Signal 10-30 In SW Yonkers

[61MACKBR1 222]

I don't have the specifics, but I just heard a Signal 10-30 announced for an Incident in SW Yonkers somewhere near the Park Hill Area. E304, 303, 306, 308, 312 (Fast), Ladder 71, 74, B2, B1 (As acting Safety Officer), Rescue 1, Car 2A, and Car 6. - Squad 11 and Ladder 75 Relocating to Station 4.

[TAPSJ 30]

10-30 is???

Thomas

[61MACKBR1 222]

10-29 Structure Fire

10-30 Using Full Assignment

[TAPSJ 30]

I see. I guess 10-75 isnt a universal Structure Fire, lol. Thanks for clearing that up.

Thomas

[jack10562 414]

Working fire, 408 Park Hill Ave.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20090725/NEWS/907250391

[JFLYNN 681]

10-30 is???

Thomas

10-30 for YFD = 10-75 for FDNY which previously in FDNY (many years ago) had been 10-30 and before that "all hands fire" which I believe is still used also....prior to late 70's or early 80's Yonkers used the term "working job" then went to signal 10-30 I believe during the tenure of Commissioner McLaughlin, retired FDNY.

[TAPSJ 30]

Yea up here 10-75 is only used by the City Of Poughkeepsie. All other use Stucture Fire, Working Fire, Fully Involved Fire, 2nd Alarm Of Fire. Then thier are some terms that arent transmitted of the radio, lolol. But thanks for filling me in.

Thomas

[Mac8146 61]

10-30 in FDNY got a 2 Engine and 2 Truck response with a BC. If more was neede then a 10-75 was transmitted bringing 3rd Engine. Not sure if anything else was sent. Upon All Hands signal 7-5 Rescue and DC then responded.

10-75 today is request for 4 Engines, 2 Trucks 1BC, 1 Fast Truck, 1 Squad, 1 Rescue and Additional BC, Plus DC. Perhaps JBE can elaborate further. The 10-30 was removed in late 70's or early 80's.

[losromero 13]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

[Anesti 329]

is safety which responded out of HQ still around?? because i see batt 1 as acting saftey officer

[R1SmokeEater 359]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

IMHO, Nims Sux ! WE know what WE mean !

[JFLYNN 681]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

NIMS guidelines advocate for the use of clear text (plain English) in multi-jurisdictional incidents...there are very many reasons why 10-codes are a more effective means of communication within an individual department or even a region as long as all the involved departments use the same 10-codes. For instance, you and I may differ on what a "working fire" is and what additional resources we will need if we pull up to a working fire...a 10 code such as 10-30 or 10-75 specifies exactly what will be needed at the scene...there are many more examples of the benefits of 10 codes but I'm not motivated enough to go on and on right now...suffice to say that IMO communication is one of, or the, most critical aspects of fire and emergency services, and also IMO NIMS has been useful but the old expression applies...sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...many in emergency services have had a little NIMS training and they mistakenly feel it is the answer to all of our communications problems...it isn't...

[nfd2004 750]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

If the City of New York can use the 10 Codes with no problem for the past 4 to 5 decades that I know of, I see NO reason why they or anybody else would have to change because some "SO-CALLED AUTHORITY" says its the right thing to do. I know in my area, plain English is used because these Higher Authorities said to change. Its interesting to hear some of the very Un-Professional Radio traffic. Let me tell you, I have no trouble understanding Exactly what the FDNY or Yonkers is talking about. But I invite any buff up to my area and listen to the chaos that goes on with even the simpliest of routine calls.

Back to the orginial thread, of Signal 10-30 in SW Yonkers. The City of Yonkers has been pretty busy lately for both the FD and PD. A few fires, stabbings, and shootings. "Ah, the Heartbeat of a City".

[x635 4,066]

I was at this fire, and Yonkers FD did an AWESOME job!! I also have a cool photo, which I will post later or tommorow.

[Bnechis 3,961]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

Plain English is no guarantee that the message will be correct.

We have used 10-20 to mean non-emergency response for t least 30 years. At some point someone wrote on a cheat sheet that it meant "respond with caution". Now every time one of our officers calls 10-20, 60-control announces "all units responding to:_____ respond with caution".

If we have an accident, will a lawyer use this to convince a jury that when we respond we do not use caution, unless told to do so?

Also, when we arrive at an incident, and the officer says: "heavy smoke or fire out every window or even people trapped" dispatch does not up the response, they have been taught that we must say: "10-75 or Working Fire, or 2nd alarm" to trigger additional resources.

[helicopper 1,050]

This is why the NIMS/ICS system tells us to use plain English instead of 10 codes.

Only in mutual aid or regional responses where different radio codes may be encountered. There is nothing wrong with the FDNY, NYPD or YFD using 10-codes during their normal day to day operations. (See attachment below for NIMS Alert on subject)

plain_lang.pdf

If the City of New York can use the 10 Codes with no problem for the past 4 to 5 decades that I know of, I see NO reason why they or anybody else would have to change because some "SO-CALLED AUTHORITY" says its the right thing to do. I know in my area, plain English is used because these Higher Authorities said to change. Its interesting to hear some of the very Un-Professional Radio traffic. Let me tell you, I have no trouble understanding Exactly what the FDNY or Yonkers is talking about. But I invite any buff up to my area and listen to the chaos that goes on with even the simpliest of routine calls.

Back to the orginial thread, of Signal 10-30 in SW Yonkers. The City of Yonkers has been pretty busy lately for both the FD and PD. A few fires, stabbings, and shootings. "Ah, the Heartbeat of a City".

If you want to call the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA "so-called authorities", you'll have to take your argument to Washington, DC.

As for plain English or clear text being the cause of your radio chaos, I bet that's not the problem! You can have very unprofessional radio traffic with or without 10-codes. The problem is the lack of a STANDARD for such codes. If there was one statewide standard, we'd have no problem using them but when you have a mutual aid response and one department uses numbers to designate sides of the building and another uses letters and a third uses colors, you're going to run into problems. Or 10-13 means car accident in one town, back in service in another town and officer needs assistance in another, what's really happening.

There are many areas using plain English as their standard and they have very professional communications and everyone knows what they mean. The chaos could probably be limited or eliminated with training, discipline, and standardization. If you let people say and do whatever they want you'll invariably wind up with a problem.

To those who would blame NIMS for all our problems, you obviously haven't read it! It is designed to reduce confusion, improve communications and coordination, track resources more accurately and efficiently, and insure that information is properly disseminated. That sucks? I think not! I think the institutional resistance to change and the "you can't tell me what to do in my department" mentalities is what leads people to believe that NIMS sucks.

[helicopper 1,050]

Plain English is no guarantee that the message will be correct.

We have used 10-20 to mean non-emergency response for t least 30 years. At some point someone wrote on a cheat sheet that it meant "respond with caution". Now every time one of our officers calls 10-20, 60-control announces "all units responding to:_____ respond with caution".

If we have an accident, will a lawyer use this to convince a jury that when we respond we do not use caution, unless told to do so?

Also, when we arrive at an incident, and the officer says: "heavy smoke or fire out every window or even people trapped" dispatch does not up the response, they have been taught that we must say: "10-75 or Working Fire, or 2nd alarm" to trigger additional resources.

Training and standardization would correct that! When that cheat sheet got edited incorrectly, did anyone bother to change it to the correct term?

Do you want dispatch to interpret your officer's message and act on their interpretation or do you want it to be standardized? If A, then B. If you tell your dispatchers that "people trapped" should add X and Y to the response, they'll do that for you. It has to be standardized though because everyone is going to have their own interpretations of "heavy smoke" unless you tell them what you want when that is transmitted.

[jack10562 414]

This topic took an interesting turn,

It seems the "requirement" for clear text or plain English has increased the amount of radio transmissions, and the time it takes to confirm receipt of a message.

Where is the need for a dispatcher to repeat word-for-word, a message they just received from a unit in the field, especially when it's not something urgent, such as a critical patient report.

New way:

Unit: "This is engine 9000 returning to station 4885 from the incident scene at 12345 whodunit street...K"

Dispatch: "Engine 9000 in service, returning to station 4885 from 12345 whodunit street at 23:34.

Old way:

Unit: engine 9000 10-8, 10-2

Dispatch: 10-4

[x129K 1,393]

IMHO, Nims Sux ! WE know what WE mean !

LOL..You so beat me to this!!!!

[batt2 145]

is safety which responded out of HQ still around?? because i see batt 1 as acting saftey officer

Due to the budget, the department is not filling in open Safety spots (due to vacation or other leave). During those tours without a Safety officer, once a Battalion Chief declares a 10-30 the other Battalion Chief responds as Safety Officer.

Edited July 26, 2009 by batt2

[Bnechis 3,961]

Training and standardization would correct that! When that cheat sheet got edited incorrectly, did anyone bother to change it to the correct term?

Yes its been brought up more than once, dont know why we still have it as an issue.

Do you want dispatch to interpret your officer's message and act on their interpretation or do you want it to be standardized? If A, then B. If you tell your dispatchers that "people trapped" should add X and Y to the response, they'll do that for you. It has to be standardized though because everyone is going to have their own interpretations of "heavy smoke" unless you tell them what you want when that is transmitted.

We have found it works better to train our people to say 10-75...then we get a standard response, that works well.