Sure, but I haven't a clue as to the probability of an operating non-compliant system being within range of a wireless alarm system at the very moment a fire arises in the property, have you? I do, however, suspect that such a coming together of circumstances at one point in time would be incredibly improbable, don't you?
No. it is significantly probable.
That obviously begs a question! On average, for what proportion of the time do you believe that there is a non-compliant device present and transmitting within wireless range of your home?
Indeed, and as I've said in my response to your PM, I still believe we are talking about an incredibly small (probably 'vanishingly small') risk that a particular dwelling in a particular place will be suffering from 'blocking' of its wireless alarms at the very moment that a fire/smoke alarm is activated - but I don't have any hard figures to back that up, so we'll probably just have to agree to disagree!
Not a financial one.
Yes, and then you suggested/implied (or so it seemed) that people should not in practice concern themselves about the small risks of a wireless connection going bad when needed.
Indeed, but that was on the basis of the figures bernard had suggested. I would be extremely happy if the probability of the WiFi in my house 'going bad' at the very moment I needed to use it (just once every 550 years!) was only 0.05%! As things are, if the wireless connection was anything as (un)reliable as my WiFi (which often has to be rebooted every day or three), then I certainly wouldn't trust it to be an important part of my fire/smoke alarm system! However, that's nothing to do with 'channel blocking' but, rather, old/iffy hardware/firmware.
We haven't - but I was talking about whatever wireless connection the detectors/alarms use, not 'WiFi' in the usual (LAN) sense - which is why I wrote "if the wireless connection was anything as (un)reliable as my WiFi " (rather than "if the WiFi were anything as (un)reliable as mine")
It's not pros and cons of the Nest.
Rewind.
and as I said can I go back to my original question... About wiring and leave the wireless interlink argument now.
I can understand your point, so I'll try to clarify. Yes, as a general principle, in any context, I would say that wireless connections (for anything) should be avoided (in favour of wired ones), unless there is some compelling reason to use wireless - since one thereby avoids all of the uncertainties (or whatever magnitude) associated with wireless, but not wired, connections.
OK - let's do that. Let's return to the wiring.
The wiring provides you with a wired interconnect. Keep it. Use it. Do not fit detectors which do not use it.
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
