DMS system by Fireco

[David Rooney]

Noticed the release of this new system...

Aimed at the hard of hearing, apparently you link a box of tricks (GSM dialler) to a fire panel in large public areas such as Supermarkets etc. and then hey presto in the event of a fire alarm condition the unit will send a text message to the person's mobile phone.

The techy sheet states:

Approvals and Standards
• Trigger: alarms installed to BS 5839 Part 1


Although there is no claim the system itself complies with anything.

Is this really an acceptable means of providing warning to the hard of hearing and might it not be misinterpreted by some that they can install this in place of a compliant alternative means of alerting the hard of hearing to a fire condition?

[Wiz]

It must also rely on the person 'registering' and 'de-registering' their mobile phone number with the premises.

Apart from the effort of doing this by the customer and the potential for numbers not being administered correctly and therefore supposedly 'registered' numbers not receiving the text message when there is a fire. If you forget to 'de-register' in site A you might receive a text message whilst you are in Site B (miles away from Site A) because of an alarm in site A!

I suppose the above problem could be got around by 'automatically' de-registering all contacts at the end of each day (but affecting those who use the site often, in always having to re-register) and ensuring that the text message includes a location message.

Obviously I don't know how the system works in practice, but it does seem a bit problematical.

I suppose the use of smartphones with their in-built GPS capabilities might be lead to a system for sending automatic text messages (with building location description) to all registered system users in the general location of a fire alarm signal.

[Davo]

David

Also bear in mind large concrete structures such as the Ridings Shopping Centre here and Exscape are dead zones for mobile signals


davo

[David Rooney]

I suppose the use of smartphones with their in-built GPS capabilities might be lead to a system for sending automatic text messages (with building location description) to all registered system users in the general location of a fire alarm signal.

My phone usually says "accurate to within 1200 metres"

Not great for a search party...!

It just seems a bit of a strange product, I guess it will be sold as a means to "supplement" the DDA policy and compliant kit, and you are left making sure your phone is charged, is on vibrate and you're not in a deadspot !

[Wiz]

Dave, 1200 metres is a bit much!

But I've got to tell you that google maps on my iphone shows my location within about 50m.

Anyway, I wasn't thinking about using the GPS facility for searching for those in a fire.

I thought that if the phone could be programmed to accept the 'fire alarm' alert text messages only emanating from systems that had operated within it's locality then a nationwide system could be set up for hearing impaired persons to receive vibrating alerts that might possibly affect them. Obviously the text message would confirm which actual building has the fire condition.

In this method, the hearing impaired users could register their phone once to the service and if every fire alarm system in the country was linked to the central text alert distribution service, then only phones currently in the vicinity of the fire alarm system would respond.

I know all of the above is unlikely to happen (or be possible), but it just seems a far better system than the one you originally highlighted.

[Tom W]

The system is a suppliment, this has all been discussed before. Its an addition to wardens and beacons.

It sends a site specific text to the user telling them what to do.

You can have problems with reception which would simply mean doing a site survey against all of the mobile broadcasters and putting booster units as required thus providing total coverage.

This seems a really cost effective tool that iradicates using pager systems which are expensive, can be lost and left at home. People always have their phone on/near them and the deaf community use text a lot.

Give it a while and people will be able to register online for a county/town etc, secretarys will be able to register people when they arrive etc.

Think about a deaf person in a shopping centre (etc) changing room/toilet, using a phone can alert them immediately.

Save time save lives and the its a lot more cost persuasive to install for employers under DDA a conscience and CSR.

http://vimeo.com/13300661 < watch this

[Tom Sutton]

Previous thread http://fire.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=4813.0

[David Rooney]

Sorry I obviously missed this topic - was probably whent the site seemed to up and down like a yoyo.....

Personally i don't see it catching on....

[AnthonyB]

Sounds far better for a non public building where it's easier to ensure staff & visitor phones are registered - putting the onus on the member of the public to register their phone goes against the grain of the RRO and could end in tears....

[Tom W]

Sounds far better for a non public building where it's easier to ensure staff & visitor phones are registered - putting the onus on the member of the public to register their phone goes against the grain of the RRO and could end in tears....

There is no ensuring, there is no onus as this is a suppliment to the additional precautions.

Its talking about speeding up the process, rather than being found by a fire warden or waiting to see a beacon, the deaf person could already be notified and told where the fire assembly point is!!

The system we have now is not perfect, people rely on pager systems a lot which are often left on the desk while they use the facilities or left at home or out of battery plus cost £200 a time to get a new one!

This is a service that can offer an unlimited amount of users and uses existing technology.

Speak to the deaf community, what they have in place is not suitable and sufficient, they feel the risks are not as low as reasonably practicable, they like this system.

Texts costs normal rate and the system is £1k to add extra cover to an unlimited amount of users. Think about your local shopping centre's footfall each day. If 1 in 7 of those are deaf and they have extra precautions for £1k thats a bargain in my book.

Corporate Social Responsibility is a big thing.

You have also not thought about unmanned sites, this can notify FMs, engineers to the moment the fire alarm goes off thus speeding up the business emergency plan.

[kurnal]

In terms of liability for the Responsible Person, I would suggest that the liabilities and responsibilities arising from the installation and use of the DMS under the Fire Safety Order are little different to those arising from the installation of a loop system for hearing aids.

Some deaf people visiting a building will benefit from the loop system and become more independent as a result. They will therefore be less dependent on any other risk control measures such as sweep searches, strobes etc.

The DMS is an enhancement that some visitors to a building may choose to use, its use may be encouraged by the RP by the installation of the system but its use can never be under the control of the Responsible Person. It is therefore unlikely to replace other risk control measures which will be still needed for all those other visitors who do not subscribe. 

[Davo]

Saw this at Firex today

Very little fanfare on the stand, which was unusual

More work required I think

davo

[Tom W]

Interesting commments.

If we only stick to the boundrys of British Standards we would never excell.

If you buy a new car it would probably come with ABS breaks, you don't need ABS breaks and they are costing you more. Normal breaks do the job don't they? They slow you down. But you get ABS breaks becuase they increase your safety, its an additional feature which you are willing to pay for.

I don't flog fire alarms but maybe Wiz or David Rooney could let me know how much a whole fire system in a shopping centre would cost? So when someone says the risks are reduced (The whole point of a risk assessed world, no?) by spending a grand more, people should be jumping with joy!!

"It doesn't have a British Standard? Its not required by blah de blah" Phooey!! Gravey is not required on my roast but I love it and it makes it better!!

[David Rooney]

I don't disagree with the good intentions of the product. My query was whether the product could be abused knowingly or unknowingly perhaps due to the ignorance of the buyer that they may think they are getting a cheap compliant system ("the system is £1k to add extra cover to an unlimited amount of users") when they obviously aren't.

But if a centre manager is told by his boss to find a system to keep the local Fire Officer happy and he goes for the DMS and nothing else then in my opinion he's wasted his money and not met 5839 pt 1 and he would never know the difference unless he ended up in court.

"I don't flog fire alarms but maybe Wiz or David Rooney could let me know how much a whole fire system in a shopping centre would cost? So when someone says the risks are reduced (The whole point of a risk assessed world, no?) by spending a grand more, people should be jumping with joy!! "

....... you've not mentioned actually complying with DDA or installing a compliant signalling system for the hard of hearing but presumably this needs to be included before flogging DMS but presumably this is explained to the customer with the instruction manual?

Or are we now advocating installing non compliant products simply because they appear to reduce risk with no guarantee they meet a minimum acceptable levels put down in British Standards ... in which case I could make a killing (quite literally perhaps) installing some very dodgy Eastern European fire systems that are around.

As you said, if I buy a car with ABS or not I've still got guaranteed brakes that meet a minimum standard. I don't need to ask.

If I buy this product what minimum standard have I actually met... and would I bother asking because perhaps I'd assume "it must meet the standards or they wouldn't be able to sell it".

As I said originally I don't disagree that it's a "supplement", I just question whether a purchaser would fully understand what he is buying.

[Tom W]

True David

It is down to the site survey, meetings and installation by a competent qualified, insured engineer.

That could go with a lot of things though

Perhaps we should ignore it as a fire safety product and just think of it as a DDA product? 

So how much would it cost to install a full fire safety system for your average shopping centre? Just for my own interest?

Or maybe the cost of installing beacons?