SFPD "PAT"

Status
Not open for further replies.

officer_415

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
1,273
Location
SF Bay Area
The description for SFPD A11 has always been "PAT / Muni / Tac / Traffic". Does anyone know what PAT stands for?

PAT - ???
Muni - SFMTA Division
Tac - Tactical Company (SWAT)
Traffic - Traffic Company
 

Outerdog

T¹ ÆS Ø
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
641
Guessing "Patrol" -- see also Solano County TRS for the same abbreviation (none of which should really be there according to the db admin handbook...).

Probably should clean up all those CAPITAL letters in the Alpha tags, too (TRAINING, MAINTENANCE, etc).

Alpha tags should use a mix of lower and upper case letters (the use of all capital letters should be avoided). (6.4.1)
 

officer_415

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
1,273
Location
SF Bay Area
Guessing "Patrol" -- see also Solano County TRS for the same abbreviation

No, the normal patrol talkgroups are A1-A8. PAT refers to some sort of specialized unit within the SFPD. However it's probably antiquated, or a typo of something else like RAT (Robbery Apprehension Team, a unit in the early 2000s)
 

footage

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 20, 2004
Messages
287
Location
Pacific Rim
I think it's antiquated. It's been around for over 20 years, and I can find no reference to the abbreviation in the SFPD general orders and elsewhere.
 

rooivalk

Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
170
It's "RAT", not PAT. RAT was an operation done with undercover Officers posing as potential robbery victims. They'd get robbed and an arrest team would swoop in and arrest the suspect. For legal reasons, they are no longer performed, and were never on "A-11".
 

Outerdog

T¹ ÆS Ø
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
641
No, the normal patrol talkgroups are A1-A8.

I realize that. Absent any other reasonable suggestions, it looks like an old stray piece of info. It should be removed from the description entirely. You've already had one guy tell you that there is no reference to it in the sources he reviewed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top