Splicing cables

[dextrous]

Now, this leads to another technical question - the RF system has a control panel which says on the box it is suitable for up to 12 smoke/heat detectors. But there will be in excess of 15 of these, plus 4 call points. The NZ mateyboy says his isn't a problem - is this correct? Is there a way round this by hard wire connecting some of the sensors into localised zones which count as, say 1 instead of say 3 component parts?

If it says 12 on the box then 12 it is!
What sort of fire alarm system is it? Manual call points suggested to me it is the type you find in a commercial type premises - usually you can have unlimited number of manual call points unless you're stepping into addressed system teritory. Smokes / heats are usually limited but 12 does seem a bit on the low side.

Spoke to the main man today who has had discussions with the tech boys from the manufacturers who have described that this will not be a problem, since grouping some within local zones will work, especially if there is some hardwiring incorporated into the system linking sensors within a zone with one of the alarms being the radio link to the others. Hope it makes sense and my poor English isn't obfuscating things As the house is to be mulitple occupancy, the council has insisted that there are call points and a control box. Not ours to reason why they want this level of diligence in their interpretation of the regs and BS specifications. But that's not a problem - we aim to please!

The boss man also told me that he was looking to downsize his team following the near completion of some big contracts he's had, and that on one of the jobs someone had been following dodgy practices but he couldn't pinpoint exactly who. Our information has enabled him identify the most likely culprit, who will thus soon become, well, unemployed. The company is a good one with a good reputation (we have used them before on a few occasions and this is the first time there's been a problem).

As for the NZealand guy being platinum, I think he may have been referring to the wrong element in the periodic table. We've got him down as something a bit more carbon like Or possibly even a by-product of a carbon based unit (this terminology comes from Star Trek the Motion Picture of many moons ago!)