Re: Rough pricing question

["Roland Moore" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> As far as we can tell, the city hasn't really put much thought into
> anything that doesn't call them, and the county just flat doesn't care.

That said it still won't be an excuse not to do things correctly, it just
means no inspection or engineering time accociated with that event.

> Nonexistent once the current provider is ditched.  Think little holes
> where equipment should be and wires yanked out of the walls.

It sounds like you have (or had) magnetic locks. From what you describe it
would be better to have your maintenance guys install a delayed egress rim
alarmed panic exit device. A red button won't come close to doing the job
right. You might have a city inspection department that doesn't care about
electronic access control but, believe it or not, might get excited about
door hardware. If you can install a rim panic device then a lock like this
http://www.hesinnovations.com/hes2/9600.cfm  might work with it. Without
seeing the doors it is not possible to know what you need to secure the
doors properly.

>Not to sound like a broken record, but what's cheapest?  If you charge
>more for the outside cable runs than facilities maintenance can do them
>for, then they'll do them.  All the building mounts are currently U-bolted
>to the supports on the corrugated metal.

It sounds like you have answered your own question. Was it "cheaper" to have
to rip the gear out you have and start over? Mounts & Mounting Brackets
http://www.boschsecurity.us/index.aspx?prdctgroupid=73 look at them.
Understand how the right mount can improve what you're able to see.

> Effectively new system, since everything is currently leased from a
> vendor they want to ditch, and all we need is; if a valid card is
> presented, open the door and log who/when, if a button is pushed, open the
> door and maybe log when. Something that can display in realtime what card
> is being used where and match it to a name would be preferred.  Who
> provides the computer depends on whether it costs more to have one
> provided than for us to provide it, though interfacing with the existing
> network (to allow HR or a supervisor to look at the records directly)
> would be greatly preferred.

This is decent stuff priced at the lower (no LOWEST) end.
Continental Instruments
http://www.cicaccess.com/testframe.html?main.asp
http://www.cicaccess.com/testframe.html?main.asp
Keyscan
http://www.keyscan.ca/English/PDFs/Products_CA8000.pdf
http://www.keyscan.ca/English/PDFs/Products_SystemV_Basic.pdf

> Obviously that would depend on the use of each camera; the two sweeping
> the parking lots would need a higher frame rate and resolution than the
> two sets of face and gate cams.  Figure our current settings are "crappy"
> and "doesn't matter much since it's out of focus anyway."

If you are not satisfied with your current camera setup there are many
reasons to be. You mentioned night views. It might be poor lighting or no
back focus prior to set up (or the need for an IR cut filter for those
installers that don't know how or what back focus is).
For a DVR try looking at these:
Bosch DiBos version 8:
http://www.boschsecurity.us/index.aspx?prdctid=3689
American Dynamics Intellex Ultra:
http://www.americandynamics.net/products/intellex_DVMS.aspx
Integral Technologies DVXi:
http://www.integraltechnologies.com/Products/Video/ViewProduct.aspx?pid=92

It would be helpful to know what you want features wise, and what features
you want to actually purchase for before shouting HOW MUCH?

"Joe Bramblett" <kd5nrh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.12.16.20.14.43.483136@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 06:05:17 +0000, Roland Moore wrote:
>
>> 1) What AHJ has the regualtions (if any) on the work you wish to be
>> performed? Is this job going to require submittals and O&M manuals?
>
> As far as we can tell, the city hasn't really put much thought into
> anything that doesn't call them, and the county just flat doesn't care.
>
>> What is
>> the existing door harware.
>
> Nonexistent once the current provider is ditched.  Think little holes
> where equipment should be and wires yanked out of the walls.
>
>> 2) The first door is read in and read out?  There should be more to that
>> door bid, like at least an intercom to allow people to get let in when
>> they
>> forget to read out; especially if there are other doors that are REX
>> only?
>
> Nothing so fancy; we just want it to deny access unless a valid cars is
> used, and log each entry/exit.  If someone wants to exit twelve times
> without coming in, that's fine, just log it.  Traffic is so heavy at that
> door during shift changes, I doubt we could enforce a "don't hold it for
> the next guy" policy from there with a shotgun.
>
>> Why have read in and read out? Is not even legal in most places to have
>> that
>> as a sole means of egress.
>
> Obviously there would be a big red button on the frame, preferably with
> some sort of squealer to discourage its misuse, to let anyone out without
> a card.
>
>> 3) What front end? Who supplies the computer? Is this an add on upgrade
>> or
>> new system? A maximum of 16 doors doesn't mean much. 16 doors of NStar
>> versus 16 doors of Keyscan, versus 16 doors of Software House represents
>> a
>> huge difference in price just on brand and features.
>
> Effectively new system, since everything is currently leased from a
> vendor they want to ditch, and all we need is; if a valid card is
> presented, open the door and log who/when, if a button is pushed, open the
> door and maybe log when. Something that can display in realtime what card
> is being used where and match it to a name would be preferred.  Who
> provides the computer depends on whether it costs more to have one
> provided than for us to provide it, though interfacing with the existing
> network (to allow HR or a supervisor to look at the records directly)
> would be greatly preferred.
>
>> 4) Fire alarm interface? Who pays? Customer or dealer?
>
> Would it even be necessary with an exit button available?
>
>> 5) Interface to visitor management and CCTV?
>
> Not really; if there's a cheap way to do it, maybe, but as it stands, we
> just have a couple of numbered visitor cards, and everybody else has to be
> escorted at all times.
>
>> 6) Pole maounted gear out of doors. Who saws the lot and pipes it? Or is
>> it RF? What kind of building mounts?
>
> Not to sound like a broken record, but what's cheapest?  If you charge
> more for the outside cable runs than facilities maintenance can do them
> for, then they'll do them.  All the building mounts are currently U-bolted
> to the supports on the corrugated metal.
>
>> 7) To calculate storage for 21 days is not possible unless you also know
>> the CIF and frame rate and idle times etc.
>
> Obviously that would depend on the use of each camera; the two sweeping
> the parking lots would need a higher frame rate and resolution than the
> two sets of face and gate cams.  Figure our current settings are "crappy"
> and "doesn't matter much since it's out of focus anyway."
>
>> 8) Motion sensing? If you
>> don't have record on motion you will have lots of fun reviewing video.
>> No smart search? No analytics? Buy lots of Coke and popcorn.
>
> As it stands, our smart search algorithm consists of either the guard
> remembering when something happened, or guessing times until it's narrowed
> down.  Record on motion would only help with the rest of the system on
> holidays, since the rest of the time there's a lot of milling around going
> on all over the site.  If we look at a camera and don't see something
> moving, we generally assume it's failed.
>
>> 9) No one
>> does VHS and dumps to printer on today's new systems. Why would you?
>
> Because our local PD handles getting a floppy of JPGs by sending it home
> with one of their officers to print them out.  They only got a DVD player
> at the station a couple years back amd the record/playback in their cars
> is all VHS. If we need them to act on something, hardcopy stills and VHS
> are the way to go.
>
>>10) Will this system have a badge printer?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Round numbers?
>> $2500.00 per regular door of access.
>> $5500 for DVR
>> $2800 per PTZ
>> $A bunch for Labor
>
> Presumably, since you don't list recurring costs, this is for purchase,
> rather than lease?  Either is acceptable, as long as we know what ballpark
> we're in.
>
>> Sounds like you're client may be going for the lowest bid which will
>> equal lowest satisfaction, lowest performance and lowest quality.
>
> Gee, you're an intuitive sort, aren't you?  :)
>
> Since we're the only ones who really use the camera system, we're trying
> to give them some ideas of what could be improved when they do the
> changeover without too much increase in price.  Unfortunately the current
> vendor promised them the moon, and delivered, for the most part, a
> marginally useful system.  Two cameras (the parking lot sweeps) do what
> they're supposed to, while the rest are either badly positioned, out of
> focus. or have apparently unresolvable problems with night mode.
>
>> Most
>> companies will negotiate a fixed price for well defined work. I don't
>> think our company would bid this if asked. There is too much work in bid
>> prep and we are too busy to waste time on maybe work when there is for
>> certain work that is waiting to be done.
>
> Well, I suppose I could narrow a lot of it down, but we're a bit out of
> the loop due to a site supervisor (our guy, not the client's) who "didn't
> want to be bothered about none of that fancy junk" when they asked him
> what the system would need to do.  Now that he's seen what that attitude
> got us, he's on board with the idea that we need to be more involved in
> things like this, and we're trying to get back in the loop before it
> happens again
>
>> I bet that may be the case
>> where you are as well.
>
> No...the case where we are is that there's nobody within 65 miles that
> deals with this stuff on a regular basis, so the client rep apparently
> went with the first company that would send out a smooth-talking sales rep
> who told him what was needed.  As such, we have gate cameras mounted 15
> feet up, practically directly over the callbox area, so we can clearly
> see the roof of a vehicle waiting to get in, and for the annual lease
> price, they could hire two more full time guards with handheld cameras and
> binoculars.
>
>