Re: Why not use two seperate panels when designing a high end system?

[Nomen Nescio <nobody@xxxxxxxxx>]

SecurityNovice said:

>But for just another 175, the customer could buy a seperate panel just for
>the interior safe contact and the vibration detector.  This way, if the
>intruder found his way into the store and bypassed the perimeter alarm, he
>would think he is home free.. But when he gets to the mother load, he is met
>by another independent syste.  Of course, the panel would be installed away
>from the primary panel and a radio or cell could be used to transmit the
>signal.. My question is.. it's so obvious that it would be money well spent,
>why does no one do it???  Am I not seeing the big picture?

It's not just another $175, when you consider the cost of the panel, the
additional secure communications link, and the installation labor.  Plus,
there's the extra monitoring costs every month.

However, you may be interested to know that until the mid to late 1970s, it
was standard practice for jewelry stores to have two separate alarm
systems, one for the premises and one for the safes.  This was in the days
before control panels had zoning, and it also avoided having a single point
of failure disabling the entire protection system.

Incidentally, in those days, the premises system and the safe system were
sometimes interconnected so that a skilled attempt to defeat the premises
system would cause an alarm on the safe system.  And vice versa, meaning
that both systems would have to be compromised simultaneously.  The details
are unimportant because today's systems are totally different, but
old-timers will recognize the term "direct wire interlock."

- badenov