wIntegerate CAD. I think thats what its called.
Printable View
wIntegerate CAD. I think thats what its called.
Our agency just switched from VisionCad to Sungard OSSI. What the new system does well, it does very well; unfortunately, that's a pretty short list so far. Granted there will be bugs to work out in any new application, but this system seems to have been designed by people who have never worked as dispatchers.
For example, in our jurisdiction an EMS call above Charlie level gets a PD, Fire, and EMS response. VisionCad generated one incident call and then we assigned the appropriate units to it. OSSI generates a separate call for each responding 'branch', i.e., a PD call, a Fire call, and an EMS call. We can't assign an ambulance to the Fire call, or a Fire unit to the Law call, and so on. So you have 3 calls to keep track of instead of 1.
We e-mail the CAD reports to Fire so they can do their reports, and now it's double the work because the Fire calls don't include the EMS times. And where before it was simple to e-mail reports, now it's a laborious process involving creating and e-mailing PDF files and so on.
Another annoyance is the fact that almost nothing can be customized by each user, i.e. I can't change the font size or color, etc., and the font used is seriously about 8 pt. or so and very difficult to read.
Just seems counter-intuitive, not user-friendly, and incredibly clunky for something claiming to be state-of-the-art.
Anyone else have OSSI, and if so, can you comment on what your experience has been.
[QUOTE=RadioX;959228]Our agency just switched from VisionCad to Sungard OSSI. What the new system does well, it does very well; unfortunately, that's a pretty short list so far. Granted there will be bugs to work out in any new application, but this system seems to have been designed by people who have never worked as dispatchers.
We use OSSI too, and I agree totally, what it does well, it does great, but there are so many things that are crammed into it that it simply doesnt need and that at times can make it run slow and almost impossible to remember all of its bells and whistles and how to use them properly. Ours seems to have this annoying bug about verifying addresses for traffic stops. They never verify, even if you spell out the entire intersection our cad still won't take it. To that end you have to enter the call with a unverified address then pull the call back up and reenter the address again only to watch it verify without a hitch. Its enough to make you wanna throw it out in the parking lot and grab and pad and pen when things are busy.
Hey - I've been keeping an eye on this thread for a while... I actually work for a CAD company now but was a dispatcher for 10+ years... I don't want to hijack the thread but I would be interested to know, with regard to the verifying, if you like that it verifies at all when you do a traffic stop? I used to use a lot of abbreviations or descriptors when I'd throw in a stop (I worked on a VERY busy radio) and was happy that there wasn't any geo verification happening because it would have just mucked things up... if something came of the stop I'd open it up and verify it before I closed it. Our product works this way, too, but everyone seems to do it differently. Just trying to get some feedback for our development team (feedback from actual dispatchers!?!!? how... unusual!)Quote:
Originally Posted by THEKID72737
-B
Our CAD does not verify locations for traffic stops either. I can honestly say it really doesn't bother me. If I really want it to, I can just open the ticket and make it verify, but there really isn't a need to.
We are in the process of setting up New World right now. Any suggestions?
We are currently in the middle of implementing Red Alert from Alpine Software. This is a complete fire department CAD and management program. The advantages are it 100% customizable, it is not a recycled police program, all aspects of the program are interconnected. The Dispatch portion dovetails nicely into the NFIRS portion. Some disadvantages is it is 100% customizable (lots of data entry) we worked without CAD for so long out dispatchers are somewhat resistant when CAD tells them to send a specific piece and "that's not the way we have always done it", because everything is interconnected you have to be careful making changes because the change may impact another portion of the program you had not anticipated.
RadioX,
I work at Sungard OSSI in CAD Support and I am also a volunteer firefighter so I stumbled across this forum. I wanted to help you out a little. The 'problem' you are having with creating multiple calls is the way the system works. However, the problem you are having with the font size is something I believe we can fix for you. If you will please contact me directly at kelli.tesh@sungardps.com I will see what I can do for you! Also, if you are having any other problems I would be more than happy to discuss them with you! Thank you,
THEKID72737,
As I told RadioX, I work for Sungard OSSI in CAD Support. I am willing to help you out with you problem on the verifying intersections too. There is an option that will allow it to verify, however it is a system wide setting. I will be more than happy to assist you with that. Please shoot me an e-mail at kelli.tesh@sungardps.com and I will be happy to assist you!
Thanks,
We currently have HTE CAD V, the windows based version of HTE. IT SUCKS!!!
Not user friendly at all, very cumbersome to get anywhere, look anything up, or enter anything. Just as an example, the "in-house" feature of records of law enforcement contacts, it is a 4 step process to look anyone up! Then, once you are in a record, it's 5 more screens to get to a phone number!
Not thought out well for use by end users....also doesn't cooperate with other systems well like the TIME system in Wisconsin. It is windows based but doesn't work like windows, the arrows up or down in a window don't work, the mouse does weird things, and sometimes when you minimize a window, it disappears and locks up.
At my center, dispatching for 5 county fire departments, 4 law enforcement agencies including WV State Police and Jackson Co Sheriff, and 1 county wide EMS agency with 3 stations, we use the InterAct CAD system, and InterAct GIS Mapping system, and ZETRON touch screen radio/paging system.
Research I've done shows IMC (www.imcus.com) is leading the pack right now for completely integrated CAD and Fire Records system. The system works great for departments up to 500 sworn personnel (police or fire). The CAD system sends all of the fire call information to the NFIRS report including who's on what truck, duties, times, address information, and so much more! Check it out.
What sort of research has led you to this conclusion, Bruce?Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceT
I dispatch for a central dispatch. We dispatch for the county, 1 city, and 5 small towns. We also dispatch for all fire and ems agencies in our county. We use CISCO, tied into cerulean/packet cluster, and I have to say, more times than not, I end up beating my head on the counter. It seems like every time things get to working good, CISCO pushes an upgrade that ends up causing more problems than good. It can be user friendly when it works good, but we end up fighting it more times than not.
What department do you work for BruceT? From all of your previous posts it seems like you represent IMC.Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceT
It was asked earlier but who do you work for and how do you support your market data on IMC? All of your posts are related to selling IMC? Is that who you work for?
Our department switched to windows based CAD in September. We use EN ROUTE. It is the worst piece of crap, un user friendly, slow system. We all hate it. We had GEAC text based and while it had it problems, we wish we had it back. WE use Visionar for RMS and aren't too thrilled about that either.
A lot of KY is using InterAct CAD, we use it in Bullitt County just south of Louisville Metro. I'm not a dispatcher, but we love it and so do our dispatchers