EB2 Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Hi to all I have a very old ATG MX48 alarm system but need to replace the panel as OH entered wrong code and engineer who fitted it is dead, so we have no engineer code and no living engineer I've contacted knows anything about such an antiquated system everything is there and was working, just need to replace the actual panel, possibly add a keypad as the MX is all in one, and change 4 sensors for pet enabled sensors any ideas on easy fit systems that can accomadate 4 sensors and 2 PA s and with the ability to add on later if ness, EB2
Guest RJBsec Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Almost any panel that a local installer will fit will do the job.
magpye Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Hi to all I have a very old ATG MX48 alarm system but need to replace the panel as OH entered wrong code and engineer who fitted it is dead, so we have no engineer code and no living engineer I've contacted knows anything about such an antiquated system everything is there and was working, just need to replace the actual panel, possibly add a keypad as the MX is all in one, and change 4 sensors for pet enabled sensors any ideas on easy fit systems that can accomadate 4 sensors and 2 PA s and with the ability to add on later if ness, EB2 Tell them it's the forerunner to the Scantronic 9100 and for defaulting and re-programming, use the 9100 manual, or, get a new system! Someone told me I was ignorant and apathetic, I don't know what that means, nor do I care.
breff Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Tell them it's the forerunner to the Scantronic 9100 and for defaulting and re-programming, use the 9100 manual, or, get a new system! Agreed, phone some local companies and tell them its a 9100. The opinions I express are mine and are usually correct! (Except when I'm wrong)(which I'm not)
Guest RJBsec Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Why does everyone keep trying to rescucitate the 9100's? Let them die off peacefully - customer can't even change codes without calling an engineer!
lawandorder Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Why does everyone keep trying to rescucitate the 9100's?Let them die off peacefully - customer can't even change codes without calling an engineer! I'd forgotten about that but you're dead right! Funny really, the user could change codes an 9200s, 9500s, 9800s, 9600s but not 9100, wonder what the logic was behind that engineering decision? I used to work on Regalsafe RS50s and 100s which were basically similar specced panels and users could change codes on these.
Guest RJBsec Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 wonder what the logic was behind that engineering decision? I think that you will find that the 9100 was originated for one of the Nationals (Modern?) and it was just an additional revenue-raising 'fix'.
magpye Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 I'd forgotten about that but you're dead right! Funny really, the user could change codes an 9200s, 9500s, 9800s, 9600s but not 9100, wonder what the logic was behind that engineering decision? Ah, don't know anything about the programming of 'chips' by the manufactures, but I understand the code change facility was left off because there was not 'enough room' left to have it included on what ever was being used Someone told me I was ignorant and apathetic, I don't know what that means, nor do I care.
kka Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 may i suggest if you changing the panel, that you also bring the outside sounder up to date also. a local company would advice you of all the new regs. Kevin Scott. Owner of KK Alarms...... Installation .. Service .. Repair ...... Thoughout.. Northumberland and North Tyneside ..... Tel:01670 361948 (call diverted after 15 seconds) or 07947444114
Guest old-hand Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 I used to work on Regalsafe RS50s and 100s which were basically similar specced panels and users could change codes on these. They were nothing like a 9100, c##p springs to mind.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.