In response to Bernard Green

[mdf290]

Bernie said

You have said they send a motion detected and then go to sleep until a minute without movement has passed, then they wake up again.

WRONG I said they still send and dont just go to sleep after the first report. I do not know how many continued reports occur but it is NOT a single one which YOU should remember because I already told you this.


Bernie said

The electricity is off for more than 10 hours
result - alarm will not work
Applies to all alarms

Wrong a Yale 6200 works for up to three years without any external power at all.

Brenie Said

Cut phone wires ? A good alarm that relies on phone line does not have the line run where it can be cut. A monitored alarm often has the critical line monitored and cutting it will create an alarm at the monitor station.

... and some dont..



Bernie said

Some "professional" installers may not do a full survey, but most do, some who install wireless linked sensors have the necessary test equipment for verifying signal strength and other critical parameters are aceptable. And those the sensors on that quality of system do not send once and then go to sleep but continuously repeat alarm messages until they receive confirmation from the panel that their alarm has been received. Not possible on one way licence exempt channels.

Some well known household name companies just stick in two pirs when in reality four or more may be needed but their install staff have to fly round hitting targets. Again you are technically wrong about the operation of the Yale pir before it goes to sleep.
Have you actually TESTED one yet B.


Bernie said

You know the connection between this and the link that prevents the alarm sounding when jamming occurs. The same does NOT apply to wired alarms which cannot be made to false alarm from outside the property simply in order to make the owner turn off the jamming detected alarms.

What I said had NOTHING to do with alarms being jammed and simply mentioned people IGNORING alarms.

Bernie said

And you promote DIY alarms because you sell them and then charge for installing them. Hence you have a vested interest in them.

And why therefore is it wrong for me to point out when someone trolls and scaremongers? Why is it not appropriate for me to correct someone when they are wrong?

Bernie said

I can say that in my home it is likely that the jamming detection on a Yale alarm would have to be turned off to prevent my neighbours being disturbed by "false" alarms. These alarms would be caused by legal transmissions on the channel from nearby properties found by using an off air monitor ( as a professional installer of radio systems you will know about these ).

How can you even say that when you have NEVER even had one fitted or tested in your home.???

Bernie said

The public domain information and freely given information from Yale Technical supports my profession opinion about alarms that use one way communication on licence exempt frequencies.
In an ideal environment they will work but if one wishes to rely on them continuing to work when needed then one has to ensure that ideal enironment is maintained. Because the radio channel is licence exempt there is no recourse if a neighbour starts using the same channel. The only time action could be taken is when a criminal uses a transmitter to block the systems in a street but even then there is the need to prove intent to commit a criminal act.

You are an idiot Bernard.
You just cannot fathom what I previously explained that these alarms are some peoples ONLY recourse to home security given the budgets these have.
You advocate Monitored systems and not just any but one where the cutting of the phone line has no effect therefore dual signalling.
So what you are actually saying is unless you pay £2000 for an alarm it is not worth buying.

You just cannot stop with your weird fixation and accept that given the budgets and the risks a Yale system is actually a perfectly workable solution and you keep harping on and on and on and on and on.

You have totally ignored the important points I mentioned to suit trying to funnel the conversation down your incredibly boring little back alley.

Give it up Bernard you are on a losing battle Yale sell hundreds of these alarms every week.

Not only that but Yale also do 866mhz systems with rolling codes so you are not even portraying the correct opinion anyway.




People fit these alarms and here's something you obviously haven't realised THEY WORK!

If you dissuade just ONE person from having an alarm installed and they get burgled as a result that will be on YOUR conscience Bernard NOT MINE.

 

[mdf290]

In fact thinking about it more.

This is a DIY website and people put up posts with problems they may be having with their system and I HELP THEM.

No strings attached. I haven't been contacted or have contacted a single person from this website re offering any services to them.

So I help people for free just because I have the experience to do so.

But you . . . . on the other hand.

Cannot help people with their problems because you don't know about the alarms. You have never fitted one or tested one.
You are wrong technically about some of the claims you make and you insist on entering every thread to rubbish the systems.

Totally ignoring the fact that you are insulting people who have already bought or are considering to buy one of the alarms.

ignoring the total boring nature of your continued harping I also contest that you are a negative influence who may actually discourage people from protecting their properties.
You make vaque claims as if they are absolute statements of fact while conveniently hiding the fact the systems you so approve can equally fail for any number of reasons.

There are probably many many people who would like answers about their Yale alarms.
Answers which if given would ensure their systems would be installed properly and have the best chance of working correctly.

It would not surprise me to learn that many many people find this site due to Yales own technical support being patchy at times but once finding the site do not register and ask a question when they have seen the response a Yale thread will get.

Keep bullying people away from the DIY site Bernard.

It must make you feel really big...

(or why else would you do it?)

 

[Jibbeh]

Needs more butthurt.

 

[Bodgeitandleggit]

I don't know anything about alarms but I like Bernard

 

[mdf290]

I used to have time for Bernard he used to be the voice of reason against some rather partisan members that used to inhabit here.

Now however I have changed my mind as he has lost all sense of perspective. He wades in with the same argument regardless of the needs , wants , budget and risks involved.

For sure noone would put a one way wireless system up to guard the crown jewels.

But in real life having the Yale or any other alarm whether they work or not on your property makes the biggest difference to whether you will be burgled or not since 85% of burglars would avoid homes with alarms.

The 15% who will burgle your home even with an alarm will have burgled any home regardless in a probable quick smash and grab.

To dissuade anyone from alarming a property by suggesting an extremely small statistical probability with even fewer anecdotal references is an absolute dead certainty to fail is dishonest , misleading and unfair.

 

[bernardgreen]

To dissuade anyone from alarming a property by suggesting an extremely small statistical probability with even fewer anecdotal references is an absolute dead certainty to fail is dishonest , misleading and unfair.

Once again you avoid the issue that almost all wireless systems can be disabled before the burglar enters the property, the cheaper the system the easier it is to dis-able it.

It is not the issue of the chance of a sensor being blocked at the moment the burgar breaks in, it is the issue of the burglars who are now "going equiped" not only with cro-bars and glass breaker but also with the means to dis-able wireless alarms.

If attempts to dis-able the alarm result in the alarm sounding then the burglar will go elsewhere. Repeated attempts over several weeks may be sucessful when the owner reacts to the annoying and apparently false alarms and turns off the jamming detection. The property is no longer protected and the next burglar who attempts to dis-able the alarm will realise this and be able to dis-able the alarm. It is public domain knowledge that one manufacturer reccomends turning off jamming detection if there are frequent "false" alarms.

Note to would be burglars who use jammers, there are stings being set up where the wireless alarm will appear to be dis-abled by your jamming. it is, but the silent jamming detection alarm is not dis-abled and your jamming signal will invoke a rapid response. So think before you go equiped and try to dis-able a wireless alarm. Is it an ordinary house or a sting house ?.

You continue to press the point that accidental blocking of an alarm message is very un-likely, I agree the chance is very small in many areas.

You should not mis-lead people into believing that accidental blocking is the only type of blocking that will prevent an alarm during a break in.

 

[mdf290]

That decision gets made when the homeowner decides to pay £150 for an alarm off a shelf or asks someone to install it for him. Those people may have had a number of quotes (usually) before choosing the option within their budget.

I have fitted probably 3000 or so Yales now from Sheffield to Bridlington and all around West and North Yorkshire, I'm fitting six this week as we speak. That should give me a representative sample group.

Surely if people were suffering repeated false alarms to the extent you feel the need to forewarn due to jamming at least a small proportion of those three thousand or so would have got back to me to express concerns or ask questions.

The reality is only ONE person has contacted me for that reason.

ONE in THREE THOUSAND.

You also fail to mention that burglars can set off Wired alarms or that wired alarms can be silenced such is your focus on what in my experience with the systems is a practical non issue.

Your continued alarmist (no pun intended) position is likely to dissuade more people from fitting an alarm and therefore suffering a burglary than the number of people you THINK you are going to protect from a jamming attack.

There is an estate in Leeds which has more Yale alarms than any other kind and they have a security facebook group. Yale alarms have been fitted on that estate since it was new in 2009. People still call me and ask for an alarm.. If there had been a problem they as a community would know all about it but they dont.
I have to assume therefore that your scaremongering is down to some commercial angle you yourself are protecting and that you aren't retired at all as you claim.

 

[bernardgreen]

Surely if people were suffering repeated false alarms to the extent you feel the need to forewarn due to jamming at least a small proportion of those three thousand or so would have got back to me to express concerns or ask questions.

Maybe they have followed

Radio jamming
This control unit and siren are equipped with the latest type of radio receiver using AM radio technology. If interference detection is set to ON in the siren, when the system is armed, any criminal attempt to prevent (or jam) the detector transmissions will be picked up as interference and will cause the siren to alarm. The control unit can be set to display and report (by dialling out, not sounding alarm) when interference is detected.

If the alarm is frequently triggered by interference there may be high levels of unusual radio signals in your area. Some kinds of electronic equipment can generate this kind of radio interference. In the unlikely event of you experiencing problems with interference, it is recommended that you switch jamming detection off.

Some kinds of electronic equipment legally use the same radio channel as the alarms.

The reality is only ONE person has contacted me for that reason.

Have you considered that some of your customers are not getting back to you because they have lost confidence in the person who sold them a DIY system and charged for installing it. Do you leave the systems you install with "jamming detection" enabled or dis-abled ?

You also fail to mention that burglars can set off Wired alarms or that wired alarms can be silenced

It is impossible to silence a wired alarm without having gained access to the cabling. A wireless alarm can be silenced or dis-credited ( repeated false alarms ) from a distance.

I have to assume therefore that your scaremongering is down to some commercial angle you yourself are protecting and that you aren't retired at all as you claim.

I am retired, from a career as an electronics design engineer which included 12 years of designing for radio communication systems. You however DO have a commercial angle as your income appears to be partially dependent on installing DIY alarm systems.

 

[JohnD]

We have established that the chance of an interfering signal, in an ordinary domestic house in an ordinary residential road, jamming one of your sensors at the same time that a burglar breaks into your home, is vanishingly small. It is in fact so small that Bernard refuses to estimate the probability.

The average person who wants to spend £150 on a simple DIY alarm that he can install himself in an hour or two, or pay some more handy person to fit it for him, is probably not going to change his mind and spend a couple of thousand on a superior system.

Bernard displays no understanding of the needs and budget of the typical Yale customer; nor of the lengths to which a typical crack-head or opportunistic thief is likely to go to defeat technology, when he can more easily steal from the house next door, which has no alarm.

 

[mdf290]

Maybe they have followed

Radio jamming
This control unit and siren are equipped with the latest type of radio receiver using AM radio technology. If interference detection is set to ON in the siren, when the system is armed, any criminal attempt to prevent (or jam) the detector transmissions will be picked up as interference and will cause the siren to alarm. The control unit can be set to display and report (by dialling out, not sounding alarm) when interference is detected.

If the alarm is frequently triggered by interference there may be high levels of unusual radio signals in your area. Some kinds of electronic equipment can generate this kind of radio interference. In the unlikely event of you experiencing problems with interference, it is recommended that you switch jamming detection off.

I SERIOUSLY Doubt it Bernard . . I install all my sirens out of reach at the end of a ten metre ladder !!!! You are assuming they would know that jamming was the cause and would not instead immediately think there was a system or sensor fault. Of course lots of old ladies and young mums just love clambering up ladders and changing the dip switch settings of alarms while juggling a manual. Oh yes and you also seem to think when people pay someone else to do something if it goes wrong that they would actually fix it themselves and risk losing warranty cover.

What planet are you from? Your wild suppositions are just crass stupidity.

Have you considered that some of your customers are not getting back to you because they have lost confidence in the person who sold them a DIY system and charged for installing it. Do you leave the systems you install with "jamming detection" enabled or dis-abled ?

First comment was just a pointless supposition but you are good at them.
The second comment was purely insulting. I have NEVER installed a system with the jamming detection turned off. If I could not get a system to work reliably on site I would NOT install it and NOT charge.
Your comment was extremely puerile ,ignorant and antagonistic.

It is impossible to silence a wired alarm without having gained access to the cabling. A wireless alarm can be silenced or dis-credited ( repeated false alarms ) from a distance.

Absolute rubbish again Bernard. I could silence an external siren without accessing any cabling at all.
Your second point again is rubbish. Remotely communicating with the alarm would set it off not silence it.

I am retired, from a career as an electronics design engineer which included 12 years of designing for radio communication systems. You however DO have a commercial angle as your income appears to be partially dependent on installing DIY alarm systems.

You NEVER listen to anything anyone ever says you must have been the most irritating child any teacher ever had te misfortune to stand before.

I said I come on here to give advice for absolutely NO gain of my own other than to LEARN more myself by SOLVING other peoples problems.

 

[bernardgreen]

You NEVER listen to anything anyone ever says you must have been the most irritating child any teacher ever had te misfortune to stand before.

I listen to people who have the knowledge of the matter they are talking about. In matters involving radio communications I listen to designers, regulatory officers, enforcement officers and other professionals.

Why should I listen to you when you have shown a lack of knowledge about the alarms you install.

For example you believed the sensors sent regular "I am here" messages to the panel. Testing suggested that you were wrong. Yale confirmed the sensors only transmit on motion detected, low battery or tamper.

Which means ( for new readers ) alarms can be set with a protected door open or with a dead PIR sensor, the panel will not issue a warning of these faults. Because the panel is not aware of a dead or missing sensor frequent walk tests are necessry to ensure all sensors are functional.

I said I come on here to give advice for absolutely NO gain of my own other than to LEARN more myself by SOLVING other peoples problems.

And you are slowly learning about the constraints applicable to all alarms that use one way wireless communications on a licence exempt radio frequency. Until you are fully aware of those constraints the advice you give has to be questioned due to you lack of detailed knowledge of the operation of the system.

Your comment about budgets invokes the thought that people will spend many hundreds of pounds of TV and other items and then buy a cheap alarm to protect them.

 

[mdf290]

You NEVER listen to anything anyone ever says you must have been the most irritating child any teacher ever had te misfortune to stand before.

I listen to people who have the knowledge of the matter they are talking about. In matters involving radio communications I listen to designers, regulatory officers, enforcement officers and other professionals.

Why should I listen to you when you have shown a lack of knowledge about the alarms you install.

See you are doing it again. . .acting the knob.
You are totally ignoring the fact that these systems actually work in domestic environments. So entrenched is your position that they 'cannot possibly work' that you actually asked me if I turned the jamming detection off when I install alarms. This seems to be the only way your brain can comprehend the idea that they just might possibly work.

I said I come on here to give advice for absolutely NO gain of my own other than to LEARN more myself by SOLVING other peoples problems.

And you are slowly learning about the constraints applicable to all alarms that use one way wireless communications on a licence exempt radio frequency. Until you are fully aware of those constraints the advice you give has to be questioned due to you lack of detailed knowledge of the operation of the system.

Sorry to disappoint you again Bernie but if anyone wants to know about an alarm system do you think that they would ask me after installing thousands of them or you who has never even installed a single one.

Your comment about budgets invokes the thought that people will spend many hundreds of pounds of TV and other items and then buy a cheap alarm to protect them.

Are you so seriously naive that you have only just grasped that little nugget of truth.

Of course that is EXACTLY what happens.

Lets not get too excited about all this alarm malarky Bernard at the end of the day it's only a device that makes a noise which may or may not attract attention and in reality would not no matter how much you spent on one prevent a smash and grab burglary.

 

[mdf290]

Have you considered that some of your customers are not getting back to you because they have lost confidence in the person who sold them a DIY system and charged for installing it..

Sorry I didn't directly respond to this little gem earlier you were giving me so much crap it slipped through the net . . . .

Oh dear oh dear . You really have issues to come up with a patronising remark like that...

You just don't get it that the alarms GENUINELY do not give the trouble you predict.

But then your point about people 'losing confidence' after paying someone to install a DIY alarm.
That's a really bitter comment Bernard. What lead you to that?

I'm sure with your strange mindset you might also feel people could easily lose confidence and maybe even feel resentment for paying.....


The gardener to cut the grass .....when they could have easily done it themselves...
The car wash . . . when they could have easily done it themselves...
The decorator . . . when they could have easily done it themselves...
The man fitting the new aerial . . . . when they could have easily done it themselves...
Someone to set up their new PC and wifi network . . when they could have easily done it themselves...

You get the picture?? Don't you?

There are many reasons people ask someone else to do things and in the case of DIY alarms there are a vast number of obvious points you clearly refuse to acknowledge.

1. They do not have confidence in their own ability
2. They do not have the physical ability
3. They are of a section of society that has never used power tools
4. They don't own any power tools or a ladder
5. The instructions are not written in Urdu or Pashtan etc
6. They simply do not have the time
7. They cannot be bothered to do it themselves
8. They would prefer someone who knows what they are doing to fit it as that would give them more confidence that it will work.


Have a look at reason 8 Bernie.

 

[ImayKnow]

May I just add Bernard that mdf does appear to be talking a lot of sense.

 

[bernardgreen]

But then your point about people 'losing confidence' after paying someone to install a DIY alarm.
That's a really bitter comment Bernard. What lead you to that?

A few OWLE ( one way licence exempt ) systems that have been abandoned ( and not just burglar alarms )

8. They would prefer someone who knows what they are doing to fit it as that would give them more confidence that it will work.

I agree you know how to fit them, the instructions are clear, but do you know how they work ? In the event of a problem do you have an off air monitor to verify a sensor is sending ?

Once again I will state that in favourable conditions burglar alarms using OWLE radio will work. I have never said they won't work in favourable conditions. The point you choose to ignore / reject / deny is that while the conditions may be favourable when you install and test the system you cannot ensure those favourable conditions will continue in the future.