Re: Sole Path ???

["Bob La Londe" <onebikenut@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Russell Brill" <russwbrill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:d86dnWuJf4e7U83QnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Nick,
>
> The TG-7FS is polled by the Telular Comm center servers every couple of
> minutes.. If it fails to check-in for more than 5 minutes a communications
> trouble will be sent to the central station... The TG-7FS has far more
> supervision than a standard phone line(s)....
>
> Regards,
> Russ

Interesting.  However, just a couple days ago I replaced a TG-7 (not fire).
It was checking in just like it was supposed to, but the panel was showing a
line fail.  The unit was failing to connect to the panel or recognize the
signals or call attempts from the panel.  Ping the unit from the on-line
interface with Telular got a response and no troubles showed, but it would
not communicate signals from the panel.  In this case the supervision would
have failed where I not the paranoid sort that always programs the panel to
send its own autotests and monitor the line.  It got an Uplink 2550 in its
place because that is what I had in the truck.  Wish I had kept the unit to
play with, but the customer asked for it.  I think they plan to play with
the SIM card.

Sorry, unless they can show the TG-7FS is an inherently superior
communicator rather than just a differently packaged (red metal can or
whatever) and priced (to cover their product liability insurance) unit then
I'm not going to recommend sole path.  I do very much like cellular as
secondary or even primary for fire, and I wouldn't have a problem with
installing two separate units using two different carriers.

--
Sincerely,
Robert (Bob) J La Londe III

The Security Consultant
P.O. Box 5720
Yuma, Az 85366

Licensed Communications Contractor
Serving Yuma Since 1994
Commercial & Residential
ROC103044 & ROC103047

(928) 782-9765 Voice
(928) 782-7873 Fax




> "nick markowitz" <nmarkowitz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:63cb8e2e-c077-412f-b6a8-c1ee9657a80b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Feb 7, 5:53 pm, jewellfish <jewellf...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Feb 7, 2:18 pm, "Bob La Londe" <n...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I received a phone call and an e-mail the other day from one of the
>> > reps for
>> > Telular. He was all excited that they have a communicator suitable for
>> > sole
>> > communication for commercial fire. I listened to him and read some of
>> > the
>> > info he e-mailed to me and it just doesn't add up.
>>
>> > It looks like a GSM communicator sending two signals instead of one.
>> > Big
>> > whoop. Its still a single communication path. Now if it incorporated a
>> > GSM
>> > and a CDMA communicator with a trouble output if either fails to test I
>> > might buy into it, but it sure doesn't look that way when giving it the
>> > quick once over. Instead they seem to indicate the the NFPA standard
>> > was
>> > changed???
>>
>> > Really? All these years that we have been required to provide two
>> > communication paths, and now NFPA says we only need one? Is this true?
>> > What am I missing?
>>
>> > Esplain it to me Rucy.
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> I am most familiar with the 2002 & 2007 editions of the code as most
>> locations I deal with have not adopted the 2010 version of NFPA yet
>> and so the following refers to these versions of the code. If I
>> understand NFPA 72, chapter 9 it does not mandate two communications
>> paths for all methods of signal transmission. This chapter breaks
>> down into sections dealing with different transmission technologies.
>> Now, when systems use DACTs, then yes the code specifies that that
>> primary method must be a phone line and the secondary path can be a
>> phone line or several other alternates methods ( one of which is
>> cellular phone, which Tellular models are designed to fulfill).
>> However, other sections that deal with other technologies do not
>> mandate multiple paths. For instance, in the Chicagoland area many
>> municipalities have direct connect (reverse polarity) connections.
>> Signals over one set of conductors. AES radios are taking the place
>> of these hard-wired connections but, again, they are a single radio
>> transmitter using a private network. The Tellular TG-7fs literature
>> seems to indicate that it is using standard cellular networks, so
>> there must be some change in the code to allow for this.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bill
> Way it was described to me
> Tellular sends a fault to central if its servers do not see a check in
> after so many minutes from unit so it is supervised .
> that plus UL has lowered the requirements  realizing dual paths really
> mean nothing in digital age if one phone line goes down all will. on
> most telco systems these days
>