Author Topic: A piece of history... (Read 33831 times)

medevac · « **on:** April 05, 2006, 01:21:28 PM »

MFS Comms first time responding an SES unit...

MFS: RESPOND Vehicle Accident 05/04/06 12:40,LAURA SES,LAURA, MAP 0 A 0 ,,6KMS FROM LAURA ON THE CRYSTAL BROOK ROAD,75929*URGMSG:

also a new station code for those nutters out there...

strikeathird · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2006, 01:52:39 PM »

So MFS are now dispatching all SES jobs ?

Mike · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2006, 02:00:19 PM »

Apparently so. All pager messages must be acknowledged within 4 minutes before the default unit is responded.

medevac · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2006, 02:56:33 PM »

changed over at 1000 this morning.

24P · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2006, 03:37:28 PM »

See also they are using URGMSG on the end of some of their pages as well

Mike · « **Reply #5 on:** April 05, 2006, 03:58:46 PM »

this has been happening for a while. The pagers are programed to react to those strings 'CFSRES and URGMSG' in the same way CFS pagers do.

Alan (Big Al) · « **Reply #6 on:** April 05, 2006, 04:01:04 PM »

Wasn't there a big thing a while ago that fire and rescue (if SES) must be responded at the same time what will happen with this now??? if an accident occurs within a town where both services reside who gets the initial call MFS or CFS etc etc....

Does SOCC still do their radio work or is that MFS to?

medevac · « **Reply #7 on:** April 05, 2006, 04:11:29 PM »

SES response pages have always used the URGMSG... ahh thingo.

Re: radios
SOCC have nothing to do with SES anymore other than too ensure they are responded to VAs shud it be there rescue area...

Quote

Wasn't there a big thing a while ago that fire and rescue (if SES) must be responded at the same time what will happen with this now??? if an accident occurs within a town where both services reside who gets the initial call MFS or CFS etc etc....

MundCFS; this has always been an issue, all its going to mean is that CFS comms (shud the call originally go to them) will have to contact MFS comms for rescue response, and MFS comms will have to contact CFS...

alreayd used to happen in areas such as Mt Gambier or Murray Bridge, where SES are rescue and MFS are fire... It will continue to be an issue as long as there is more than one commcen for fire and rescue dispatch.

but in the mean time we'll just worry about SAAS and SAPOL actually calling the fire/rescue service.. LOL.

Camo · « **Reply #8 on:** April 05, 2006, 05:39:46 PM »

Will be interesting to see what happens with response to Road Crash in Mt Gambier....

Scary Stuff!

Camo

medevac · « **Reply #9 on:** April 05, 2006, 06:24:06 PM »

IMO it should be better for instances such as Murray Bridge/Mt Gambier, where occasionally people would "forget" to respond the other service... the system will now automatically dispatch both. there should be no excuse...

24P · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2006, 07:38:52 PM »

Have seen a few pages in the last hour where MFS have "dual responded" with SES. Poses the question is it a SES primary call or MFS.

medevac · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2006, 08:22:44 PM »

its an SES primary job... ive been watching that too.

seems to me, and i could be wrong, that MFS are sending MFS pumpers with SES, getting there first and putting a stop back...

24P · « **Reply #12 on:** April 05, 2006, 08:28:41 PM »

Did hear 409 say SES "not" required. I think the MFS might find out it will stretch resources very quickly.

medevac · « **Reply #13 on:** April 05, 2006, 09:57:44 PM »

mmm playing silly buggers.

Firefrog · « **Reply #14 on:** April 05, 2006, 10:13:32 PM »

anyone suprised?

medevac · « **Reply #15 on:** April 06, 2006, 08:52:45 AM »

well at least SES will be able to kcik there asses... there getting paid to do the job, so they wont really be able to get away with doing it incorrectly..

the other thing i noticed, all these country unitis are going to be getting pretty crappy detail on there msg's.

Mike · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2006, 09:56:38 AM »

A little extra info to the my comments yesterday:

4 minutes to notify of reciept of page.
6 minutes to notify that unit will respond.\

more to follow.... just got some work to do...
dont you hate that!!!!!

strikeathird · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2006, 11:35:24 AM »

Quote from: Firefrog on April 05, 2006, 10:13:32 PM

anyone suprised?

No.. I said ages ago... What better way for MFS to get a larger budget if you do an additional 15,000 calls a year across the board ! Yet alone new chainsaws, equipment, members..

List goes on...

24P · « **Reply #18 on:** April 06, 2006, 12:41:10 PM »

Does this mean if they get a tree down in CFS EMA areas we will get MFS CFS and SES responding?
As above post it seems a good way to get their call rate up.

strikeathird · « **Reply #19 on:** April 06, 2006, 12:54:27 PM »

1905914 12:09:48 06-04-06 6/04/2006 12:09:13 PM SHQ: Please note. For technical reasons all SES paging will have "CFSRES" replacing "URGMSG" for the interim. These responses are for SES. Please respond as previous. DCO

bajdas · « **Reply #20 on:** April 06, 2006, 12:58:55 PM »

This is quite a massive change for SES, so some issues will always occur during a change. This includes how the volunteer units respond, some equipment to be finished and paging interfaces.

From my perspective, the future looks gooooood though

bajdas · « **Reply #21 on:** April 06, 2006, 01:02:10 PM »

Quote from: 24P on April 06, 2006, 12:41:10 PM

Does this mean if they get a tree down in CFS EMA areas we will get MFS CFS and SES responding?
As above post it seems a good way to get their call rate up.

The answer will be NO.

medevac · « **Reply #22 on:** April 06, 2006, 01:46:35 PM »

Quote from: bajdas on April 06, 2006, 01:02:10 PM

Quote from: 24P on April 06, 2006, 12:41:10 PM
Does this mean if they get a tree down in CFS EMA areas we will get MFS CFS and SES responding?
As above post it seems a good way to get their call rate up.

The answer will be NO.

firstly there is no mutual aid agreement between SES and MFS.

from my understanding... the only people going to trees down will be SES (at least that is how the system was meant to be set up) all this SES going with MFS is just incorrect response data at the moment. afrom what i have heard any tree downs, storm damage, flooding, animal rescue, patient lift that comes into MFS comms via 132500 or 000 "will" be dispatched to the local SES unit by themself... this is the way the CAD data is meant to be working, per the written agreement with MFS (or so i have been told)

so... it looks like some SES units are going to have to work on there response times dramatically for the instances of patient lifts and animal rescues to a degree.. and the rest are going to have to keep doing it in a timely manner.

strikeathird · « **Reply #23 on:** April 06, 2006, 01:50:35 PM »

Work on response times dramatically.... yea... just a bit !

Being required for P1 patient lift.. I can see alot of defaulting to the MFS / CFS response that only a week earlier would have been turned out any way...

nomex_nugget · « **Reply #24 on:** April 06, 2006, 05:05:21 PM »

It was interesting listening to the MFS last night, they seemed to be going to a lot more 'tree down' jobs than you would expect for a night like that. A cynic would suggest that they were responding to jobs themselves coming in on the 132500 number. It was also interesting to see them respond two SES units and two MFS pumps to a tree down on a house at Largs North, I can't remember the last time two mets pumps went to a tree on a house as an initial response.

I guess this all ties in with the fact that they are now putting chainsaws on all their pumpers.

For CFS brigades in dual response areas (EMA) I think more tree downs could be on the way, I guess at least when MFS are tied up cutting up trees all night we will then get a run to some of the other jobs in their areas.

Author Topic: A piece of history... (Read 33831 times)

strikeathird

strikeathird

strikeathird

strikeathird