Rural Fire Service Callsigns

[rochedalescan]

PRIMARY ROLE NUMERICAL IDENTIFIER
Command Personnel - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Light Appliance - 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
Medium Appliance - 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57,
Heavy Appliance - 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67,
Ex-Urban Appliance - 13
Troop Carrier - 14

Slip On Unit
25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39

Trailer Unit
15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24

Water Tanker - 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80

Quebec Romeo 1
Kedron Park (State HQ) Assistant Commissioner Rural Operations

Quebec Romeo2
Kedron Park (State HQ) Director Rural Operations

Delta121 Caboolture Area Director
Delta122 Caboolture Area Support Officer
Delta123 Caboolture Area Training Officer
Delta131 Ipswich Area Director
Delta132 Ipswich Area Support Officer
Delta133 Ipswich Area Training Officer

[Stretch]

Add to that 81 is a control vehicle.

Can someone comfirm that please.

Mitch

[BradT87]

Well......
What everyone knew as the '9' series vehicles have changed recently.
Evidently, every brigade with a 91, 92 etc. should now be calling them 81, 82 etc. I know there are many brigades on the coast that are still calling them both... Depending on who is operating the radio at the time. Apparantly they were allocated the wrong call signs to begin with and now the arguments are over, everyone needs to re-train their brains to call them 8-somethings.

So, same vehicles, different call signs. Confirmed.

[Stretch]

Well......
What everyone knew as the '9' series vehicles have changed recently.
Evidently, every brigade with a 91, 92 etc. should now be calling them 81, 82 etc. I know there are many brigades on the coast that are still calling them both... Depending on who is operating the radio at the time. Apparantly they were allocated the wrong call signs to begin with and now the arguments are over, everyone needs to re-train their brains to call them 8-somethings.

So, same vehicles, different call signs. Confirmed.

I assumed that but didn't want to post it to make an arse out of myself in front of everyone. Coz Wasp Creek used to have 91, 92 but then suddenly I stopped hearing them and heard Wasp Creek 81, WC 82.

Thanks for clarifying.

Nice to have you back

[Rohan]

all the 80 series are designated as troop cariers ussually dual cab 4x4 utes and such and the 90 series are classified as command vehicles ussually 4x4 single cab utes or vans similar to a urban sierra unit

[Rohan]

90’s Vehicle set up for use by 1st Officer or Group Officer for command and control use at major incidents or to support multi brigade response.
80’sDesigned for provision of forward control in high activity locations. Ability to carry some equipment but predominately crew carrying vehicle. Not a staff vehicle and does not have a fire fighting capability.
40’s Light 4 wheel drive appliance for use in low intensity bushfire fighting and used for initial response, support, mitigation, mop-up and patrol applications. Not for use in direct attack on medium intensity fires and usually supported by medium or heavy appliance. Not considered as a primary response vehicle in medium to high bushfire risk areas.
50’s single cabs Simple to operate versatile rural brigade appliance primarily used in village and iZone urban interface areas for mitigation activities and wildfire response with the capability to pump reticulated water for defensive structural firefighting. Also suitable for use as a sole brigade appliance in rural areas.
50’s dual cabs Reduced water carrying capacity to provide for additional crew for quick response in high-risk urban interface areas. Capability to pump reticulated water for defensive structural firefighting.
60’s Appliance with higher water carrying capacity, capable of responding to wildfire with small crew strength and where access permits a heavier vehicle. Used in a support role to medium and light appliances.

as per the new vol portal

[coghilla]

91 is now being used by command & control vehicles, both Gold Coast & Gatton groups comm vans use this designation.

[FFDean]

there are also as of late rural tankers

they are caller as "rural tank zero four"

rural tanker 04 is based at burnam it came out to visit my stations last year and to be honest there pretty bad for every thing except costing alotta money to build and looking good

they seem loosely base on the urban victor truck "two crew cab, useless at direct attack only good for a command point

also another cool truck 857Y its a confuseing truck as its got the yankee call sign but its based at a rural station and responds to anything its wants to basicaly

[rossmutz]

there are also as of late rural tankers

they are caller as "rural tank zero four"

rural tanker 04 is based at burnam it came out to visit my stations last year and to be honest there pretty bad for every thing except costing alotta money to build and looking good

they seem loosely base on the urban victor truck "two crew cab, useless at direct attack only good for a command point

also another cool truck 857Y its a confuseing truck as its got the yankee call sign but its based at a rural station and responds to anything its wants to basicaly

A tanker is by design useless at direct attack. Its intent to to provide support to front line vehicles.

[Rohan]

id have to agree with rossmutz the whole point of a tanker is to make it so the direct attack appliances dont need to leave the fireground in search of a water supply as the tanker has created a static supply with its portable dam and portable transfer pump and can to multiple trips to refill while not taking appliiances off the ground to do this job