Robbie McFerren wrote:
They are somewhat common in my area of south central Pa at least
for the PD. I have noticed that they have their regular meaning
(not sure about 10-10) but the ones I noticed are 10-1 (Weak
Signal) 10-4 (Afirmative) and 10-10 (Negative)...

10-4 is the only one that I've ever seen
universally mean the same thing.

Variants I've seen
10-1:
- Relay this traffic "10-1 this info to the field supervisor"
- Enroute to hosp "Medic 2 10-1 to St Anthony's"
- Are you ok status request "ADAM SIX 10-1?"
- Sober "This subject is 10-1"

10-10:
- Lunch "Unit 9 10-10 at Wendy's"
- Paperwork "Pick up your 10-10's at the jail"
- Arriving on scene "Medic ONE is 10-10 the accident scene"
- Your call cancelled "Medic TWO you have been 10-10'd"


n0eq Lumpy

I've been a public-safety dispatcher for the last 15 years now for 2
agencies (1 full-time, 1 on-call), dispatching PD/FD/EMS. I disagree with
the statement that 10-codes are losing popularity. At least in this
God-forsaken Hell of northern NJ 10-codes seem to be holding their own.
Both agencies I work for are in the same county of northern NJ and each of
the 2 police departments use their own 10-code list. The FD in the
full-time agency also has their own 10-code/signal list. The EMS unit uses
some of the PD 10-codes. The dispatchers and officers use a mixture of
10-codes/signals and plain english. The supervisors, including the comm
center supervisors, do not enforce the use of either style. Their only
concern is that we are clear, precise, and professional-sounding on the
radio. The on-call agency only has 10-codes/signals for the PD, and again
there is no enforcement of either style, just be professional on the air.
However, most dispatchers strive to be as professional as possible and use
the 10-codes/signals.

From a security standpoint the 10-code/signals do nothing. Anyone who
listens to an agency for even a short amount of time will be able to figure
out what the 10-codes/signals are. We're all scanner buffs here and I
venture to say that almost every single one of us didn't know what we were
listening to when we first set up our first scanner. But after a short
amount of time we figured it out.

My opinion is that 10-code/signals are fine for everyday ops involving just
your agency. Those incidents that require multiple jurisdictions are
obviously candidates for plain english. Again, security is not an issue
here.....look at how many media helicopters, TV and radio news vans show up
during a multi-agency event. Everybody is listening to their scanners...if
they weren't they wouldn't be there. What is an issue is the ability for
agencies to work together on a common frequency (such as SPEN in NJ) with no
misunderstanding. If there is sensitive information to be relayed it can
(and has been already) relayed via cell-phone or Nextel.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next few years. Now...can
somebody get me out of this Hell that is NJ????? I HATE THIS STATE!!!!!

--
.....lately it occurs to me....what a long, strange trip it's been.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:24:01 -0400, "Joe"
wrote:

I've been a public-safety dispatcher for the last 15 years now for 2
agencies (1 full-time, 1 on-call), dispatching PD/FD/EMS. I disagree with
the statement that 10-codes are losing popularity. At least in this
God-forsaken Hell of northern NJ 10-codes seem to be holding their own.
Both agencies I work for are in the same county of northern NJ and each of
the 2 police departments use their own 10-code list. The FD in the
full-time agency also has their own 10-code/signal list. The EMS unit uses
some of the PD 10-codes. The dispatchers and officers use a mixture of
10-codes/signals and plain english. The supervisors, including the comm
center supervisors, do not enforce the use of either style. Their only
concern is that we are clear, precise, and professional-sounding

Fine until someone gives a 10-xx (meaning I'm going to lunch)
in response to someone who thinks it means I'm responding.

Nice that they want you to be professional _sounding_, but
real professionals would clear up this "my way" childishness to avoid
confusion or disaster in a real emergency where multiple agencies were
thrown together.

on the
radio. The on-call agency only has 10-codes/signals for the PD, and again
there is no enforcement of either style, just be professional on the air.
However, most dispatchers strive to be as professional as possible and use
the 10-codes/signals.

From a security standpoint the 10-code/signals do nothing. Anyone who
listens to an agency for even a short amount of time will be able to figure
out what the 10-codes/signals are. We're all scanner buffs here and I
venture to say that almost every single one of us didn't know what we were
listening to when we first set up our first scanner. But after a short
amount of time we figured it out.

My opinion is that 10-code/signals are fine for everyday ops involving just
your agency. Those incidents that require multiple jurisdictions are
obviously candidates for plain english. Again, security is not an issue
here.....look at how many media helicopters, TV and radio news vans show up
during a multi-agency event. Everybody is listening to their scanners...if
they weren't they wouldn't be there. What is an issue is the ability for
agencies to work together on a common frequency (such as SPEN in NJ) with no
misunderstanding. If there is sensitive information to be relayed it can
(and has been already) relayed via cell-phone or Nextel.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next few years. Now...can
somebody get me out of this Hell that is NJ????? I HATE THIS STATE!!!!!

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:43:16 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

Nice that they want you to be professional _sounding_, but
real professionals would clear up this "my way" childishness to avoid
confusion or disaster in a real emergency where multiple agencies were
thrown together.

And you've been a professional dispatcher for how long?

"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:43:16 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

Nice that they want you to be professional _sounding_, but
real professionals would clear up this "my way" childishness to avoid
confusion or disaster in a real emergency where multiple agencies were
thrown together.

And you've been a professional dispatcher for how long?

Not to mention how many multi-jurisdictional incidents has he worked?
Sounds like all hat and no cattle, as we say here in the southwest. A GOOD
dispatcher adapts to the circumstances. If you can't handle changing
circumstances, let somebody who can do the job.

Been there, done that!
A former PD dispatcher

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 01:00:11 -0500, "M." said in
rec.radio.scanner:

Not to mention how many multi-jurisdictional incidents has he worked?

Or how many years has he spent communicating with more than one agency
(and more than one set of codes) on a daily basis?

Sounds like all hat and no cattle, as we say here in the southwest. A GOOD
dispatcher adapts to the circumstances. If you can't handle changing
circumstances, let somebody who can do the job.

Yep. I tell my wife about the bad accident with a few seriously
injured people (even though she's picked up most of the codes by now,
just hearing me on the cell phone), my OTJ friends in the city about
the bad 10-53/54 and my friends out here about the 10-10 with SPI. And
if I have to talk to a fire department dispatcher I speak English.

Come on - we have 5 year old kids who are multi-lingual. Adults can't
speak more than one "language"?

Been there, done that!

The 'gummint should leave the decisions to the people who actually do
the job. At least in this case they finally got it right. Someone
must have been on vacation.

A former PD dispatcher

"Bloody fingers" like mine.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:16:21 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:43:16 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

Nice that they want you to be professional _sounding_, but
real professionals would clear up this "my way" childishness to avoid
confusion or disaster in a real emergency where multiple agencies were
thrown together.

And you've been a professional dispatcher for how long?

A rescue team with each member speaking his own language is a
disaster in waiting.. Or did your people learn nothing from the
screwed-up comms on 9/11.

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:18:14 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:



The 'gummint should leave the decisions to the people who actually do
the job. At least in this case they finally got it right. Someone
must have been on vacation.


We saw how well comms went on 9/11, even with all the
"professionals" supposedly spwaking the same language. But "the people
who actually do the job" ouldn't even work each other on the same
frequencies.

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 06:58:50 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:18:14 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

The 'gummint should leave the decisions to the people who actually do
the job. At least in this case they finally got it right. Someone
must have been on vacation.

We saw how well comms went on 9/11, even with all the
"professionals" supposedly spwaking the same language.

Those political appointees couldn't get a paper bag to interop with a
bonfire to produce ash.

But "the people who actually do the job" ouldn't even work each other on the same
frequencies.

First, NYPD operates on 450 MHz. FDNY operates on 150 MHz. The
equipment isn't cross-compatible.

Second, the people who "do the job" of specifying the systems for NYC
are professional politicians, not professional communicators. Please
don't get me started - I spent 12 years pulling my hair out over their
supposed "expertise", buying systems that covered 25% of the area the
vendors promised coverage for, or portables that were "state of the
art" - in everything but providing communications.

Now NYS is putting in a MA/Com system for statewide interop. I guess
the question of who's going to pay for all the additional equipment
that every LE and FD in the state will have to buy (and then leave to
rot on a shelf unless it's ever needed, since very few systems in NYS
are MA/Com) isn't something that concerns them. And the fact that, in
the mountainous areas, the state couldn't afford enough coverage on
850 MHz.

There may be some states that have people on the ground making the
decisions, but the federal government and New York (both city and
state) aren't among them.

Michael Brown, anyone?

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 06:55:59 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:16:21 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:43:16 GMT, said in
rec.radio.scanner:

Nice that they want you to be professional _sounding_, but
real professionals would clear up this "my way" childishness to avoid
confusion or disaster in a real emergency where multiple agencies were
thrown together.

And you've been a professional dispatcher for how long?

A rescue team with each member speaking his own language is a
disaster in waiting.. Or did your people learn nothing from the
screwed-up comms on 9/11.

You quite obviously know nothing about the situation in NYC. But
you've evaded the question yet again - HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A
PROFESSIONAL DISPATCHER?

You won't answer that one, will you? Because you aren't one - you
just know how to make things up and hope they sound good to people who
don't know the actual situation. Surprise! You've been found out.