RCR Resource Directory

[Roger]

I have a beef about the Road Crash Rescue Resource Directory..
It still recommends rescue response based on suburb or council boundaries.
Surely in this computer age we can remove this antiquated selection criteria and base the responses on nearest resources.
Granted, this will not change for much of the state, but there are plenty of examples where the nearest rescue resource is not being sent because it lies on the wrong side of an imaginary line...this might apply to other types of responses too.

[Wagon 1]

Ask the RCR commitee, made up of SAAS, SAPOL, SAMFS and SACFS. Unless they all agree to a change nothing will happen. But I had noticed some issues, stations like Aldgate being listed as a rescue resource but only carrying a combi tool, bit of a worry, actually more of a worry that CFS doesn't even know what equipment its own stations have!!

[oz fire]

Roger, currently due to the CRD systems we are limited to suburbs and geographic locations. Maybe the new CAD, if it adopts a GEO system, with intergrated mapping and alike will allow the exact response to be made - ie location/address specific not just road and suburb - we can only wait in hope.

The other option though, if the area you are talking about is dispatched by the MFS Comcen, they can put in two rescue resources - there are groups in the hills who have two rescue resources responded to all RCR's and specific towns where the MFS data base shows two rescue resources as the town is 15km from both and unfortunately a number of the roads run right through the town, this way both resources are dispatched at the same time and if one is not needed a stop is issued.

[Roger]

So if the MFS database can deal with nearest resource or multiple resources based on the fact that each road is in a "zone" then the council boundaries are inconsequential. Why doesn't the RCRRD Committee move away from their system in favour of the MFS system? Seems to be, although not perfect, much better than the existing council/suburb based document. 

[Wagon 1]

SOC can do that to if you give them the info, my group has given them a complete response directory for every road in the group, much the same as we have done with SAMFS comms, so all they do is enter a road name, and bang it tells them who to respond, but they can't be expected to be perfect without the info!

[oz fire]

Roger a location is in a zoe, usually not just a road.
The basic premis several years ago when CFS started establishing zones on the MFS computer was to have four zones (N,S,E,W) to allow the various resources that surrounded a brigade to be incorporated - no point having the northern neighbouring resource travel to the southen boundary, if there is a brigade there (sounds like several areas in the hills, where the freeway is the boundary lol).
Zoning on the MFS database is a very lengthy task, although once complete is fantastic, at this stage, this state doesn;t have the resources or appropriate system to zone all areas for RCR, Hazmat and alike, hence the geographic locations/suburb use.

[Wagon 1]

When CAD eventually gets here then there won't be an issue, it will go on nearest most appropriate resource, but until that happens, we have to put up with human interventian and someone's idea of what is best.

[Roger]

Wagon 1, does that mean that you ignore the RCRD? and go against interservice agreements? If so, even though it would be in the best interests of the public, what might be the consequences in the coroner's court?  "Why did you not send the agreed resource..." worms...

Oz, the MFS street search database zones list each station in sequence from nearest to furthest, at least for the first 6 brigades or so...as i understand it. Using the callsign differences, (19 rescue, 28 hazmat etc), as long as those brigades are listed in the sequence they will be picked up as the nearest reource of that type. So, effectively, all areas should be zoned for any type of incident, removing the human intervention & ergo the subjectivity.

[Wagon 1]

Where did I say that? I abide by the RCR directory, not that I am the one doing the response, what I am saying, is its still someone's idea of what is best, and a coroner is not going to chew me out for following a directory signed off by the Chiefs of SAAS, SAPOL, SAMFS and SACFS. He will chew the chiefs out.

[Roger]

I acknowledge that you did not say that...i perhaps read more into it than was there. sorry to infer.

[Toast]

It is rather interesting to look at the designations of who is to respond where from years ago. Also the placement of fixed alarms and the order of turnout to those. I think that the whole system needs to be looked at. Even on just a brigade level fot the time being. For example, we noticed in a fixed alarm response (the first time to the bulding in years) that two brigades in the adjacent group were much closer than the currently listed 2nd and 3rd responce brigades. Is this a hangover from the times of coucil districts doing things on their own rather than using the closest resource?

Also, with birgades like Aldgate being listed as a rescue resource, is this the brigades own doing? It does seem odd as the entire freeway from Glen Osmond to Mt. Barker has Heavy Rescue brigades covering it, Burnside/Glen Osmond MFS at the bottom, Stirling in the middle and Mt. Barker at the top. If this is brigade freelancing I think it is terribly dangerous as the time it takes to realise that a rescue cannot be completed with an omni tool could be the difference between life an death.

[Wagon 1]

No, its in the official Green RCR directory, which means it was submitted by CFS HQ via region 1, so thats is what I mean when I say its a worry that CFS region 1 doesn't even know what brigades are doing what or have what equipment!!

[Toast]

I understand that is how it comes to be in the resource directory, I was actually wondering where the initial push came from for brigades like Aldgate to have equipment and capabilities that appear to be surplus to the groups requirements.

[Wagon 1]

Well you would have to ask that brigade, if they pushed to get in then they really need to be slapped around a bit, that is assuming it came from them.

[corocfs]

When CAD eventually gets here then there won't be an issue, it will go on nearest most appropriate resource, but until that happens, we have to put up with human interventian and someone's idea of what is best.

CAD is here.... unfortunately there are only three liscences for it in the state.. so of courseone has to go to ambos, one to police, and one to fire.... the liscenece for fire dispatch is held by SAMFS. so wont be geting any joy there, unless the whole of CFS CRD goes to SAMFS comms and SOC becomes purely a supporting role for brigades (resource tracking/admin/etc...)

[Wagon 1]

The "license" is held by SAFECOM not SAMFS, just happens that it will be going into SAMFS comms in wakefield street.

[corocfs]

u r correct david, sorry my bad... but still stands that there is one liscence held for the fire services in SA, so dont hold ur breath waiting for CFS to get a CAD system

[oz fire]

Oz, the MFS street search database zones list each station in sequence from nearest to furthest, at least for the first 6 brigades or so...as i understand it. Using the callsign differences, (19 rescue, 28 hazmat etc), as long as those brigades are listed in the sequence they will be picked up as the nearest reource of that type. So, effectively, all areas should be zoned for any type of incident, removing the human intervention & ergo the subjectivity.

Roger yes, you are right in the zone set up, six brigades though is purely a CFS thing, BOMS is capable of acceptijng allot more than that and MFS have set it up to allow allot of changes for their stations - large enough job you can see CFS appliances in most MFS stations - not that that ie ever likely to happen as they would be sent to the incident.

Zoning can be changed by the individual operator on the day, as the dispatch occurs. Once they are logged into BOMS they can and do make changes as required - the issue here is if and when those changes are made and they effect CFS - trust me it has happened and on several shifts it regularly happened out north and down in the deep south - hopefully though this is changing, personalities are changing and slowly their is becoming an acceptance - slowly.

As for CAD - we need to remember the Government owns the system and administers the licenses and there are very, very strict conditions - the best option, I think is for one facility for CRD for Fire, Rescue and Medical - would make life easier and examples for overseas prove it is extremely effective, cost efficient and provides the ultimate service to the community

[kat]

There must be some recourse to change the Green book.

We've had some changes made to accommodate local knowledge in the far past.

For example second rescue to a certain area came from a Brigade that appeared closer on the map (by a mere few kms) but the road was narrow, unsealed and terrible. This was changed to the Brigade a km or two further away but on a main sealed highway.

I wouldn't have any hesitation calling what I considered to be the appropriate resource as an OIC regardless of what the green book said and would stand in any court to defend a choice based on sound reasoned judgement and knowledge.

[Wagon 1]

You can call whoever you like Kat, so long as the Green book was followed first, don't think anyone will crucify you for that.

[Roger]

But the fundamental problem with the green book is that is still based on suburbs... street by street might be a more accurate way to go. Obviously not feasible to list each street in a green book, so a common CAD database would be the bible. Following the green book in the first place doesn't guarantee the nearest brigade, and may delay the most appropriate turnout by a few minutes.

[kat]

But surely it's designed to be a general type thing?

For example if it says Tailem Bend 2nd Rescue XYZ Brigade that's an automatic type alarm but locally we know if it's 5km East then it would be XYZ Brigade, but 5 kms West and it's ABC Unit, 5kms South and it's DEF Unit, 20kms up the Mallee and it's GHI Brigade, out the other way JKL Brigade. All these locations are only covered by the "Tailem Bend" entry in the directory but realistcially there are three CFS Brigades and two SES units that may be the appropraite second rescue in the area known as "Tailem Bend" depending on which side!!! These are documented in our risk and response plans.

[Roger]

except for the times that SOC operators have refused to act on requests...

[kat]

I think the SOC issue has been resolved. Any new instances of this?

Anyway, as an example, an MVA 25km from Tailem Bend on the Princes Highway (an area that could only be covered by the "Tailem Bend" entry in the green book) that required a second rescue would see an automatic response from the green book of Murray Bridge SES. The Meninige SES would be 30km closer, not have to come a LONG way through a built up area and would be the moral, ethical and sensible second rescue response. I would immediately request that this resource be called and not the other. We have this opportunity if we have accessed the ALERTS call, otherwise I guess we end up with the unfortunate situation of standing down a page response on arrival at station.

Any CAD system would have to address these issues and include much more specific location information to determine appropriate resources.

[kat]

In the past we had a few examples like an operator refusing to turn us out to a MVA when requested twice by police (actually told them it was a council issue). On third call argued with a Brigade member on scene who insisted we be called.

I believe these issues have been fully resolved and appreciate the excellent work being done by our current SOC staff.