Declined Radio Usage and Channels suggestion

The suggestion has been declined.

Top_Guy

Banned
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
62
Reaction score
92
Points
18
So the issue I wish to address if the fact that the radio is nearly always manic, even with control online. My suggestion to address this is as follows. Firstly each divison will have it's own separate radio channel and then for calls units will be automatically switched to an incident channel.

Layout as follows

ERT- Channel 1
Incident 1 - Channel 1.1
Incident 2 - Channel 1.2
Incident 3 - Channel 1.3
Incident 4 - Channel 1.4

CID - Channel 2
Incident 1 - Channel 2.1
Incident 2 - Channel 2.2
Incident 3 - Channel 2.3
Incident 4 - Channel 2.4

DSU - Channel 3
Incident 1 - Channel 3.1
Incident 2 - Channel 3.2
Incident 3 - Channel 3.3
Incident 4 - Channel 3.4

RTPC - Channel 4
Incident 1 - Channel 4.1
Incident 2 - Channel 4.2
Incident 3 - Channel 4.3
Incident 4 - Channel 4.4

AFO - Channel 5
Incident 1 - Channel 5.1
Incident 2 - Channel 5.2
Incident 3 - Channel 5.3
Indecent 4 - Channel 5.4

LAS, HEMS, HART - Channel 6
Incident 1 - Channel 6.1
Incident 2 - Channel 6.2
Incident 3 - Channel 6.3
Incident 4 - Channel 6.4

LFB - Channel 7
Incident 1 - Channel 7.1
Incident 2 - Channel 7.2
Incident 3 - Channel 7.3
Incident 4 - Channel 7.4

Auxiliary Operations (Air Ops, NH) - Channel 8
Incident 1 - Channel 8.1
Incident 2 - Channel 8.2
Incident 3 - Channel 8.3
Incident 4 - Channel 8.4

999 Calls/ Control - Channel 9
Civ talk 1 - Channel 9.1
Civ talk 2 - Channel 9.2
Civ talk 3- Channel 9.3

This will allow everyone in each divison a better way to communicate whist also keeping radio communications to a minimum. If a unit from another unit the individual simply flicks to the master channel and requests the backup needed and then moves to an incident channel where they are free to communicate without any interruption. For example:

ERT has stopped a man who they believe to be under the influence of drugs and request support from RTPC to test the driver and also DSU to search the vehicle. I would simply notify members in Channel 1 that Channel 1.1 is in use. Flick to Channel 4 and request assistance due to a man under the influence and inform them to move to Channel 1.1. I would then repeat the same message for Channel 3. This way I can explain the situation without fear of interpretation and with the knowledge that the information I have sent has been received.

The way this would work with control thathat they would be the ones to appoint channels for any 999 calls they receive either through cad or from a call hander in the 999 channel. They can then appoint units that they need. If a unit needs to call control they can also move to channel 9 and inform control who can then send the appropriate information. This would also give more power to FIM as all authorisations would be given through them. However if FIM is not active it would be up to the individual who requires the authorisation to seek it. I.e AFO in 5.1 would need to return to Channel 5 to seek weapon authorisation or self auth.

Like with anything this suggestion would be a huge change however it would prevent many of the issues we are seeing with having so many units in one channel. This would be a long time in the making and getting used to however it would be a much more effective way of working.

The way this would work in terms of Helimed and NPAS is the same. Units requesting would join Channel 8 and request the appropriate unit who would then switch to the necessary sub channel

Apologies for the rather lengthy post. Also before anyone replies with "Game mods can handle it" they have been working their socks off and them having to condtantly deal things on the radio takes them away from other things.
 
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Hi there Top Guy,

I have reviewed this suggestion meticulously and I see a lot of benefit in areas of your suggestion.

However I do not believe that the channel layout proposed would work as seamlessly as the current channel uses and Control integration.

Furthermore, there would need to be a suitable radio system and a lot of development, which I do not believe is worth it for the benefits in return.

I will revisit this suggestion in the future with Senior Management and the Senior Developers, however from a Control Command standpoint I will be declining this suggestion.

I massively appreciate the time taken to suggest this.

Kind Regards,
(E5) Clynx
 
Top