Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SoCalFire] Multi-agency comm testing in 483.7875

Expand Messages
  • Mikey
    what is SCC???
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 31, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      what is SCC???




      Brent Corbin wrote:

      >
      > Any chance that's SCC, rather than FCC?
      >
      >
      > On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 11:07:30AM -0800, Pablo Valadez wrote:
      > > FCC with LACoFD, SS, FBI, LAFD, and many others.
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      > *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      > <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=246920.2960106.4328965.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=1705063108:HM/A=1513704/R=0/*http://www.gotomypc.com/u/tr/yh/cpm/grp/300_02F/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl>
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > SoCalFire-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > To contact the list owner, send an e-mail to
      > SoCalFire-Owner@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
    • Don Root
      ... As noted earlier, Sheriff s Comm Center
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Mikey wrote:
        > what is SCC???
        >

        As noted earlier, Sheriff's Comm Center
      • John H. Guetherman
        ... When they talk of interoperability, they should include one set of common radio codes, not the multitude they have now. APCO actually had/has a standard
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In SoCalFire@yahoogroups.com, Brent Corbin <corbin@p...> wrote:
          >
          > Best quote so far - "NG, you're 10-1, er, not Lima-Charlie, er -
          > you're coming in with a lot of static..." 8*)
          >

          When they talk of interoperability, they should include one set of
          common radio codes, not the multitude they have now. APCO actually
          had/has a standard set of ten-codes. I wonder how many agencies
          across the US actually use it, instead of their own version?

          Either a common set of codes, or dump codes altogether, and go to
          plain English language.

          John H. Guetherman
          Peoria, AZ.
        • Tracy
          APCO (Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials) first developed 10 codes in the early 1940s and re-visited the issue with APCO Project 14 in the
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            APCO (Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials) first
            developed 10 codes in the early 1940s and re-visited the issue with
            APCO Project 14 in the early 1970s. 10 codes, as well as other radio
            codes, are commonly referred to as brevity codes, which by definition
            is conveying a message clearly in a short amount of time.

            Since APCO is not a governing entity but a private international
            organization these "standards" are only recommended but not
            mandatory. This resulted in many public safety agencies adopting
            these 10 codes only to further develop their own codes in addition to
            the few dozen initially suggested by APCO.

            While the first couple dozen 10 codes that were developed by APCO
            remain unchanged (at least in all agencies I've monitored) the
            additional 10 codes above the APCO 10 codes vary greatly in meaning
            even between neighboring agencies.

            To further confuse the meaning of 10 codes, several well meaning
            scanner hobbyists have translated and published these 10 codes
            incorrectly. Remember, the initial definition is to communicate a
            message clearly and succinctly. While these incorrect lists aren't a
            problem for public safety officials they can be confusing for those
            new to the hobby of radio scanning.

            While I agree, in my humble opinion, there is a problem with having
            public safety folks who need to work together using differing brevity
            codes, the use of these codes are valuable in preventing
            miscommunication. If 10 codes are done away with then they should be
            replaced with some standard in communicating. I recall someone on a
            radio scanning list (probably on SoCalScan) told of a police officer
            who was working with National Guard units. The officer communicated
            over the radio "I need back up" so the National Guard folks opened
            fire to "back him up". Of course this is probably an urban myth but
            it's a good example of why brevity codes are useful to convey an
            exact message.

            Perhaps, in the future, this issue of brevity codes will be re-
            visited by an entity with more clout than APCO like Home Land
            Security (not holding my breath).

            Links of interest:

            Dispatch Monthly on 10 Codes
            http://www.911dispatch.com/information/tencode.html

            APCO Past Projects
            http://www.apcointl.org/about/past_projects.html

            Tracy
            APCO Member #227436
            www.freqofnature.com


            --- In SoCalFire@yahoogroups.com, "John H. Guetherman"
            > When they talk of interoperability, they should include one set of
            > common radio codes, not the multitude they have now. APCO actually
            > had/has a standard set of ten-codes. I wonder how many agencies
            > across the US actually use it, instead of their own version?
            >
            > Either a common set of codes, or dump codes altogether, and go to
            > plain English language.
            >
            > John H. Guetherman
            > Peoria, AZ.
          • Don Root
            ... The Fire Service standard is clear text - plain english. However, even plain english has it s problems, as demonstrated during the 1992 Civil Unrest,
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              John H. Guetherman wrote:
              > --- In SoCalFire@yahoogroups.com, Brent Corbin <corbin@p...> wrote:
              >
              >>Best quote so far - "NG, you're 10-1, er, not Lima-Charlie, er -
              >>you're coming in with a lot of static..." 8*)
              >>
              > When they talk of interoperability, they should include one set of
              > common radio codes, not the multitude they have now. APCO actually
              > had/has a standard set of ten-codes. I wonder how many agencies
              > across the US actually use it, instead of their own version?
              >
              > Either a common set of codes, or dump codes altogether, and go to
              > plain English language.

              The Fire Service standard is "clear text" - plain english.
              However, even plain english has it's problems, as demonstrated
              during the 1992 Civil Unrest, when military troops unloaded their
              weapons into an apartment building in South Central when asked by
              a Law Enforcement officer to "cover him" as he was going to enter
              the building in search of a sniper.

              And, as was pointed out at a meeting I recently attended with a
              National Guard rep, "Repeat" does not mean "Say again" to an
              artillery specialist.

              The trend is to dump codes altogether in favor of commonly understood
              terms.

              Don
            • Tim Tribble
              Well, the intent is the same, repeating last action, in the world of artillery they re just saying it with 120mm rounds instead of words. Although, if there
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Well, the intent is the same, repeating last action,
                in the world of artillery they're just saying it with
                120mm rounds instead of words. Although, if there was
                anyone left affter the first salvo, they would be
                saying "incoming" again. That would be the same as
                "say again."

                --- Don Root <k6cdo@...> wrote:
                > And, as was pointed out at a meeting I recently
                > attended with a
                > National Guard rep, "Repeat" does not mean "Say
                > again" to an
                > artillery specialist.
                > Don


                =====
                Donald "Tim" Tribble, KD6MDV
                Sacramento, CA
                "Don't bother me. I'm in my phrontistery"
              • Brent Corbin
                That was precisely my point - brevity codes are at best a nuisance and at worst potentially life threatening in a multiagency environment. I was sort of
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  That was precisely my point - brevity codes are at best a nuisance
                  and at worst potentially life threatening in a multiagency environment.
                  I was sort of astonished that CHP, of all agencies, didn't seem to
                  catch that (or, maybe they did, and were needling the NG 8*)


                  On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:56:21AM -0000, John H. Guetherman wrote:
                  > --- In SoCalFire@yahoogroups.com, Brent Corbin <corbin@p...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Best quote so far - "NG, you're 10-1, er, not Lima-Charlie, er -
                  > > you're coming in with a lot of static..." 8*)
                  > >
                  >
                  > When they talk of interoperability, they should include one set of
                  > common radio codes, not the multitude they have now. APCO actually
                  > had/has a standard set of ten-codes. I wonder how many agencies
                  > across the US actually use it, instead of their own version?
                  >
                  > Either a common set of codes, or dump codes altogether, and go to
                  > plain English language.
                  >
                  > John H. Guetherman
                  > Peoria, AZ.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > SoCalFire-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  > To contact the list owner, send an e-mail to SoCalFire-Owner@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                  >
                • Ruben Flores
                  ... Good one Tim, that was funny!...hehe... -RF http://www.police-scanner.info
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In SoCalFire@yahoogroups.com, Tim Tribble <tcomm_specialist@y...>
                    wrote:
                    > Well, the intent is the same, repeating last action,
                    > in the world of artillery they're just saying it with
                    > 120mm rounds instead of words. <snip>

                    Good one Tim, that was funny!...hehe...

                    -RF
                    http://www.police-scanner.info
                  • rfreely1116@aol.com
                    In most cases, only the police departments are still using the APCO codes. Most of your fire departments and ambulance companies are plain-speak. That is the
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 3, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In most cases, only the police departments are still using the APCO codes.
                      Most of your fire departments and ambulance companies are "plain-speak."
                      That is the ones who have not done to the pure MDT or digital mode of radio
                      comm. Just thought I would put my two cents in. Roger Freely freelance
                      photog.
                    • John H. Guetherman
                      This is what I hear from my city PD. 10-1 cannot receive you 10-2 receive you OK 10-4 OK, I acknowledge, etc. 10-7 out of service 10-8 in service/available for
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 5, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        This is what I hear from my city PD.

                        10-1 cannot receive you
                        10-2 receive you OK

                        10-4 OK, I acknowledge, etc.

                        10-7 out of service
                        10-8 in service/available for incidents
                        10-9 repeat your transmission

                        10-15 subject in custody

                        10-17 Enroute to...

                        10-19 returning to...
                        10-20 location
                        10-21 telephone...
                        10-22 disregard
                        10-23 on scene (formerly 10-97)

                        10-27 driver's license info
                        10-28 vehicle registration info
                        10-29 warrant check for person/stolen check for item

                        10-33 emergency radio traffic only

                        10-35 Are you clear to recieve confidential information about a
                        subject you're out with? (How's that for brevity?)

                        10-42 Officer's home

                        10-45 Meet another officer... (formerly 10-25)

                        10-50 change radio channel
                        10-51 felony warrant hit (after 10-27/28/29)
                        10-52 misdemeaner warrant hit (after 10-27/28/29)

                        Then there's the Codes from 1-1000: Code 2, Code 3, Code 4,
                        etc...which aren't all consistent from agency to agency here in the
                        Phoenix metro area. But these are the only 10 codes I hear from
                        Peoria.

                        John H. Guetherman
                        Peoria, AZ.
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.