james.wilson Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 dont disagree mate. Interpretation IMO is own to the silly amount of notes under the normative bit. All that IMO should be removed securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 why is there LPS1277 anyway - shouldn't the EN standards themselves be what we work to, why is there another document which is covering the same **** as the others???? it's no wonder people can't keep up with it all. it really shouldn't be this confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 En is too weak for the insurers. Grade 2 is lower than the old 4737. plus Europe have to agree and they rarely do. What makes sense to us don in Spain etc. Ie they have no confirm std etc securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 En is too weak for the insurers. Grade 2 is lower than the old 4737. plus Europe have to agree and they rarely do. What makes sense to us don in Spain etc. Ie they have no confirm std etc ok, so why doesn't 6662 pick up on the uk specifics of the implementation, why doesn't it cover what is covered is 1277 and if it doesn't cover the same things then why is n't 6662 amended to cover them so at least we still have one standard to work with? also, why isn't 8243 covered in 6662 also, if it's the UK version of 50131 then throw everything to do with the UK into 6662 so it's all in one place? in fact, why isn't 8473 and all the other stuff all thrown into 6662 as a uk standard for the installation of blah blah blah - make the damn thing 300 pages long but put it all into one document Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 666 is limited by Europe on what it contains. The only thing we have full control over is bs standards. 1277 is not a bs or an en, but is controlled by the bre and specified as an additional requirement by insurers. But as its bre only it cannot be rolled into a bs, a dd or a pd securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 666 is limited by Europe on what it contains. The only thing we have full control over is bs standards. 1277 is not a bs or an en, but is controlled by the bre and specified as an additional requirement by insurers. But as its bre only it cannot be rolled into a bs, a dd or a pd hang on - so 1277 is the uk insurers implementation of the en signalling standards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 What a load of bollox this is all is. And people wonder why the industry isn't taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 hang on - so 1277 is the uk insurers implementation of the en signalling standards? sort of, they didn't / couldn't wait for the signalling side to be finished. Plus they don't agree with self certification, ie its grade 4 honest, and with so many signalling products coming they need a way of testing them to ensure they actually work when attacked. Lps 1277 is that document and requirements etc securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 What a load of bollox this is all is. And people wonder why the industry isn't taken seriously. I totally agree. There should be one set of UK standards (drawn up by UK interested parties only) which we all work to. If insurance firms don't trust the manufactuers then 3rd party approval is fine but the 3rd party approver doesn't need to produce long winded documents which appear to either take the place of or bolster existing standards. It should be tested and get a stamp thats it. I don't remember actually working to 4737 because i'm only a youngster but wasn't that what I'm trying to describe?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 when we controlled our own standards that was possible. WIth EN we cannot have our own regs from a standard point of view its againt eu law securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.