SA Firefighter

primary & secondary searches of the (abandoned) premises found no persons inside. seems it was a common squat for more than one homeless person...

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.

Well, despite all the bashings, criticisms, and some positive reinforcement, Adelaide Fire had its mettle tested well and truly on Thursday. I'd like to congratulate them on an amazing job under such intense circumstances. There has been some really good feedback, although I know that not everything went 100%, I'm guessing that many people expected, maybe wanted, it to fail. Region 1 never even activated their own resource tracking.
MFS put extra staff on for the conditions, had every phone in Comcen staffed and had the right people in the right positions.
I was in there on the day, and wish to publicly thank all the Adel Fire operators on a brilliant job.

On another front, a BOMS upgrade is due for release on Monday, which will allow operators to search for and input requested Brigades by full name, rather than short name (4 letter abbrev.) This should speed up your alerts calls and dispatches. ie, operator enters full name and BOMS converts it to callsign.

Rusty

Whilst the premises may have chosen to connect to the CFS for financial reasons (a much cheaper connection than through the MFS), the premises still lies in a Mutual Aid area, and so Fire Service response is subject to the Mutual Aid agreement. Under that agreement the response must be a Dual, SIMULTANEOUS response by both CFS AND MFS.
It is unfortunate that the CFS failed to take the MA agreement into consideration when connecting this alarm. Hopefully, over the next couple of years, the MFS will also transition to wireless alarm technology, and be able to integrate all of the WFAM alarms into their system. At last, the ability to intercept a false alarm when mechanics are working, and prevent multiple pager activations when resetting a circuit doesn't hold... especially in the middle of the night...

Quote from: Mike on December 06, 2006, 12:14:22 PM

Quote from: medevac on December 06, 2006, 11:52:28 AM
MFS: RESPOND Strike Team 06/12/06 09:50,MAJORS RD,OHALLORAN HILL, MAP 165 A 5 ,,ASSEMBLE 1030HRS - STN 42,DAILY INC. NO. 16,41 441 401 431*CFSRES:

Is this a relativly new addition to their response messages, or have i just been outstandingly unobservant? (DAILY INC. NO. 16)

The MFS have transitioned to on-line (computerised) fire reports, (finally away from hand-written fire reports!). As part of the consultation process, the operators identified that when the radio operator had a page full of going jobs and appliances were calling in sit-reps, upgrades or stop messages, it would be harder (& time consuming) to select the correct incident from the daily incident list. This is because the calls are listed in call-number order, not by appliance. To alleviate this they suggested including the daily incident number into the dispatch message. (gulp - aghast... management actually consulted with and listened to the staff!!!)

This also means a change of radio protocols, requiring the appliances to say "Glynde 221, call number 16, From S/O Smith Stop for..." etc, allowing for the operator to select the incident first, then input the message in the right place.

It will also be a God-send when Multiple Incident Procedure is instigated, and the MIP log forms are returned to comcen for input into the system - straight to the call number listed by the crew on their MIP log.

Although it's not currently required, CFS/SES crews could quote the call number when acknowledging pager messages... might help if it's busy?!

Upper Sturt and Bridgewater are definitely closer than Summertown, (B/W straight down the freeway - easy run), though Piccadilly should IMHO get a look-in...

Heysen Tunnels Response Plans state that for a confirmed fire in the tunnels an automatic second alarm shall be transmitted (Bridgewater, Aldgate, Upper Sturt & MFS). OIC can request specialist resources from either service, including foam pod/s, State Hazmat, BWC's etc. Also, dispatch should incllude a phone call to the Norwood Traffic Control Centre to see what their monitors show, from which they would likely close the freeway completely.
From past experience on that road dealing with large spillages, they have 25 mins on a rainy day to catch the flow before it hits the Patawolonga, or longer if the waterways aren't full. Now, burning fuel down the catchment presents a whole host of new issues, and may warrant a strike team response from the MFS to follow it through the channels in MFS area & cut it off.

Quote from: medevac on November 01, 2006, 07:39:27 PM

Quoteprobably because you have a pumper so if it was a fire a pumper is better to deal with it.

probly because MFS have the wrong response data and should not be paging brigades in that area anyway, rather ringing there alerts number.

So just why do the MFS page the S/E Brigades?

Quote from: medevac on November 08, 2006, 07:45:50 AM
although SOCC are not allowed to tell CFS appliances to change to MFS talkgroup,,,, any appliance responding into there area should do so, and tell SOCC that they are.

WTF?? Why on earth would SOCC NOT be allowed to tell CFS apps to go to MFS T/G? It's SOP to change, so where's the problem? Might be difficult for borderline calls to know whose area it is until arrival, but for the others....

Quote from: TillerMan on November 02, 2006, 05:59:10 PM

I heard a rumour that EMA CFS brigades will get them in their front running appliance too, can you confirm this Rusty?

Can't confirm or deny... only heard as rumour myself... however SACAD terminals are likely to go in EMA brigade front running apps... perhaps someone in an EMA brigade might have heard more?

Smoke alarms do funny things when their batteries go kaput... some actually go into a series of beeps, not just the one occasional chirp. The poor elderly callers usually are frantic or at wits end (especially as these events occur usually in the middle of the night as the temp drops and the chemical reactions in the batteries slow down, making them appear flatter..). When they call the Fire Service it usually is their last port of call. So the dispatch goes out to Assist Resident. From there the (MFS Country or CFS Brigade) chooses their own priority and crew and attends as they see fit. If that means one person to walk around the corner, or a full crew in full turnout gear, so be it. That's locally governed.

Some councils have Elderly Assistance Programmes, who will change their batteries once a year, in line with the Fire Services' call to "Change Your Clock, Change Your Smoke Alarm Battery" campaign..some councils do not. However when it is after hours, and the resident has noone to turn to, we are there.

If you don't want to go, put your head back under the pillow and go back to sleep. Or, better still, stop complaining and start your own local assistance programme.

Pumprescue does not need to reply to your post. Firstly PR might not have logged in for a week, or had the chance to reply, but mostly it shouldn't need one. Figure it out.

No, Linc24p, THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Quote from: Linc24p on October 28, 2006, 07:53:31 PM

M – Medication – Am I under the effect of any medication?

perhaps  "Am I experiencing any adverse effects from medication?"

MFS are also going the way of "MCT"s (Mobile Computer Terminals) with touch screens. The company that produced the old MDTs is now defunct, so there are no more spare parts!
MFS expect to switchover sometime in the first half of 2007, though initially the MCTs will be just as dumb as the old MDT's. Later they expect on-line mapping and alarm/ premises preplans etc, more in line with SAPol MCTs. All they have to do then is try to teach the S/O's how to use them!

Programmes to put in place to deal with doing our job?
If you don't want to do this sort of stuff then don't respond... You don't have to go...seems that many people are picky about the types of call they go to anyway.
And so what if the MFS go to these types of PR calls... that's up to the MFS. It's not up to you to decide what they should and shouldn't do...maybe you could write SOPs and response criteria for the ambos and police too?

Only the Officers carry the pagers... the station bells still drop ok, just have trouble getting to the Appliance MDTs through the new roof.

the ideal would be calltakers from MFS and CFS working side by side in the same Comcen, helping each other and learning from each other. No way can I be happy to say bring in civilians... much better to have people with firefighting background so they know the right questions to ask, and can anticipate the needs of the firies on the ground. One firefighter / supervisor would get far too busy on an "it's-hitting-the-fan-day" to supply all the fire know-how across the board.

An alarm call doesn't worry me so much, esp during working hours, but reports of fire is another matter entirely. BTW the request for CFS not to go to alarms in MFS area came from our CFS management, not from the MFS.

Quote from: oz fire on October 06, 2006, 10:33:52 AM
10:16:05 06-10-06 PRIMARY ALARM, I1: FIP, RENMARK HOTEL, MURRAY AVE, RENMARK
10:29:09 06-10-06 MFS: RESPOND Private Alarm 06/10/06 10:28,RENMARK TOWN,RENMARK, MAP 0 0 0 ,,BACK UP RENMARK TO FIRE ALARM AT THE RENMARK HOTEL,609*CFSRES:

Intersting anomaly - with a CFS brigade 3 km away, who would you respond and in what time frame?????
PS - Renmark to Berri approx 20km

You guys should all know better... the agreement between MFS and CFS is, and has been for a long long time, that CFS do not respond to Fire Alarms or Private Alarms in MFS area, except where Mutual Aid (as opposed to Enhanced MA) is under effect, unless local agreements state otherwise. This is not a "waa waa we didn't get called" situation. Build a bridge.

All fair enough. Especially see the point with employer negotiations.

I can't understand why Brigades will page for more crew... either they're coming or they're not... I believe that if you have to page for more crew (or a driver etc) then you should default instead.
Whaddayareckon?

Quote from: mundcfs on September 23, 2006, 03:42:06 PM
I think the point is why is Pt Lincoln MFS responding to a tree/grass fire 30km north of the port and then taking 10 minutes to call CFS. Thats an issue worth looking at as it's covered by 2 or more CFS brigades???

Well, that one just seems crazy...a distinct lack of common sense on that one I think. :oops: I would have thought that CFS should have been called by MFS Comms in the first instance.

I take it that most of the delays you speak of are in Country MFS Command areas. Boundary areas in Adelaide are now better catered for using dual response software programming. Country area are a bit harder to cater for, for a couple of reasons... Firstly a lot of country roads have not made it into the MFS database yet...an issue to be followed up. (So, for example, if a call is received for a call just out of Renmark the operator might enter "Renmark MFS, Renmark" into the system as no other detail is available). Secondly, most CFS Brigades that adjoin MFS Country Stations don't have a callsign in the MFS database (except say Mt Gambier Group, Kadina & Kapunda...maybe one or two others). If they all get together they can arrange dual response for boundary roads, certain areas on either side of the boundary, and be responded simultaneously.. It's really not hard, but it will be a big job and will take time to coordinate. Currently, once the call has been dispatched by MFS Comcen, the onus is on the local MFS station to ensure the notification of the CFS should the call be found to be in CFS or dual response area.

Hope this explains a few of the shortcomings.
Bring on SACAD.

Pity the CFS uniform isn't an attractive one.... can't think that too many women would be clawing at the khaki. :-P

Quote from: CFS_firey on August 07, 2006, 11:24:45 AM
Is there any way we can change the rules so that common sense can prevail?  Why can't we trust members of the public when they say its only a minor fender bender and all occupants are out of the vehicles and uninjured?

Because of the f-ups that occured in the past. Too many jobs where rescue wasn't called because the callers might have said that there were no injuries or entrapments, when in fact the opposite was true.

Frustrating, too, how many times the Fire Service/s are called just to be a quick clean-up because the council would take too long...

Well...the poor dipatchers... damned if they do, damned if they don't.

"Common sense should prevail..." Operator counselled and told to send the recommended response.
"Why send rescue when not required?" Operator counselled for not using common sense.

As pointed out, the RCRRD states that all should be responded outside metro are (and just what is the definition of metro area?).

Often when SAPOL or SAAS call the Fire/Rescue service for a job they may well say that there is no one trapped, but this is the result of questioning the caller, without confirmation of an emergency service on-scene. Everyone has heard and bitched about past incidents when the other service wasn't called, or a simple MVA turnout was found to be a job with entrapments...

So, for now, at least, expect to see more unrequired callouts. At least it'll get the stats up.