Incident Type Protocol?

[6739264]

So, as an uneducated pager scanner observer, I have to query the following:

MFS: *CFSRES INC034 28/06/10 13:04,RESPOND Smoke in Area,2 KING WILLIAM ST,ADELAIDE MAP 118 F 13 TG182,STRONG SMELL OF SMOKE IN BASEMENT,SAIR55 ADL201 AD2011

MFS: *CFSRES INC021 27/06/10 10:57,RESPOND DOMESTIC FIRE,11 SEVENTH AV,ST MORRIS MAP 119 J 3 TG182,SMELL OF SMOKE IN CIELING,CALL FROM RESIDENT,BLP211 AD2011

MFS: *CFSRES INC040 27/06/10 15:26,RESPOND DOMESTIC FIRE,23 FLINDERS ST,KENT TOWN MAP 4 Q 7 TG182,SMOKE ALARM SOUNDING,POSS SMOKE IN AREA,CALL FROM 34 FLINDERS,AD2011 ADL202

These all appear to be of similar incident type, with nothing being confirmed, yet they get different incident types? Additionally we've all seen the "Smoke in Area" with further information "Smoke issuing from factory" and the "Domestic Fire - Fuse box smoking" Any reason that there appears to be little consistency between incident types?

I can understand new operators, and the willingness of some Comms operators to overstate the potential nature of the job, but it seems to happen far more frequently than it should.

Not to mention that the number of incident types seems to be horridly restricting - perhaps adding to the confusion?

Why comms? Why?

[Darren]

Hmmmm......Hmmmmm......I wanna say more but.....Hmmmmm

[6739264]

Hmmmm?

[bittenyakka]

Interesting point, I am one to err on the side of lets sent to many than too few and would rather arrive to find a smoke in area that is really a substantial fire with more resources.  So is there anything wrong with that?

And the Number of incident types? well If the type "smoke alarm" existed what would you think is an appropriate response? If it is working that could be anything from toast to a going fire so how would you write a response SOP? (yes i do acknowledge that in as all these responses are not alarms the caller may have noticed flames etc but lets ignore that atm)

[6739264]

The only thing wrong with it is that the operator is either making assumptions about the job, or is providing conflicting information between the incident type and the extra information provided. "Smoke in area - smoke issuing from factory" is a pretty classic example. Removal of conflicting information that causes confusion at the earliest stage of the turnout life cycle is a must no?

The job that caught my eye this time was the "Smoke in area - strong smell in basement" surely that warrants more than a mere "Smoke in area" classification?

"Smoke alarm" does exist pal, either as "Alarm" or "Bell Ringing". What about an electrical fire? Or smoke issuing? Smell of burning?
Currently "Smoke in area" seems to be still setup as a rural response type.

I know the system is old and broken, I'm more questioning the consistency of responses and what appears to be a lack of defining protocol. 

 

[bajdas]

The response type to an incident should be tailoured to the area the incident is reported in. Thus smoke in a rural region is different than smoke in a urban region.

But for me there should be no difference in response to the 'smoke in a house' incident type, if the house affected exists at Cummins or in Adelaide. But there always will be due to the amount of people living in the area and the perceived risk to the community dictates the emergency resources available.

Being a volunteer call taker, it is very difficult to make a decision in a few seconds on 'how to describe what the caller has just said' in a response code. Very rarely does the response code exactly fit what you have just been told by a person who is upset or stressed by worry.

Personally I think SAAS have it better because the call taker stays with the caller to get more information while dispatch is being done by another person. But people on this forum critise that system as well.

I am not sure a solution will ever be found to a human decision making process.

[6739264]

I am not sure a solution will ever be found to a human decision making process.

Its pretty simple. You open up a greater number of incident types set into the system. Is something electrical on fire? Then turn out an "Electrical Fire". A house on fire? "House Fire". A unit? "Unit Fire". Smoke issuing from a strucutre? "Smoke Issuing". Smell of smoke/burning? "Smell of smoke". Oddly enough rural responses are pretty good... As usual its just the Urban stuff the needs work.

More categories = easier to work out where the incident fits and what gets turned out.

Just remembered seeing a Gas Leak get turned out as a "Hazmat Reduced - Smell of Gas" the other week.

[Zippy]

The Incident types seem legitiment, the use is quite questionable tho.

Smoke in Area > Smoke present in building, or yes...a rural fire. *rolls eyes*

Bell Ringing > Smoke Alarm Activation

Private Alarm > Monitored Alarm System Activation

Domestic/Commercial Fire > Strong Belief there is a fire present either visible or out of sight (dense smoke).

[6739264]

Nothing wrong with the classifications that we have currently - but the lack of many "set" incident types means that its restrictive for operators. Not to mention that the form isn't long enough for "Respond To" and this also relies on operators winging it in terms of Appliance response.

Even basic things like "Explosion" do not exist, once more, relying on the "Smoke in area" or "Domestic/Commercial Fire"

[OMGWTF]

Differant shifts, differant officers and differant training levels.

Notice INC 40 and INC 021 were during a differant shift to INC 34.

There is no set list of questions for operators to follow to arrive at an incident type.

Lets not forget, most operators are temporary and spend the first 12 months of there 2 year secondment getting up to a decent standard, then there gone.

[jaff]

Roll on SACAD..ALL HAIL SACAD!!!

[rescue5271]

But Jaff is SACAD going to fix these problems??? I understand there is also a review of SOP'S in the way in which we respond to call outs and the number of appliances to each job....

[Darren]

IF the much talked about CAD ever gets here, it will finally make brigades accountable, you can no longer just say jim bob in the ute will check it out. We might actually be able to live up the FIRE SERVICE part of the CFS.

The way things are done now is a joke !

[jaff]

But Jaff is SACAD going to fix these problems??? I understand there is also a review of SOP'S in the way in which we respond to call outs and the number of appliances to each job....

Don't you worry Billy boy SACAD will fix everything!! overweight appliances.....fixed, poor and inconsistent truck builds .....fixed, lack of funding .....fixed, staffing issues..... fixed, dopey group offices.....fixed, dispassionate emergency services ministers......fixed and $1 million dollars worth of public suck(aerial panacea) sitting on the tarmac at brukunga ......fixed, ah yes SACAD the much antic...............ipated cure for the 21st century!

[jaff]

ALL HAIL SACAD!!!

[bajdas]

IF the much talked about CAD ever gets here, it will finally make brigades accountable, you can no longer just say jim bob in the ute will check it out. We might actually be able to live up the FIRE SERVICE part of the CFS.

The way things are done now is a joke !

HOW..... I doubt that every emergency vehicle will get data terminal buttons to register the specific vehicle is responding...the cost would be huge...the acknowledgement will still be by phone or radio as it is now. If this is true, then it is still up to the reponding Brigade or Unit to ensure the correct vehicles are responded to the incident.

Nothing changes..Please correct me if I am wrong in my assumptions.

[6739264]

IF the much talked about CAD ever gets here, it will finally make brigades accountable, you can no longer just say jim bob in the ute will check it out. We might actually be able to live up the FIRE SERVICE part of the CFS.

The way things are done now is a joke !

HOW..... I doubt that every emergency vehicle will get data terminal buttons to register the specific vehicle is responding...the cost would be huge...the acknowledgement will still be by phone or radio as it is now. If this is true, then it is still up to the reponding Brigade or Unit to ensure the correct vehicles are responded to the incident.

Nothing changes..Please correct me if I am wrong in my assumptions.

Resources are turned out, not Brigades. Like SAMFS now, Stations don't get turned out, resources do.

[Darren]

As numbers said, it will be resources not brigades (not sure about SES) trucks will have to book in and out, not like now where we have no idea who is responding where or when or if ! There is some talk of a simple MDT, to cut a lot of radio talk. So just wait and see......but no breath being held here !

[bajdas]

...There is some talk of a simple MDT, to cut a lot of radio talk. So just wait and see......but no breath being held here !

People were talking (rumours) about an extra box of electronics being connected to the older style GRN radios that are being currently replaced. Then the lot being installed in the vehicles with buttons on the dashboard connected to the electronics. Some extras were also being talked about in addition to the buttons. Not sure where the idea (incl maintenance of the solution) is at or even if this was true in the context of the SACAD project, but the technology is available.

Will be an interesting change to procedures at the local level...good luck in getting everboody on board & responding the correct vehicle.

[bittenyakka]

Well having more types would be a good thing four sure, as long as the appropriate standard of response is maintained .eg "fuse box fire" should have hte same as "domestic fire"since that is a likely out come. not always but frequent enough.

[Zippy]

CFA Pager format, which i completely think is where we should go.

@@ALERT F100608847 ORBO2 STRUC1 CHIMNEY FLU ON FIRE 13 BROWNING ST ORBOST /RAYMOND ST //CARLYLE ST SVSE 8571 D10 (283254) NEWM ORBO [ORBO]


@@ALERT                  = Pretty much CFSRES
F100608847               = Incident number (shortened on radio, dont know how tho)
ORBO2                    = CAD ZONE, Primary Brigade
STRUC1                   = Incident Type, Structure Fire Priority 1
CHIMEY FLU ON FIRE       = Custom description (can be anything)
13 BROWNING ST ORBOST    = Address
/RAYMOND ST              = Nearest Intersection
//CARLYLE ST             = Next Nearest Intersection
SVSE 8571 D10 (283254)   = Map Ref
NEWM ORBO                = Brigades Responding
[ORBO]                   = Pager Msg Reciever

[rescue5271]

The buttons on the dashboard to cut out radio traffic has been hit on the head due to costings..mind you CFA looked at this year's ago and i do mean years ago and back then it was going to cost heaps but also it did not give you full coverage.. CFA have been looking at it again and its been put back on the shelf and that is where it will remain as they are going to VHF Digital which will now make another problem for CFS to work out how we Border groups and brigades take to them....

[Darius]

IF the much talked about CAD ever gets here, it will finally make brigades accountable, you can no longer just say jim bob in the ute will check it out. We might actually be able to live up the FIRE SERVICE part of the CFS.

The way things are done now is a joke !

HOW..... I doubt that every emergency vehicle will get data terminal buttons to register the specific vehicle is responding...the cost would be huge...the acknowledgement will still be by phone or radio as it is now. If this is true, then it is still up to the reponding Brigade or Unit to ensure the correct vehicles are responded to the incident.

Nothing changes..Please correct me if I am wrong in my assumptions.

Resources are turned out, not Brigades. Like SAMFS now, Stations don't get turned out, resources do.

indeed but how will that change 'accountability'?  From a brigade point of view not much changes with SACAD, what's to stop a member of the brigade 'responding' in their own car and putting a stop?  nothing that I can see.  In fact in country areas, why does it matter anyway?  that person is providing early 'intel'.

And even before the page comes out, in some cases group officers will still get Alerts calls and be able to decide that no response at all is necessary.

[jaff]

Darius, as I understand it GOs and alerts recipients will only be contacted on low risk events normally out of FDS...smoke in area, tree fire, cat up a tree that sort of thing, but our more connected members could probably set us straight!

[Darren]

The only way accountability will come in is if the regions actually take groups and brigades to task rather than just ignore things as happens now.