How turn off Ademco Vista 50P Comms?

Reply

  #1  
Old 01-22-19, 05:08 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
How turn off Ademco Vista 50P Comms?

I have a Vista 50P which was set up to be professionally monitored, but it is no longer. However, I do want to continue using it in local mode (ie, alarm sounds, but nobody is called). I have the programming guide and the installation instructions, but have been unable to figure out how to tell the system to quit trying to dial. As a result, it throws code FC or Comm. Failure (depending which keypad is accessed). I can clear the code, but after a while it reappears.

How do I tell the system NOT to try to communicate?

Thanks!!!

M K
 
  #2  
Old 01-22-19, 11:17 AM
C
Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,084
Received 43 Votes on 40 Posts
Assuming your system communicates by landline:

1) Installer code + 800 to enter panel programming
2) *32* to erase Subscriber Account Number---(this is the number programmed to identify the panel to the Central Station Receiver. It's not your billing account number).
3) *33* to erase Primary Phone Number (the no. the panel calls to send signals).
4) *34* to erase Secondary Phone Number
5) *99 to exit programming

System will not try to report to Central Station now.

If you have been monitored by cell service or internet, this would be the time to mention it.
 
  #3  
Old 01-22-19, 11:28 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
THANK YOU!!!

I have been monitored by land line only.

I had THOUGHT I had already erased the primary and secondary numbers, but turns out I hadn't. Oops! I now have, and erased the the account number as well. So far, so good.

BTW, I am doing away with central monitoring of this system because I bought and installed a Ring Video Doorbell Pro, and monitoring that ($100/yr or $8.33/mo) includes monitoring a ring alarm system as well. So I bought the base Ring Alarm system and added a "listener", which initiates a call to the monitoring service if it detects a non-Ring alarm sounding. The listener just arrived, and I am eager to hook it up and get the full system working.

I also added a couple of the Smoke/CO alarms ring sells, as I had an inadequate number of smoke detectors on the Ademco system, and no CO detectors, even though I have gas heat and a gas fireplace.

Anyway, since I was paying a lot more for the monthly service to monitor the Ademco alarm, payback is less than 24 months, and I get alerts whenever there is movement at my front door, along with video of it and the ability to remotely answer the doorbell. Total win in my book.
 

Last edited by miriking; 01-22-19 at 12:38 PM. Reason: Corrected erroneous statement
  #4  
Old 01-22-19, 04:27 PM
Andoy33's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: United States
Posts: 160
Received 5 Votes on 5 Posts
You should have the ademco system on as a back up as the Ring Alarm system isn't UL listed tested yet so its unknown how well the smoke and co would work in an event of a emergency i read from an article somewhere. I believe the Nest Protect smoke detector and nest alarm system are UL listed and get home owners discounts if that matters to you.
 
  #5  
Old 01-24-19, 12:11 AM
P
Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nevada
Posts: 79
Received 3 Votes on 2 Posts
POTS monitoring should only cost $8 a month.
 
  #6  
Old 01-28-19, 07:30 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
So perhaps I wasn't very clear. The way the Ring system is working at my install is:
1) I have a First Alert smoke/CO detector (z-wave) sold by Ring which is part of the Ring system.
2) I have a Ring-branded "Listener" (z-wave) which causes the Ring system to alarm if the UL listed Ademco alarm sounds.
3) The Ademco heat & smoke alarms (System Sensor units) are always on, even when the system is not armed.
4) The Ademco contact switches and motion detectors will cause the alarm to sound if (and only if) that system is armed.

NOTE: The currently installed System Sensor smoke alarms have sounders, but they are older and are NOT compliant with the current UL standard for the noise they make. As a result, the Ring listener doesn't respond to them. I have purchased replacements - they should be here any day. Once they arrive, I believe I will be in a good situation:

Regardless of Ring, I will have the Ademco fire alarm sounding if any of its sensors are activated, & I will have the First Alert alarm (smoke and CO) sounding if it is activated. Those are both UL certified, so I feel pretty comfortable I will get local notification (loud noise) in the event of fire or excess CO.

Also, a fire or CO alarm should normally be reported to Ring (and my phone) since both those are monitored - albeit the listener and central station at my house are not UL listed so arguably are not as reliable. Offsetting that somewhat, the Ring system has cellular back-up, while my prior solution had only IP-based phone service.

Lastly, if it is armed, the Ademco's burglary protection devices (contact sensors and motion detectors) will also cause that system's sounder to activate, just as they always have. I believe the Ring listener will interpret that as a fire alarm since the sounder for the Ademco system is the same device. That is, I expect that by arming only the Ademco system, I will have monitoring of all the existing Ademco devices (fire and burglary) as well as the fire devices from Ring. If I only activate the Ring alarm, I will have monitoring of its fire and burglary devices, plus the fire devices of Ademco. And if I activate both, I have central monitoring of all the sensors from both systems.

In addition to the above, I have cloud-based storage of videos of any motion near my front door, notification to my phone of motion and any alarms, the ability to answer the doorbell from anywhere, and a warranty on the Ring equipment which lasts as long as I continue the monitoring service, which is currently $100/year. I can add additional cameras and sensors with no increase in monitoring or video storage costs. Even without the UL listing for the Ring equipment, this still seems like a significant improvement in overall security.
 
  #7  
Old 01-28-19, 07:55 PM
Andoy33's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: United States
Posts: 160
Received 5 Votes on 5 Posts
i understand what you mean now. That seems like a cost effective solution to me. Since you have the video storage you should consider adding the ring flood light cameras. I recently bought one to review and it’s pretty good with its wide angle view.
 
  #8  
Old 02-07-19, 07:33 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Turns out nothing is as simple as it seems. The replacement smoke detector recommended by the rep I spoke with at System Sensor is the 2WTA-B, a 2-wire plug-in, photoelectric, 135 degree thermal, 85dB Sounder. That's perfect, except the instructions packed with it say (a) only one 2WTR-B detector per zone can be used; (b) Only one 2WTA-B detector shall be installed on a zone, and, the problem, (c) The 2WTA-B detector shall not be mixed with other 2-wire detectors on the same zone.

The zone in question has two existing smoke detectors and one heat detector in the kitchen. (It may also have two existing smoke detectors in an attached guest house, although I haven't yet confirmed if those two devices are indeed on the same zone or if they are wired into a different zone. The guest house burglar alarm is in a second zone, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean the fire system in that building was zoned separately as well.)

So - it appears I am at an impasse with this particular device. I will be calling System Sensor again to see if there is a sounder I can wire in which meets the UL spec for how it sounds and which will attach to the existing system, or if there is a smoke detector which can be added to a circuit with the existing ones and hos the right sounder, or if there is some other solution. <sigh> Why can't things be simple???
 
  #9  
Old 02-07-19, 04:19 PM
M
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
Posts: 16,903
Received 120 Votes on 111 Posts
You would need to add the RSS-MOD to the system to allow multiple 2WTA-B; because they flip the loop polarity to power the sounder, that's why they don't mix with "normal" 2 wire devices,

https://www.systemsensor.com/en-us/Pages/RRS-MOD.aspx
 
  #10  
Old 02-11-19, 05:40 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Thanks, Mr. Ron. I REALLY appreciate your reply.

FWIW, I had found that info in the System Sensor material, but I am trying to find a way to accomplish the goal of having the Ring Listener hear the Ademco whenever it alarms, and would prefer, if it is possible, to avoid the RSS-MOD and additional 2WTA-B units. That's because doing it that way means the heat sensor in the kitchen would have to be taken offline, since you can't mix different kinds of units on the loop (per the paperwork accompanying the 2WTA-B). In addition, I am concerned that were I to buy 3 more 2WTA-B units to replace my existing model 2400 units, and buy the RSS-MOD unit, it's somewhat likely I could not install it all correctly. Because there are clearly some technical issues in setting up the loop with the RSS-MOD which I don't understand, I suspect I'd be better served by buying additional z-wave units from Ring and abandoning the thought of having Ring monitor the Ademco system as well.

But I haven't given up on "marrying" the two systems. I am hoping there is a path to making a minor modification to the Ademco system so the Ring Listener can hear it and respond.

Potential Path A: Attach one of the more recent remote annunciators to one of the existing model 2400 smoke detectors. The 2400 manual shows where to attach a remote annunciator, so I know it can be done. But the 2400 is out of production and I don't know if any currently available remote annunciator will work with them, and I also don't know if a currently available annunciator will sound the current UL standard noise so that the Ring Listener will respond to it, although I'd be surprised if that's not the case.

Potential Path B: Attach a current annunciator directly to the Ademco control panel. I haven't completely gone through the panel documentation (it is, of course, voluminous) but would expect it to have this ability, as I know it's not atypical for an annunciator to be mounted outside (or in an attic, at an eave) so that it is telling all the neighbors when the alarm is triggered. So maybe the best solution is to buy a current annunciator to place on that line, and put the Ring Listener next to that device.

Your thoughts would be much appreciated, as I know I am way outside my wheelhouse and that my thoughts on what ought to work may be far from reality!

MK
 
  #11  
Old 02-11-19, 06:04 AM
M
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 6
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Andoy33,

Thank you for your input. Much appreciated!

I do like the Ring products and have already been thinking about whether to add additional video devices. So far, I haven't, and that's because when we bought it, the home already had a 9-camera DVR with night vision. The cameras surround the house and cover the yard and the points of entry to both the main house and the guest house. They are all 720p, so the clarity is reasonable, and the DVR has the ability to connect to the net. But I haven't enabled web storage or web-based viewing of video. I didn't want the expense, and I also didn't want to offer the world a chance to hack my cameras and watch us doing whatever it is we do. <smile> I did, however, quadruple the HDD capacity so that it would have more history, as the 7-10 days of storage it provided was too short for my comfort. I also use an old PC as a "somewhat offsite" storage medium (it's in the guest house, the DVR is in the main house) to provide a level of backup for the videos. I am just more comfortable in this arrangement than I would be in having the security issues associated with a cloud storage service. That said, I am still thinking about adding one more Ring camera to cover the entry to the guest house. I might be ok with that on the web (as I am the front door videos), and getting noticed when motion occurs there would, of course, alert me to a break-in.

Best,

mk
 
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
 
Ask a Question
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: