Intruder alarm signalling split from cctv post

[Guest RJBsec]

Of course insurers take the same view as arfur don't they, they recommend audible-only ... unless there's a risk to protect then it's not only signalling with police response but dual-path signalling ... I wonder why they do that, being as it's so useless and only a result of "sales patter 'licence'" and "'clever' or glib sales techniques".

[arfur mo]

but you cant offer the alternative yourself your is your 'guidance' unbiased.

well i can and do offer the ARC alternative via having the system taken over by one of 2 NSI gold companies, but as for bias lets look at your approved 'team' shall we? can you say hand on hart 'you' are fair and unbiased yourselves? would you swear 'you' advise the client they only need 'bells only', or do you push for the remote signaling knowing the returns will be far higher for you, and making your company worth more on paper (if not rich in morals).

after all, you make massive profits out of selling this facility - eho could blame you?.

(shows i can trade insults with the best of them)

And as i know your aware :cough G2 systems on digis have to send a test tx every day, if not recieved it goes into comms fail (well we would call the client)

are you sure? "so i know your are aware" was that a typo slip or an attempted at a poor joke? - are you 'aware' of the English language and the art of reading and understanding what is wrote in it?

so I know YOU are aware - a 'dialler' in experienced engineers parlance was a '999' (was often called a 9'er'), term got transferred to a digital communicator (aka digicom or digi or dialer), but also SO I know YOU know i said VOICE DIALLER. do i need to exsplain what one of those is - or can i assume you know?

we can bandy alarm termanology back and forth if yu wish, and you well know i'm very game for it, but can we now drop the attempted condescending dismissive tone and simply discuss the points raised in a sensible adult fashion - i'm well known to have a very short fuse towards those insulting my professionalism and/or knowledge, especially in the public sector where this behavior is even less acceptable and i though banned.

(and if you think that was a bit - sharp you should have seen the 1st five compositions - they were real humdingers - lucky it is Sunday folks - or i'd be outer here but i did not want to be on 'God review' ).

We used to fit dialer but have refused for a few years now. Broadband gets fitted they stop working, line issues they stop working etc etc, so many reasons they may stop and your only gonna find out on the annual service... unacceptable in my own eyes.

i'm agreed with most of the above, the 'line' i and this thread was drawing earlier is if having signalling to an ARC worth it.

You may think ther eis no need for a secure signalled, single path, extended format signalling system, I for one will differ.

Dont get me wrong diallers have their place... just i have had too many fail in the field to risk anymore

i never said that it was not worth it point blank - or where did i?, but the point is not about the integrity of the signaling devices and paths but the value it presents verses the cost. there are many jobs that are worth signaling but not in its present very high cost format. as i see it to sell ARC today could well fall foul of the 'fit for purpose' and the new 'anti rogue trader' legislation, where every company has to behave fairly or suffer the consequences in court.

remember here, the Police are not obligated to show up for any automatic alarm signal, and an intruder alert will seemingly often get less priority than manning a speed trap, so no matter what technology used you or the ARC on your behalf can't guarantee they will attend (which they won't if there is no confirmed signal), only to inform. so all the fuss about digis/dc' red care gets blown out the window.

at present seemingly the most reliable is dual com, digi's can be set by most decent panels to auto test hourly, daily, monthly or as required but then i'm sure you knew that full well (but irritating for anyone to say that to you though as if you did not) so the digicom (for your clarity of term) imo have a market for those who need signaling above a voice dialer but don't warrant the cost of duel com. this might also be for those who feel not confident to change the keyholder dialed numbers so the ARC can do this duty easily for them as required.

as for diallers (= digicoms) failing, i've used scancoms and later gardtec, both external and built in even the ADEMCO mecanno screw matrix ones. i've never known one to fail in all my trading years or before come to think of it (must be the way i fit them), sio i'd change the make you were using if i were you, and avoid those sales at screwfix .

regs

alan

[arfur mo]

right'o, lets google 'em

failling of in house security measures inculded the manned guarding aspect, no commerical arc involvement

bent security guard gives 'em a key

WFT, as in the faked arm robbery in a cash van?

that's what I thinking

you would do well to read what is wrote and the reason behind it, and know the facts prior to posting a reply.

do you not think the Palace security is not linked to NSY? using the most secure technology in detection and signalling - asignalling manned by specialist officers? defeated by a mere passer by with no tools or jammers or even his own ladder, so what hope then for the normal punters who get with the local plunkets plonker? (no disrespect intended - but no sub for a copper).

yes it was an inside job - did you also note the positioning of the CCTv poles near the high walls- so anyone for an easy slide into a secure compound then?

heath row has had more than one robbery, bonded warhouses have been knocked over on a regular bassis, not always reported.

regs

alan

[arfur mo]

i always thougth our first choice name of "smoke and mirrors security..." descibed us perfectly but the old man wasnt too sure LOL

my son suggested 'bodgeit and legit', but i never was a fast runner

regs

alan

[billythebellbox]

you would do well to read what is wrote and the reason behind it, and know the facts prior to posting a reply.

arf, I'am taking my lead from you

do you not think the Palace security is not linked to NSY? using the most secure technology in detection and signalling - asignalling manned by specialist officers? defeated by a mere passer by with no tools or jammers or even his own ladder, so what hope then for the normal punters who get with the local plunkets plonker? (no disrespect intended - but no sub for a copper).

I would suspect they have there own in house security of the armed rozzer type, who at the time of the fagan's guided tour was taking the police dog for a slash, as it where 25 yrs back digi or abc but most likely a light on mimic panel

yes it was an inside job - did you also note the positioning of the CCTv poles near the high walls- so anyone for an easy slide into a secure compound then?

again the 80's, no remote arc watching the cctv chances are the inside job would have pinched the video tape

heath row has had more than one robbery, bonded warhouses have been knocked over on a regular bassis, not always

an example of breakin there where the arc dropped the ball?

[arfur mo]

arf, I'am taking my lead from you

I would suspect they have there own in house security of the armed rozzer type, who at the time of the fagan's guided tour was taking the police dog for a slash, as it where 25 yrs back digi or abc but most likely a light on mimic panel

again the 80's, no remote arc watching the cctv chances are the inside job would have pinched the video tape

an example of breakin there where the arc dropped the ball?

so would you like this in the pubic or the trade area?

[james.wilson]

well i can and do offer the ARC alternative via having the system taken over by one of 2 NSI gold companies, but as for bias lets look at your approved 'team' shall we? can you say hand on hart 'you' are fair and unbiased yourselves? would you swear 'you' advise the client they only need 'bells only', or do you push for the remote signaling knowing the returns will be far higher for you, and making your company worth more on paper (if not rich in morals).

after all, you make massive profits out of selling this facility - eho could blame you?.

(shows i can trade insults with the best of them)

I think you may have misunderstood me, i wasnt trying to offend and id say my only comment that may do was the cough after you knowing a com must now send test signals. I wasnt meaning diallers and i know what you meant.

I would normally have moved this to trade or my reply but as seem to think that the world and his boy are out to get you (wrongly) i will reply here.

Lets take this a bit at a time. First off, our company does not have to outsource as does indeed offer and recommend audible only on low risk sites. We do about a 50/50 split between monitored and audible only. If i was to recommend something that wasnt needed, as you so often point out can happen, our reputation wouldnt be much would it.

I wonder where you think this massive profits come from.. serviceing and warranty costs are very high in comparison to the charges. I personally take exception to that comment.

so I know YOU are aware - a 'dialler' in experienced engineers parlance was a '999' (was often called a 9'er'), term got transferred to a digital communicator (aka digicom or digi or dialer), but also SO I know YOU know i said VOICE DIALLER. do i need to exsplain what one of those is - or can i assume you know?

I understood and knew exactly what you meant, unfortunatly it appears you didnt. You can assume i know Arfur. Dialers dont need test signalls... thats why i dont like em... Digis and up do. Clear?

I wasnt bandying terminoligy around.. you know me i thought, stop thinking everyone is out to get you.

My point about dialler v digi, is that there seems to be a belief they offer the same end result.... they do not, and imo are an unreliable device. But suitable for some low risk installs granted. But for the cost of digi no police then i dont think the cost / performance ratio stacks up.

You also say you have never had a dialler fail. I want meaning hardware failures, but those are also relevant I was meaning reasons for the line no longer working or being campatible with a dialler or a digi. Difference is on a digi you would know with 24 hours, on a dialler only on next breakin or service. (breakin when no-one got called) granted they are both weak to line cuts but if thats a relevant risk then neither are suitable.

Calm down arf its only a forum.

But i will add if ive misunderstood, and said something you find offensive then please let me know, if its read ina different way than it was typed i will edit it, as i rarely mean it.

or pm me

James

[satsuma01]

I think you may have misunderstood me, i wasnt trying to offend and id say my only comment that may do was the cough after you knowing a com must now send test signals. I wasnt meaning diallers and i know what you meant.

I would normally have moved this to trade or my reply but as seem to think that the world and his boy are out to get you (wrongly) i will reply here.

Lets take this a bit at a time. First off, our company does not have to outsource as does indeed offer and recommend audible only on low risk sites. We do about a 50/50 split between monitored and audible only. If i was to recommend something that wasnt needed, as you so often point out can happen, our reputation wouldnt be much would it.

I wonder where you think this massive profits come from.. serviceing and warranty costs are very high in comparison to the charges. I personally take exception to that comment.

I understood and knew exactly what you meant, unfortunatly it appears you didnt. You can assume i know Arfur. Dialers dont need test signalls... thats why i dont like em... Digis and up do. Clear?

I wasnt bandying terminoligy around.. you know me i thought, stop thinking everyone is out to get you.

My point about dialler v digi, is that there seems to be a belief they offer the same end result.... they do not, and imo are an unreliable device. But suitable for some low risk installs granted. But for the cost of digi no police then i dont think the cost / performance ratio stacks up.

You also say you have never had a dialler fail. I want meaning hardware failures, but those are also relevant I was meaning reasons for the line no longer working or being campatible with a dialler or a digi. Difference is on a digi you would know with 24 hours, on a dialler only on next breakin or service. (breakin when no-one got called) granted they are both weak to line cuts but if thats a relevant risk then neither are suitable.

Calm down arf its only a forum.

But i will add if ive misunderstood, and said something you find offensive then please let me know, if its read ina different way than it was typed i will edit it, as i rarely mean it.

or pm me

James

how the hell has this jumped from a cctv discussion to an intruder discussion

?

[james.wilson]

good point