #17 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:22:59 PM »

Men if you did your homework, the details are on the SES website under each units name what they do

SA Firey · « **Reply #18 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:26:50 PM »

Link to same http://www.ses.sa.gov.au/site/join_the_ses/ses_unit_locations.jsp

chook · « **Reply #19 on:** January 22, 2010, 05:02:23 AM »

Which is not always accurate - just like the fire ones some times

whitecloud · « **Reply #20 on:** January 22, 2010, 09:17:31 AM »

There are a lot of members in those units who are trained for Vertical, in varying stages.

Alex · « **Reply #21 on:** January 25, 2010, 06:40:08 AM »

Quote from: jason on January 21, 2010, 07:32:51 AM

Quote from: Mike on January 21, 2010, 07:08:47 AM
Am interested about where that list came from as well.

Vertical Resue within SES is its own hot topic at the moment anyway. Apparently there was a serious accident (all details seem to have been banned from public/volunteer knowledge), which in turn prompted a major review of operations.

A lot of the units have vertical gear, but accreditaion of members is an ongoing issue.

Because a Lawsuit is pending.... Yeh lets just say that SES f**ked a rescue up, then tried to cover it up, didn’t call for backup until it was way too late. Now a young girl will never walk again. Leave it to the professionals STAR group/ SOT rescue paramedic’s.

Hmmmm i heard that gongbeater brigade filtered a fire up.... Lets leave all fires to the MFS/ARFF...

I have no idea what job your talking about or any details of it, but what a ridiculous statement from someone who obviously has built a grudge due to it. We should be supporting our fellow vollunteers not bashing them in open forum.

bajdas · « **Reply #22 on:** January 26, 2010, 11:09:55 AM »

Quote from: Mike on January 21, 2010, 07:08:47 AM

....Apparently there was a serious accident (all details seem to have been banned from public/volunteer knowledge), which in turn prompted a major review of operations....

The accident was detailed in the 'SASES Chief Officer's E NEWS, Issue 5 of 18 November 2009'. So hardly "banned from volunteer knowledge".

Safework SA and SAFECOM OHS investigated and the ban was lifted on 2nd November. The major review is a standard response to any accident.

If you want more details, contact the person specified in the E News.

bajdas · « **Reply #23 on:** January 26, 2010, 11:13:42 AM »

SASES Special Operations Group (now in a building at the airport) would also provide the specialised expertise if required.

Mike · « **Reply #24 on:** January 28, 2010, 07:24:50 AM »

Quote from: bajdas on January 26, 2010, 11:09:55 AM

The accident was detailed in the 'SASES Chief Officer's E NEWS, Issue 5 of 18 November 2009'. So hardly "banned from volunteer knowledge".

Safework SA and SAFECOM OHS investigated and the ban was lifted on 2nd November. The major review is a standard response to any accident.

If you want more details, contact the person specified in the E News.

Sorry, i have to laugh....

Was that the issue that started with "there is no secret sqirrel business going on in the SES" followed a bit later on in the same letter by.... "There was a serious accident involving vertical operations but we are unable to release details of the incident"

Am I the only one who finds the initial statement a little ironic.

Im aware of what happened, although not told officially. Its not something that should ever have been hushed IMHO

Author Topic: Rope Rescue (Read 23265 times)

wicky