By Mark Cotter

Our "All Call" tones dropped for a structure fire at the edge of our district, immediately mobilizing the resources from the three nearest stations. En route and still several miles from the scene, one responding unit reported "a large column of smoke" visible in the direction of the incident address. This probably was intended to galvanize our response in case the prospect of going to a burning building had not aroused us sufficiently.

On arrival, the first unit found a small shed, almost completely consumed by fire, already collapsing on itself. A mop-up line was all that was required for extinguishment, which was completed just before the entire fire fuel supply was consumed. Although the report that the fire was producing smoke was felt to be worth sharing over the air, in the end, it was useless information because the units responding could see it themselves.

Reporting a column of smoke might be useful at times, such as when no fire units have yet been dispatched. Since I had grown up in New Jersey, where open burning was prohibited in the 1960s (to preserve the pristine environment, no doubt), it took me many years to stop driving toward a smoke column after I moved to Pennsylvania. I almost always ended up at a pile of smoldering leaves. If your department has already been dispatched to a fire, however, the report of a column of smoke (or its night-time equivalent, "a glow in the sky") merely confirms the incident location. It's not a reason to tie up the airwaves.

Emergency radio frequency capacity is a fickle thing--usually plentiful when you don't need it and scarce when you do. For most departments, most of the time, our frequencies are virtually empty and used for "routine" messages regarding the dispatch and tracking of units and nonemergency exchanges that capitalize on radio's advantages over the telephone--it's quick and easy. During a significant incident, however, multiple persons and units are coming from different directions. Each has its own distinct function for which to prepare, requiring the transmission of multiple critical messages. So the radio channels can become a confusing tangle of chatter, each voice potentially crowding out the others.

My department's radios have about 25 frequencies on three banks, allowing users to carry out numerous separate conversations simultaneously. Unfortunately, spreading out multiple radio transmissions by allocating different channels only helps when there are multiple, discrete conversations or operations occurring. What happens when everybody needs to participate in or listen to the same information exchange? Since we can only effectively participate in one conversation on one frequency at one time, we often need to share the same channel. This routinely occurs during the dynamic, life-or-death-decision-making, first minutes of an incident. It is vital that we are able to communicate in those crucial early moments. Although having a virtually infinite number of frequencies has some advantages, we still need to be good at sharing a single channel when the situation requires.

There are many approaches to preserving scarce radio channel space so that sufficient capacity remains available when needed. One key component is adequate communications infrastructure (radios, antennas, software, dispatchers, and so on). These factors are outside of our ability to control day-to-day, and certainly beyond my area of expertise. Operational measures, such as the way in which we use our systems, can benefit from our individual and collective influence. Establishing and enforcing radio usage procedures that optimize efficiency, i.e., radio discipline, encompasses a wide variety of procedures and methods. Below are some techniques to ensure that a message is heard, understood, and worth sending.

Mandatory message acknowledgement is a great method that guarantees that the intended recipient receives a radio message. It's a longtime practice of the Philadelphia (PA) Fire Department. The department runs more than a quarter of a million emergency calls every year, and each unit must receive an acknowledgement before transmitting a message--any message. A typical transmission goes like this:

"Medic 1 to Dispatch."

"Go ahead, Medic 1."

"Medic 1 on location."

Although this may seem excessive and contrary to efforts to "unclog" the airwaves, it confirms that the intended recipient is ready to hear the message, preventing "wasted" transmissions that must be repeated.

Consider the alternative: a stream-of-consciousness, adrenaline-fueled torrent of information transmitted in the blind hope that someone who can help is listening:
Engine4onlocationwithafullyinvolvedmultifamilydwelling. We'remakinganinteriorattack.Getmeafullboxassignmentandhavethenextinenginelayinaline."

Such broadcasts are often, sometimes tragically, followed by a response like: "Dispatch to Engine 4, do you have a message?"

The consistent enforcement of this mandatory acknowledgement policy, even for "routine" messages, ensures that it will be practiced during high-stress situations, such as a response to an automatic fire alarm in which an actual fire is found, or anytime conditions abruptly and unexpectedly change for the worse. Such circumstances are notorious for sloppy radio procedures. We've all heard otherwise calm persons, pushed to their breaking point, literally screaming on the radio at the worst possible time. Although it's been more than 25 years since I left Philadelphia, I still hesitate to transmit until after receiving a response (See "From The Jumpseat: Teaching vs. Training"). If the Philadelphia Fire Department can do this while handling their tremendous volume of calls, smaller departments can certainly implement such a policy.

Specifying the use of concise, standard language for radio transmissions is another approach to improve message comprehension and minimize the chance of misinterpretation. Implementing this policy would involve everyone cooperating in creating standard terminology and phrases to use in describing regular fireground activities. Many emergency service terminology collections have already been compiled. With a defined radio vocabulary, if "engine" is the agreed-upon term for a Class A triple combination pumper, you won't have people calling for a "wagon" or "piece" when it's an engine they want. This might leave radio conversations less colorful, but it eliminates the potential for mistakes.

This policy also entails using formal, consistent names for units and personnel. For instance, if an officer has established command and announced a designation (e.g., "Main Street Command"), calling that person by rank, name, or unit number confuses the situation (unless, of course, that person forgets how he designated himself and stops answering his radio). Many times, I have heard someone make a call using one designation (e.g., "Engine 4 to Command"), and the intended recipient acknowledges using another term (e.g., "Go ahead, Captain" or "Interior" or "Bobby"). The initial caller completely miss the response, leading to a repeat transmission.

Reducing the number of transmissions is a third method to minimize radio frequency congestion. Although you must not neglect relaying vital information, ask yourself before keying the microphone, "Does somebody need to hear this now?" Certainly, there are standard messages we must convey--when we are en route (including always stating our destination), have arrived, and are available. Situation reports are also acceptable, as long as there are others who need to know about the same situation, which is consistently true only for the first-arriving unit.

Given the choice of using a radio or speaking face-to-face, the latter is the better. Although this would seem to be common sense, I often have heard an officer use a radio to say, "Pull up over there," instead of just pointing. Commentaries and etiquette are similarly wasteful, e.g., "Be glad to," or "When I get a chance" instead of "okay" or "copy," which is part of the standard terminology idea. Radio conversations should be formal, not necessarily polite. Thank an assisting unit or helpful dispatcher by telephone afterward, or send flowers or candy--don't tie up the radio with congenialities.

Finally, depending upon your rank, either give orders or make requests, not suggestions: Expressions like "you might want to..." or "why don't you..." indicate that the speaker is thinking out loud. If you cannot decide what you need or want, keep quiet until you do.

Combining these measures to economize on radio space usage will pay dividends when circumstances conspire, as they often do, to limit our allotted time on the air.

Mark Cotter joined the fire service more than 30 years ago, and is currently a volunteer firefighter/EMT-B with the Salisbury (MD) Fire Department. Previously, he served with departments in New Jersey and Pennsylvania as an EMT-paramedic, emergency services consultant, and fire chief. You can reach him at fromthejumpseat@comcast.net.