Gsd Grade 3 Wireless Alarms

[matthew.brough]

Here's one for you intruder buffs then.

Entry/Exit door.

Two door contacts in series, tampered and butt up to each other.

On police response.

 

Any Reason why this would be done?

 

I have my suspicions.

No point if they are on the same zone plus being entry zones not much use to get a confirmed alarm?

[MrHappy]

Yes, no overlapping of same technology except for dt's.

no worries, I thought Arf's 50131 claims where pish...

[Cubit]

No point if they are on the same zone plus being entry zones not much use to get a confirmed alarm?

Ok,

What if they weren't on same zone?

[matthew.brough]

Ok,

What if they weren't on same zone?

Again if programmed as entry not much use either. It does prohibit in the rules 2 door contacts on different zones being fitted to a system. When doing double doors we do one per door, different zone but you could have ten ones programmed as entry on different zones and it wouldn't assist in anything.

[Cubit]

Again if programmed as entry not much use either. It does prohibit in the rules 2 door contacts on different zones being fitted to a system. When doing double doors we do one per door, different zone but you could have ten ones programmed as entry on different zones and it wouldn't assist in anything.

OK.

This was a single door. On a Galaxy with no labels on the contacts - hence knowing what happened when you opened one.

[matthew.brough]

OK.

This was a single door. On a Galaxy with no labels on the contacts - hence knowing what happened when you opened one.

The only legit reason we fit 2 contacts on a galaxy on the same door is when using a max reader. One is the alarm zone and the other is the door monitor wired directly to the max. Very naughty if those contacts were both on the intruder side.

[Cubit]

The only legit reason we fit 2 contacts on a galaxy on the same door is when using a max reader. One is the alarm zone and the other is the door monitor wired directly to the max. Very naughty if those contacts were both on the intruder side.

both deffo on intruder.

I was doing the access. Ripping out some real awful toot.

[matthew.brough]

both deffo on intruder.

I was doing the access. Ripping out some real awful toot.

Alarm co being very naughty then. Pity you didn't take some photos and post them.

[james.wilson]

likely a throw away remark on an IFSEC stand or when waiting in a suppliers trade counter. perhaps, i had assumed because you can't have even quads crossing over their detection areas, and yet dual-tecs are allowed (or one of if each), your safer to use dual-tec throughout for G3.

at least i'd be exceeding compliance requirements using all iWise DT's, so i have no real issues to worry about.

Yes G3 iwise DT's if fitted correctly (bt etc) would indeed exceed Grade 3 and Acpo requirements.

 

Here's one for you intruder buffs then.

Entry/Exit door.

Two door contacts in series, tampered and butt up to each other.

On police response.

 

Any Reason why this would be done?

 

I have my suspicions.

 

1) Shunt lock on the entry door and trying to make a confirm on forced door, but non compliant.?

2) concerned 1 might be  defeated by external magnet on g2 system

3) Used to be double doors and the engineer tasked to refit to a single door was useless

4) thinks it will confirm on entry.

both deffo on intruder.

I was doing the access. Ripping out some real awful toot.

Both programmed as intruder or both on the intruder alarm.

[arfur mo]

Yes, no overlapping of same technology except for dt's.

fook n heck - at least i got something right tonight !