"Martin W" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
newsU_re.24170$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi
> A neighbours alarm box on the front of their house beeps about every 10
> seconds or so and keeps me awake at nights, Im going to call and ask if it
> can be turned off. What I want to know is if the beeps indicate a fault? I
> disconnected the power to a box once and that beeped as the battery
> discharged but not regularly like this one.
> Thanks in advance
>
> Martin
>
This can happen on these solar powered systems, and is an indication that
the battery isn't at full power in the bell box. The internal sounder
bleeps when the control panel battery is faulty or weak. What type of
system is it?

The only other situation where the external sounder will bleep on a regular
timing, is when the system has been activated in alarm condition, and the
sounder has been set up to warn of a non full reset by code after the timed
cut off period. Is your neighbour at home?

BigWallop wrote:
>>A neighbours alarm box on the front of their house beeps about every 10
>>seconds or so and keeps me awake at nights,
> This can happen on these solar powered systems, and is an indication that
> the battery isn't at full power in the bell box. The internal sounder
> bleeps when the control panel battery is faulty or weak.

If it's one of the cheap wireless alarms that doesn't have a control
panl (works with keyfobs) it might be beeping because it's receiving a
low battery signal from one of the sensors (eg PIR or door contact).

Owain

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:29:33 GMT, "BigWallop"
<spam.guard@_spam_guard.com> wrote:


>This can happen on these solar powered systems, and is an indication that
>the battery isn't at full power in the bell box. The internal sounder
>bleeps when the control panel battery is faulty or weak. What type of
>system is it?
>
>The only other situation where the external sounder will bleep on a regular
>timing, is when the system has been activated in alarm condition, and the
>sounder has been set up to warn of a non full reset by code after the timed
>cut off period. Is your neighbour at home?

If it is a hard wired alarm system, it might also indicate that the
bell module and / or support battery contained within the bell box are
on the blink.

In a hard wired system, 12 volts are constantly fed to the bell box.
The 12 volts charges a battery. The 12 volts also prevents the bell
box module from providing power to the bell/sounder.

If the cable to the bell box is cut then the power from the battery is
directed to the bell/sounder.

If the relay in the bell module and/or the battery are on the blink
then you can have problems with the bell/sounder flicking on for just
a moment and then flicking back off.

My parents used to have a hard wired alarm system.

4am one morning the battery / bell module went on the blink. Turning
the alarm off made no difference.

We had to get a ladder, climb up, open the bell box and disconnect the
bell.

Graham

On 15 Jun,
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:


> My parents used to have a hard wired alarm system.
>
> 4am one morning the battery / bell module went on the blink. Turning
> the alarm off made no difference.
>
> We had to get a ladder, climb up, open the bell box and disconnect the
> bell.

That's why I have a little switch in the loft behind the bell box. Saves
having to find the ladder at 4am.

--
B Thumbs
Change lycos to yahoo to reply

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:4D7B94F5FA%(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 15 Jun,
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>
>> My parents used to have a hard wired alarm system.
>>
>> 4am one morning the battery / bell module went on the blink. Turning
>> the alarm off made no difference.
>>
>> We had to get a ladder, climb up, open the bell box and disconnect the
>> bell.
>
> That's why I have a little switch in the loft behind the bell box. Saves
> having to find the ladder at 4am.
>
> --
> B Thumbs
> Change lycos to yahoo to reply


very good idea which i will do as soon as i get hold of a ladder

In article <n2bse.24294$%(E-Mail Removed)>, BIG NIGE
<URL:private.php?do=newpm&u=> wrote:

> Could also be a problem

If you don't post the right way up.

--
AJL Electronics (G6FGO) Ltd : Satellite and TV aerial systems
http://www.classicmicrocars.co.uk : http://www.ajlelectronics.co.uk

** Would you like to learn to post effectively? **
** http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post **

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:43:44 +0000, BIG NIGE wrote:

> THANKS FOR THE COMMENT ANDY
>
> I am not quite sure what you mean by post the right way up. Something
> screwy is happened yesterday.

He means you are top posting, putting the answer before the question!!
Convention on Usenet is to bottom post, then threads make sense.
M$ broke it BTW with Outhouse express.

HTH

Dave

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 20:25:56 +0100, dave stanton <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

[snippage]

>M$ broke it BTW with Outhouse express.

^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^

First parsed as: Outhouse Excess

IIRC there is a fix for that issue which positions the cursor
correctly when replying or composing a new post.

--
This .signature has been hijacked by the
Shellfish Liberation Army. Please remain clam.

In message <mRGse.25595$(E-Mail Removed)>, BIG NIGE
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Yes Dave I am top posting, as a lot of others on the newsgroups seem to do.
>
>I find it very annoying when working down a list of a thread to have to
>scroll to the bottom each time. Whereas if its at the top you can just click
>down the list to see each answer.
>
Another **** to killfile then ...

--
geoff

BIG NIGE wrote:
> Yes Dave I am top posting, as a lot of others on the newsgroups seem to do.
>
Sorry, Nige: it's not 'the newsgroups'. Conventions vary from one to
another. MS-specific ones, and in-house ones where Outlook Express is
the Company Approved newsgroup reader, tend to adopt the top-posting
hit-n-run approach (and leave a massive trail of previous postings
handing off the end of each post). A few groups are don't-care.

'Probably most', and this one for absolute definite, adopt the 'classic
Usenet' style. This is *not* indiscriminate 'bottom posting': rather,
you're expected to put in the effort of snipping (that means deleting)
everything you're *not* replying to, and leaving a short, relevant, but
unedited fragment to supply the context immediately before, i.e. above,
each bit you are replying to. That way, your post makes sense standalone
- important in the greater Usenet, where people receive articles in
different orders, less so when all users share a single in-house server
- and the converstation reads like, um, a conversation.

No-one here cares whether you *like* the local convention or not. But
you *will* be ignored and/or sworn at if you choose to ignore it in this
group. Like walking into any pub, club, or country, you flout local
convention at your peril.

HTH - Stefek