And enhanced polling, better encryption and lots more. But dualtec is optional

I'm not sure if this product ever came to market as i dont know anyone that sold it or installed it.

 

They did launch some grade 2 kit recently.

 guys were ex act afaik

Edited May 13, 201312 yr by jnealon

I'm not sure if this product ever came to market as i dont know anyone that sold it or installed it.

 

They did launch some grade 2 kit recently.

 guys were ex act afaik

Main man was, Peter O'Conner

No requirement for dualtecs at grade 3. Check your copy of 50131 arf

No requirement for dualtecs at grade 3. Check your copy of 50131 arf

manufacture of wireless detectors and controls to comply with APCO & EN standards is currently outside of my remit .

but when i get 5 minutes............ lol!

It's always easier to get power to detectors than it is data, anyway.

agreed, using that emphasis, other power hungry needs could be catered for in a sort of hybrid setup. implementation of better encryption should not be barrier imho

And enhanced polling, better encryption and lots more. But dualtec is optional

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.

Apart from the understanding.

i had assumed because you can't have even quads crossing over their detection areas,

IIRC Acpo thing ?

IIRC Acpo thing ?

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

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

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.