james.wilson Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 FYI statements from BSI and BSIA http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=e431c483321f841b0e8b7feea&id=34e682a6fa&e=9e83515002 http://www.bsia.co.uk/LatestNews/tabid/87/ctl/NewsItem/mid/431/Id/181/Default.aspx?returnurl=%2fdefault.aspx Quote 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...
alarmcom Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 These statements are surely at odds: BSI’s ambition is that the UK should continue to participate in the European Standardization System as a full member of CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. We consider that this is a likely outcome of the forthcoming negotiations between the UK and the EU. I will certainly do my best in the coming months to deliver this ambition, in the interests of UK industry, government and society. Were coming out, the majority system has spoken. Screw the EU standards which even after 10 years + of people trying to get square pegs in round holes the wise concede don't work as a STANDARD. Its not so difficult to move forward without EU bureaucracy. My draft solution would be to start again with a G1 = DIY, G2= pro system (similar to 4737) that starts at a higher level than the G2 currently in place but would encompasses greater levels of protection in line with the risk. eg. anti mask in defined areas and single/dual path and higher poling rates all based on risk. Simple is workable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 But the manufacturers view will be different they wont want to develop product to different standards ie 4737 and 50131 etc 1 Quote 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...
alarmcom Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 14 minutes ago, james.wilson said: But the manufacturers view will be different they wont want to develop product to different standards ie 4737 and 50131 etc Most already do. Its normally in the programming options. My suggestion is even easier for manufacturers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 I know. I will have to see how the debate goes at the next meeting. It hasn't really been discussed other than informally etc Quote 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...
al-yeti Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Come on if manufacturer changes its direction all the trade-diy will get even more confused Confusing stuff from you remain lot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alarmcom Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 1 minute ago, james.wilson said: I know. I will have to see how the debate goes at the next meeting. It hasn't really been discussed other than informally etc the danger with your meeting is that the attendees will have their own agenda which may not neccaseraly represent the interests of the majority of this industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova-Security Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 I think the security industry needs to vote Quote UK participation in the development and maintenance of voluntary industry standards by CEN and CENELEC for use across the European single market is an essential element of the UK’s relationship with our European partners. The CEN and CENELEC single standard model, with identical adoption of European standards across 33 countries and the withdrawal of conflicting national standards, facilitates market access and simplifies the market structure across Europe. Load of **** I think you should have a choice and no have it pushed on you by the BSIA Quote www.nova-security.co.uk www.nsiapproved.co.uk No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 no maybe not but nsi etc have a voice at bsi but not bsia. Quote 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...
PeterJames Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 So what is wrong with the standards we have exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova-Security Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Never been fully working to EU standards, so now the UK is out why aren't the EU standards going to be dropped. Whats was ever wrong with tin foil strips across a window? Quote www.nova-security.co.uk www.nsiapproved.co.uk No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 absolutely nothing but that is why we need pd6662 to allow us to do it here if we want. I really don't see any momentum to drop 5013x suite but ill see next time Quote 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...
al-yeti Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 1 hour ago, Nova-Security said: Never been fully working to EU standards, so now the UK is out why aren't the EU standards going to be dropped. Whats was ever wrong with tin foil strips across a window? Tin foil , yes we need that back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova-Security Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 http://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000000101091 1973 we joined the EU 2005 we adopted the standards, 32 years i will be retired by then to see the next change. Although i bet the BSIA and BSI rewrite some that we have to hold in the mean time. Quote www.nova-security.co.uk www.nsiapproved.co.uk No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterJames Posted July 2, 2016 Share Posted July 2, 2016 What is wrong exactly with the standards we have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alarmcom Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 13 hours ago, PeterJames said: What is wrong exactly with the standards we have? Code using 4,5,or 6 digits or pace or or. And let's be honest here how many just give customers what they want and not what they print on a cert. magnetic contacts that come in so many different verities that it would be easier to instal the door to suit a contact than use a simple reed switch. I'm getting bored just thinking about the wrongs of an EN. Let's go back to my earlier comment to sum things up. "Let's go back start again with a simpler solution". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterJames Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 But why do you think these points are wrong? Code using 6 digits is more secure than 4, I think that a Pace is less secure but on the other hand the false call being passed to Police simply because someone forgot their code was equally a problem. So lets look at the door contact problem, there are several different types that suit many different doors there are graded flush and graded surface, the only ones I see that are a problem are the grade 3 sites they are a pita but is G3 there for higher security or because the EU are insisting on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alarmcom Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 11 hours ago, PeterJames said: So lets look at the door contact problem, Your actually going to try and defend a failing system using this example as an opening argument? In fact I would prefer if you didn't respond, Sounds like you voted stay and are going to warn of the errors of that decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al-yeti Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 1 hour ago, alarmcom said: Your actually going to try and defend a failing system using this example as an opening argument? In fact I would prefer if you didn't respond, Sounds like you voted stay and are going to warn of the errors of that decision. You sound like a brexit wannabe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterJames Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 There is never ever going to be a perfect solution 4737 was far from perfect. There has to be rules otherwise you have anarchy and everyone just installs what they feel like and how they feel like doing it. I could never understand why we had to have stand by power for so long in the new EU standards, but then we had Seeboard doing essential works over a weekend on a industrial estate up the road and every burglar alarm was going off by early Sunday morning apart from the ones we installed. There is never going to be a perfect standard that looks out for every problem you may come across, because you cannot account for everything that may or may not happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark auto Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 6 minutes ago, PeterJames said: I could never understand why we had to have stand by power for so long in the new EU standards Some EU countries have much less reliable power grids than our own, so i think they're just covering worst case scenario Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterJames Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 24 minutes ago, mark auto QA said: Some EU countries have much less reliable power grids than our own, so i think they're just covering worst case scenario I knew that, but why did the BS version need it was what I meant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alarmcom Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 4737 was 8hrs which is more than ample for the UK. 24 hours would be a catastrophic or rare failure for the UK grid. Why would we have any standards that asked us to cope with problems other countries experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark auto Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 (edited) PD6662 states the same 12hours for grade 1 and 2, but reduces grade 3 and 4 to 24hrs (from 60 in 50131), like i said i was always told the EN requirements were to cover countries with unreliable power grids, ours doesnt need so long personally i dont think 8 hours is long enough, 12 is much better Edited July 4, 2016 by mark auto QA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alarmcom Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 Just now, mark auto QA said: PD6662 states the same 12hours for grade 1 and 2, but reduces grade 3 and 4 to 24hrs (from 60 in 50131), like i said i was always told the EN requirements were to cover countries with unreliable power grids, ours doesnt need so long Just to clarify, 12 hours IF monitored for mains failure Otherwise 24hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.