Re: Here's one for the books

[Crash Gordon® <NONE@xxxxxxxx>]

yah power the puppy back up, connect a phone line, throw in steel ash =
can, throw some kerosene on it and light it...see if it sends anything =
:-)...sounds like a fun experiment. Hmmm I have a locked Pc1550 we could =
use...only thing is it will send to a alarmco that's outta biz.


"Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message =
news:hMidnXELApzc7dbfRVn-uA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I have a feeling that the panel would have sent a signal since it was =
the AC
> power part of the panel that cooked not the rest of the board, it =
would have
> shown ac failure...for a while
>=20
> Be an interesting thing to test for sure
>=20
> "Dave" <google.3.trustme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1112234058.745043.28570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > A smoke detector above the panel wouldn't have helped on this one.  =
It
> > was the panel that caught fire.  By the time the smoke went off, =
there
> > wouldn't have been much left of that panel to send signals.  But =
yeah,
> > the code requires it, so we should do it.
> >
> > J. Sloud wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:37:29 -0500, "R.H.Campbell"
> > > <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > >But thinking about it afterwards, this panel could have burned =
the
> > whole
> > > >damn building down. Who says low voltage equipment poses no risks
> > !!!!!
> > > >
> > > >RHC
> > >
> > > How's Canadian fire code read regarding using non-Listed panels =
for
> > > smoke detection?  NFPA72 specifically forbids using non-Listed
> > > equipment for any type of fire alarm detecting or reporting.  Per
> > > NFPS72, you'd also need to have a smoke above the control panel =
that
> > > would have been quite effective in preventing the building from
> > > burning down.  Good thing this didn't happen in the middle of the
> > > night.
> >
>=20
>