FCC question

Spaz10 · Feb 25, 2015

I was recently told that within a years time that all Law Enforcement will go to "clean talk" instead of using "codes" and "signals". Have any of you heard anything about this? My local city police department has already changed over to the "clean talk" and it's terrible.

ecps92 · Feb 25, 2015

It was not the FCC that suggested this, but Homeland Security for Better Interoperability 10-05 in some states is the same as 10-04

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_yl...&p=plain+language+interop&fr2=12642&fr=mcafee

Spaz10 said:
I was recently told that within a years time that all Law Enforcement will go to "clean talk" instead of using "codes" and "signals". Have any of you heard anything about this? My local city police department has already changed over to the "clean talk" and it's terrible.

Tech792 · Feb 25, 2015

Yes thats actually old news. We were told to use "plain language" at the state level 10 years ago when going through ICS and NIMS.

W8RMH · Feb 25, 2015

They have talked about that for years but nothing happened. Mutual aid is a nightmare. The city, state, and county here each use a completely different code system.

Radio codes go way back to early radio, even when it was one-way. Back in those days the radios were not very clear and the codes helped.

Now with state-of-the-art radio systems, digital, repeaters etc. I don't think codes are really necessary. They use them a lot in my area (to be brief they say) yet they fill-in with "gonna be", "at this time", "in reference to", "be advised", and a lot of other phrases that are not needed anyway.

If it was up to me I would drop the codes and fill-ins and just talk like you were face-to-face.

Spaz10 · Feb 25, 2015

I read the article on plain speech but I thought it said it was only recommended and not a mandatory thing? My local PD just started this this year.

Spaz10 · Feb 25, 2015

It just sounds terrible with "plain talk". I myself prefer codes and signals. Just my opinion though.

KB7MIB · Feb 25, 2015

I know of 1 police agency in the metro Phoenix area that uses plain English for the most part. The fire departments use plain English for the most part as well, although there are a few brevity codes.
When multiple agencies work together on the interop channels, they have to use plain English. i don't think any two agencies here use exactly the same list of brevity codes, and that can cause confusion. I've heard it happen, when an officer from one agency forgets to use plain English, and an officer, or a dispatcher, from another agency has to ask them what they mean, because in the context used, the brevity code didn't make any sense to them.
Either standardize the list (not just the APCO 10-code list, but there's also Code 1 to Code 1000, and some agencies have 11-codes, and I think even 12-codes) and stick to it, or go to plain English.

John
Peoria, AZ

jeatock · Feb 26, 2015

I'm a long time firefighter, but for some reason can't recall if my fire engine is a 10-51 or 10-52. "Engine 2551" is easier to remember, and the new guys can understand it pretty easily.

The recommendation comes from DHS, not FCC. Exceptions will always be made for agency specific codes, like telling dispatch that you have changed from one type of administrative detail to another for time accounting, or for communicating exact statute violations. Unfortunately old habits die hard. NIMS and ICS solve that by requiring you to speak plain English all the time and be done with it. Secret Squirrel codes are used for both brevity and privacy, but are by no means universal and lead to mass confusion when multiple agencies have to play together.

Personal example: I was working one mile across the border in another state and at 2PM was sitting in a drive through waiting on my Mountain Dew. On the local PD channel I hear "All units; 10-10 at [restaurant I was at]". One mile across the state line, a 10-10 is a fight in progress. I'm looking around at a deserted parking lot, wondering if the cooks were having at each other as PD cars start pulling in.

As the officers casually strolled to the door I remembered that 10-10 over here was a coffee break. A 10-10 in both states normally generates a vigorous response, but entirely different tactics are required.

Imagine the potential embarrassment if a green gung-ho trooper from my home state had been there and run in with his riot helmet and night stick at the ready. I don't think his watch commander would allow lack of plain English as a good reason.

profiledescent · Feb 26, 2015

Spaz10 said:
It just sounds terrible with "plain talk". I myself prefer codes and signals. Just my opinion though.

It's unreadable crap when you do an interoperability or mutual aid operation. May as well have one group speak spanish, one french, one russian, and one english.

Plain english means clear communication across the agencies. What's your opinion on clear communication vs not being sure what was said?

JoeyC · Feb 26, 2015

Spaz10 said:
My local city police department has already changed over to the "clean talk" and it's terrible.

What you really mean is it doesn't sound "cool" anymore?
People don't speak to each other in code in day-to-day talk. Why should they on the air? The usual defense is clarity and brevity, neither of which holds any weight in reality.

Gradyo54 · Feb 26, 2015

Illinois State Police have stop using their "TIPS", Traffic Information Points System and are now using a plain talk format. Every now and then you will hear a code but nothing like before.

ecps92 · Feb 26, 2015

Yes we do

LOL, SOSDD, ROTFLMFAO, YMMV

O you mean Real Verbal Communication

Sorry had to go there.

JoeyC said:
What you really mean is it doesn't sound "cool" anymore?
People don't speak to each other in code in day-to-day talk. Why should they on the air? The usual defense is clarity and brevity, neither of which holds any weight in reality.

profiledescent · Feb 26, 2015

JoeyC said:
What you really mean is it doesn't sound "cool" anymore?
.......

Same goes for the Q coders, "for ID", and LE jargon on FM/Digital amateur. You have to wonder what their reaction would be if they heard a recording of themselves. Though,....THEY might think it was cool.

jeatock · Feb 27, 2015

It is slowly getting better. Most (not all) fire service responders have dropped number codes and have started speaking plain English, using 'acknowledged' and reading back a brief summary of the order instead of saying only "10-4", and "On scene with a [descriptive scene report]" instead of "10-23". Other disciplines are more set in their habits.

Now if everyone will start speaking clear English, taking an extra second to state their message clearly the first time, instead of having to repeat it three times "real quick".

Some time ago I received a phone call that a new radio system had performance issues. To get the full effect, read the following out loud in less than four seconds. Quote: "Last far, I hollr'd real quick like at the horn an ast him to fetch me some awl and a ruddapudda ranch from over the shotgun tar of the Shovalay and hadda holl'r at him three time before he undaheard me. Whenery'all gonna fix these here radios?" End quote.

I don't think there is an radio alignment setting that can fix that particular problem.

DaveNF2G · Feb 27, 2015

Unfortunately "plain English" is not always all that plain. Codes were not always intended to obscure the meaning of traffic, although they do that for people who don't speak the lingo. If you look at the manuals for early Public Service Band receivers, you might see a list of 10-codes. These were referred to as APCO Aural Brevity Codes. They were meant to save time, not keep secrets.

In public safety, and especially in law enforcement, the institutional mentality veers toward keeping secrets. The APCO codes became the seeds for a number of customized 10-codes that were more about keeping secrets than saving air time.

In making a transition back to "plain language" there needs to be some attention paid to the original purpose of using codes - brevity (and clarity). Plain language in the communications environment does not mean - and should not mean - just saying any old expression. It should include standardized phrasing so that everyone involved can understand exactly what is meant without wasting a lot of air time with excessive verbiage.

Most "plain language" dispatching nowadays seems to take too long to say and some of it can be misinterpreted or misunderstood easily. (It gets worse when a dispatcher is obviously reading the incident information for the first time while giving out the call.)

902 · Feb 27, 2015

APCO no longer endorses a 10 code. It was what the organization considered in a different era and, Dave's right, it was for brevity, not to obfuscate the meaning of something. Various COMSEC classes teach that it does not take much for listeners to pick up on codewords. When I got my first scanner, I remember hearing "Make an 88" a lot. After about the third time, I reached the conclusion that it was a direction to return to quarters. Same thing with a neighboring county's use of "fourteen." That was their equivalent of what most others said "10-4" to. Not everyone memorizes those things. A family member who became a police officer used to keep two things folded up in his hat: a little map, and the new 10 codes.

The FCC doesn't have the authority to compel the use of "plain language" vs. a 10 code. It's not what they do. Other federal interests might tie funding into teaching and implementing NIMS (which does advocate plain language). You want a federal grant to buy nifties? Show the numbers indicating NIMS trained volunteers and employees, and show that NIMS is adopted by resolution and incorporated into emergency operating plans. There is the compelling force. It's the same tactic that rounds up national compliance for highway funding (Want our money? Do the things we want uniformly.)

I posit that plain language is in itself a code. To amplify on Dave's statement, you can't say anything you want, you have to use proper phraseology that's taught in NIMS. "Send me ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING!" or "Send me a bunch of fire trucks!" doesn't fly (you might end up hearing that on the radio, but...). Plain language includes the words "Task Force" and "Strike Team." The difference is taught in the NIMS courses and reinforced in the ICS. Same thing with Type II Fire Boat. It means a firefighting boat with a 1,000 GPM pump on board. Or a Type I Hand Crew vs. a Type IV Hand Crew.

I wouldn't worry. Collectively, 10 codes are going out of favor, but plain language codes are in. Same reason as before: they allow uniform descriptions of more complex requirements and reduce the potential for misinterpretation at the other end.

DJ11DLN · Feb 27, 2015

Great discussion. They always told me that the ten codes, signals, etc were to minimize the time the old tube rigs were heated up back in the early days of 2-way, which could make a major difference in the service life of the finals. Sort of makes sense but does not account for their use in the 1-way broadcast days.

I for one welcome the plain talk movement, though I know that codes, signals, etc are going to persist. I catch myself doing it...30+ years of dealing with this stuff will do that to you. And I think some of them, such as 10-0 (fatality), 10-32 (firearm), and 10-79 (notify coroner) will persist no matter how hard we try to kill them off. And I remember that all of these and most of the rest were explained in the sheet that came with my folks' first BC3 back in the early '70s, and I wonder who we think we're fooling when we use them.:roll:

ecps92 · Feb 27, 2015

Right on the button !

And for those Hobbyists who want to LEARN about ICS and NIMS
FEMA (your federal tax dollars) allows you , Yes You the private Citizen
to take the very same NIMS/ICS trainings as the folks you listen to.

And you get a very nice COLOR Certificate.
Just visit Emergency Management Institute - Independent Study (IS) | Course List

902 said:
APCO no longer endorses a 10 code. It was what the organization considered in a different era and, Dave's right, it was for brevity, not to obfuscate the meaning of something. Various COMSEC classes teach that it does not take much for listeners to pick up on codewords. When I got my first scanner, I remember hearing "Make an 88" a lot. After about the third time, I reached the conclusion that it was a direction to return to quarters. Same thing with a neighboring county's use of "fourteen." That was their equivalent of what most others said "10-4" to. Not everyone memorizes those things. A family member who became a police officer used to keep two things folded up in his hat: a little map, and the new 10 codes.

The FCC doesn't have the authority to compel the use of "plain language" vs. a 10 code. It's not what they do. Other federal interests might tie funding into teaching and implementing NIMS (which does advocate plain language). You want a federal grant to buy nifties? Show the numbers indicating NIMS trained volunteers and employees, and show that NIMS is adopted by resolution and incorporated into emergency operating plans. There is the compelling force. It's the same tactic that rounds up national compliance for highway funding (Want our money? Do the things we want uniformly.)

I posit that plain language is in itself a code. To amplify on Dave's statement, you can't say anything you want, you have to use proper phraseology that's taught in NIMS. "Send me ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING!" or "Send me a bunch of fire trucks!" doesn't fly (you might end up hearing that on the radio, but...). Plain language includes the words "Task Force" and "Strike Team." The difference is taught in the NIMS courses and reinforced in the ICS. Same thing with Type II Fire Boat. It means a firefighting boat with a 1,000 GPM pump on board. Or a Type I Hand Crew vs. a Type IV Hand Crew.

I wouldn't worry. Collectively, 10 codes are going out of favor, but plain language codes are in. Same reason as before: they allow uniform descriptions of more complex requirements and reduce the potential for misinterpretation at the other end.

jeatock · Feb 27, 2015

DJ11DLN said:
and 10-79 (notify coroner)

Good points and all valid. I do content that in some cases (as above), the valid intention may be to obscure the meaning of a message. For example, after responders have been paged to a medical emergency at Grandma's address the call for the coroner should be in code, or even better made via cell phone or some other medium that Grandma's family is not privy to.

The old adage 'engage brain before putting mouth in gear' is hard enough to remember in daily face to face conversation. Incident communications require it even more. Using plain English in interoperable situations but speaking Secret Squirrel daily when conducting communications in your comfort zone usually means that in the heat of a 'moment' you are likely to automatically talk in the manner you are used to. More often than not that is the wrong time and place for unclear communications.

My basic rule is to stop, think, THEN talk, and do it right the first time. Easy to preach but not always remembered when the brown stuff has hit the ventilator.

krokus · Feb 27, 2015

When my county transitioned to the statewide trunked system, part of the requirements was to stop using most codes, and start using plain language. A few codes have been retained, for officer safety.

The elimination of the codes has helped smooth communications between agencies.

Sent via Tapatalk

FCC question

Member

Member

Member

Feed Provider Since 2012

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

DaveNF2G

Guest

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads