What is your take on the merits of each? We currently use non-tact but after running into a problem with dispatch not having the emergency talk group pulled up on the console, I am thinking of changing over to tactical on normal operating talk groups and leaving non-tactical on other talk groups. At least then during most incidents, they will be identified at dispatch immediately. We are replacing all fire service radios this year so reprogramming won't be an issue.
Current system. 7.14 Motorola simulcast, 700mhz, Centracom Gold Elite consoles(upgrading later this year also). Current radio XTS5000, next radio APX6000XE
Tactical vs. Non-tactical Emergency
Moderator: Queue Moderator
-
motorola_otaku
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:03 am
Re: Tactical vs. Non-tactical Emergency
Really it comes down to the individual agency's preferences and operating procedures. If you use revert (non-tactical) on the fireground are you OK with safety, IC, and the RIT guys being able to change channels to contact the downed firefighter? Do you want safety and IC's radios to decode the emergency activation and display the ID/alias? Revert would nix that unless you have two dedicated radios. Dispatch is secondary IMHO, their role is important but they're not the ones running in to make the rescue.
At my place of employment we hashed this out during the transition from conventional analog to trunked P25 with APX subscribers and eventually decided to go with tactical/non-revert emergency with no auto-transmit. We felt like it was more important that everyone on the scene know that someone was in trouble and be able to provide assistance, and in the event of an extended rescue we would move regular fireground ops to another tac channel (with dynamic regroup if necessary) while leaving the mayday on the initial tac channel. This was also partially addressed in the HFD Southwest Inn LODD report if you haven't read it yet.
On a related note, we also opted not to give higher PTT priority to chiefs and safety officers. Everyone is at an even playing field. Again, the decision was based on interior firefighters having the highest life safety priority.
At my place of employment we hashed this out during the transition from conventional analog to trunked P25 with APX subscribers and eventually decided to go with tactical/non-revert emergency with no auto-transmit. We felt like it was more important that everyone on the scene know that someone was in trouble and be able to provide assistance, and in the event of an extended rescue we would move regular fireground ops to another tac channel (with dynamic regroup if necessary) while leaving the mayday on the initial tac channel. This was also partially addressed in the HFD Southwest Inn LODD report if you haven't read it yet.
On a related note, we also opted not to give higher PTT priority to chiefs and safety officers. Everyone is at an even playing field. Again, the decision was based on interior firefighters having the highest life safety priority.
-
Jayce
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2002 4:00 pm
- What radios do you own?: XTS/XTL & APX6000 & APX/XE
Re: Tactical vs. Non-tactical Emergency
I agree with you. I'd rather have the FF 25 feet away know I'm in trouble than a dispatcher miles away that will have to relay that info to the on-scene captain who then needs to relay that to his FFs. Too much time is wasted getting info to the people who will provide rescue. We are programming the new radios with tactical response on the fireground talkgroups, but will leave all other talkgroups as revert. Thanks for your insight.