Customer Service Hotline:
+8613261677119
+8613261677119
The stock here is pre war or early post war, and every floor has been altered at least once since. The first walk through usually turns up one letting with no lawful position for a head and one landing where the sounder cannot be heard from the flat door. A programme on Tong Ming Street, in New Territories, needs equipment that can be fitted while the building stays occupied, commissioned floor by floor, and evidenced with documents somebody else signs. The scale behind that requirement is why buyers are looking at Chinese factories now: the department puts the target building population at around 14,000, most of them completed or first submitted on or before 1 March 1987, and threading a hose reel through a staircase that was never drawn for one is not a realistic programme for most of that stock. This page is written for overseas distributors, regional contractors and sourcing teams who need to know what the Fire Services Department actually accepts, and it is written from job records rather than from a brochure.
The short version: an Internet of Things fire detection system together with portable fire extinguishers is accepted in place of a hose reel system and a manual fire alarm system, for a qualifying target building of six storeys or below, under the arrangement the department published on 30 April 2026. No other requirement under Cap. 572 moves. Three tests decide whether a building can use it: the ordinance covers it, a Fire Safety Direction has already been issued against it, and the owners have agreed to detectors in the common parts and in every unit. A quotation claiming a wider substitution than those two items should be asked for that claim in writing.
What changed on this address was not the equipment, it was the order of the work. The people involved were Kelvin Chiu, Compliance Officer on the address, the appointed registered fire service installation contractor, and a monitoring provider who was named before the equipment was ordered. The building is on Tong Ming Street, in New Territories, and it had already been through one design that could not be built.
What the survey found was not what the drawings promised. The riser stopped two floors short of the top landing, the basement had no path up through the slab, and in one subdivided letting the only clear ceiling sat over a cupboard partition, which is not a position a detector will do its job from. Two households refused entry on the first appointment round and were rebooked through the owners' corporation instead of being chased by the installers, which cost a week and saved a complaint. Before any equipment was priced, the question was how long the survey and the feasibility write up take, and that came to 24 days on site plus the report. The number that decided the design was the gateway count, and it came from walking the staircase with a meter rather than from dividing the floor area by a radius.
What came of it: the common parts were completed and commissioned as one defined phase, the dwellings followed as appointments were granted, and the outstanding list stayed open as a written document instead of becoming a rumour. The one item still open at handover was a meter cupboard with no lawful position for a head, and it stayed on the list with a date against it rather than being quietly dropped. After transport and local registration the landed margin came to roughly 36 percent, stated rather than implied. Those figures are one building on one street, not a benchmark, and we will not present them as one.
Field case: The composite heads on Tong Ming Street were replaced with single channel units to save money and the nuisance calls returned. The point worth keeping is not that the equipment worked; it is that the failure had a name, a location and a date on it, which is what let it be closed in one visit rather than three arguments.
The problems below are the ones that reach us most often. A subdivided unit on Tong Ming Street has no lawful position for a head that is not in dead air. What follows is drawn from retrofit and compliance work in Hong Kong rather than invented for this page, and it is the list we would hand to a buyer before quoting rather than after an argument.
The same thing happened on the next street, and on the one after it. The equipment is rarely the reason a programme fails. It fails because a drawing was treated as a survey, because access was assumed, or because two parties each believed the other owned the transmission path. In quotations the three gaps that end up costing the most are predictable: a gateway count that never appears on the page, a battery figure quoted without the duty cycle or the temperature it was measured at, and radio evidence issued for a region the equipment will not be installed in.
What settled it was a comparison written down rather than a presentation. Written gateway counts from a survey. Per model datasheets with the conditions next to each figure. Radio compliance evidence for the operating region. A technical file written for the appointed contractor that states which parts of a scheme each document covers. The honest answer on timing here is 24 days from survey to a signed scope, with most of it spent on the owners corporation rather than on the building. A supplier who cannot answer those four in writing will not be there when the inspection asks the same questions.
Fire Services Department Circular Letter No. 3 of 2026 was published on 30 April 2026, after a pilot scheme in which ten buildings across Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories were installed in the fourth quarter of 2025 and assessed from 1 January to 31 March 2026. The published results were zero fire false alarms, full system online availability and better than 99.95 per cent of components operating effectively. Those are the department figures from its own briefing, not our measurements, and they describe a supervised pilot rather than a guarantee for every installation.
The clause everybody misreads is the scope. Two requirements are substituted and only two: the hose reel system and the manual fire alarm system. Sprinkler requirements, emergency lighting, automatic interruption devices for mechanical ventilation and every other applicable measure stay exactly as they were. A supplier who says otherwise should be asked to put it in writing.
| Component | What it does | Who runs it |
|---|---|---|
| Wireless composite detector | Reads smoke and carbon monoxide in one head, with a pre alarm and a fire alarm stage to reduce false alarms | Installed and maintained by the appointed registered contractor |
| Gateway | Carries the manual call point and the sounder, holds the radio layer beneath it and the mobile backhaul above it, with two SIM cards on separate operators | Same contractor, with the mobile service under the transmission arrangement |
| Monitoring platform | Receives and processes signals, monitors system state, forwards fire signals onward through an approved transmission link | Monitoring service provider appointed for the building |
| Mobile application | Gives attending crews the system picture at the scene and the authorised control functions | Provided under the platform arrangement |
The four qualifying conditions all have to hold at once. The building falls under the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance, Cap. 572. A Fire Safety Direction has been issued for it. It is a composite building or a domestic building of six storeys or below. Owners' consent covers detectors in the common parts and in every unit, transmission and alarm equipment in the common parts, and extinguishers on each floor. A building that fails any one of the four cannot use the route, whatever the hardware can do. Owners who want the department's answer rather than a supplier's can call the Building Improvement Support Centre on 2272 9112; we hand that number out because it settles arguments faster than we can and costs us nothing.
The chain is short and every link in it belongs to somebody different. A composite head detects and reports over radio to the floor gateway. The gateway carries the manual call point and the sounder, holds two SIM cards on separate mobile networks, and pushes the message out over mobile backhaul. The monitoring platform receives and processes it. From the platform, fire signals go to the Fire Services Communications Centre over an approved transmission link, the computerised link the department calls CFATS, and every signal is also duplicated to the department server over an application programming interface.
What buyers get wrong is the contract boundary. Equipment supply, the platform service and the transmission service can be three separate agreements with three separate invoices and three separate people to call at two in the morning. We are the factory. We supply the equipment, the integration and the documented interface, and we say plainly that we do not hold a licensed monitoring service in Hong Kong.
Two stage logic sits inside the first link and it is the reason the system survives contact with real residents. A single channel response produces a pre alarm and an investigation, which is a knock on the door. A confirmed fire indication goes straight through. The alternative is a detector in a drawer within a month, which is the failure mode nobody records and everybody recognises.
The reason the route exists at all is the shift from a manual start to an automatic one. A manual system needs somebody to walk to a call point, decide, and press. A composite head starts the sequence with nobody present, at three in the morning if that is when it happens, and that is the argument for accepting detection in place of a manual alarm. It also moves the weight of the design onto cell life and false alarm behaviour, two things a wired scheme never had to care about.
The published timings are short, and they are worth reading before comparing two quotations because they are the numbers a commissioning sheet has to answer for.
Which positions are mains powered and which run on cells is a design decision recorded in the drawings, and it is what the ten or twenty second figure applies to. That is why the drawings matter more than the datasheet here. Redundancy follows the same logic: two SIM cards from separate operators for failover, dual power architecture at the gateway with cells carrying the field devices, and a supervised fault channel so a lost link shows as a fault rather than as silence.
The maintenance side has teeth. The registered contractor installs, maintains, inspects and repairs the fire service installation components and issues the certificate, and a repair not completed within thirty days is referred to the department. The main contractor is a single point of contact and carries a monthly performance report. Anybody quoting this equipment without naming who reads that report is quoting a system nobody is watching.
Placement is where the scheme is won. Inside a domestic unit the published position is the living room, near the main entrance; inside a non-domestic unit it follows the actual layout and the fuel load rather than a grid drawn for something else. At least one head goes into the common parts on every floor, and more where the floor area or the layout asks for them. At least two 5 kg dry powder portable extinguishers sit on every floor, recorded against a position rather than against a purchase order. That whole set is the published requirement, written by the authority, and none of it is a figure from our datasheet.
The cells in a wireless head are specified for more than three years of service, and that is a datasheet value measured under a stated duty cycle and temperature rather than a promise about a particular building. A head that dies in month thirty is a fault signal, an attendance and a conversation with the owners about who funds the visit, which is why we quote the figure with its conditions attached instead of as a headline.
The awkward part is rarely the count. It is the positions that do not exist. In a subdivided letting the only ceiling available may sit over a cupboard, and the only clear wall may leave the head in dead air beside a grille; neither position will do the job it was fitted for. Corridors carrying cooking need heat detection over the cooking point with composite heads elsewhere, chosen with the extraction running rather than on a quiet morning.
Rooftop plant enclosures, refuse rooms, switch rooms and meter cupboards are walked the same way, because a survey either covers the building or it does not. Where a block carries heritage status or appears on a graded list, expect separate approvals that have nothing to do with the equipment itself. The method that works is unglamorous. Tenants stay put through it, many of them elderly residents, and the detection programme usually runs alongside whatever renovation the block already has planned. Take what drawings exist, walk the building, place a gateway, measure, move it until the path is real, and record what was done.
Old building fabric does predictable things to a radio signal. A reinforced slab between floors does one thing, and a wet salt laden party wall shared with the building next door does something similar in pre war stock. Above a false ceiling shared by several lettings, the path is decided by what the grid itself is doing. Below ground, a basement level often has no path up at all, so the answer is a gateway on the level rather than an antenna fight with the slab.
Antenna extension fixes one position with a known problem; it does not rescue a gateway sitting in the wrong place, and we price it per unit because that is how tenders ask for it. One gateway per floor level plus one below ground is the usual starting point, and the number goes in writing before anything is priced. We do not reduce it to win a comparison, because the difference surfaces on site and by then it is the owner who pays for it.
Interference is measured during the walk rather than argued about after the first complaint, which is cheaper for everyone involved. Operating parameters are set for the region and recorded at commissioning, so the fifth building in a programme behaves like the first.
Commissioning is where the paperwork is either born or invented. Every device is recorded against floor, unit and gateway, the radio margin at each position is written down rather than assumed, and the fault channel is proved by taking one gateway offline and watching the platform report a fault instead of going quiet. A commissioning pack missing those three is a delivery note with a binder around it, and it will not survive an attendance.
The range covers the detection side of the arrangement and leaves every other ordinance requirement exactly as it was. The WANLIN-307 reads smoke and carbon monoxide together, which is what a slow fire actually produces. The WANLIN-307 sits at the centre of this configuration, and it is specified from the building rather than from the brochure. Whether wireless detectors are interconnected across units is a decision the appointed contractor records in the drawings, not something a supplier decides on site.
| Parameter | Specification |
|---|---|
| System reference | WANLIN-307 Hong Kong Wireless Composite Fire Detector |
| Product category | Single head carrying two sensing channels, aimed at the smouldering fire that produces carbon monoxide before it produces smoke anybody can see |
| Radio network | LoRa link to the floor gateway, which handles backhaul, dual SIM failover and onward transmission to the platform |
| Detection and trigger | Two sensing channels with a pre alarm stage on a single channel response and a fire alarm stage when the channels agree or when either passes its own threshold |
| Supervision and health check | Each channel reports its own health, so a sensing element drifting out of range becomes a service item instead of a missed fire or a nuisance call |
| Protocol and integration | Device identity and recorded location carried in every message, exposed to the console and to the API feed |
| Notification path | Local alarm through the gateway sounder plus a message to the responsible group depending on configuration |
| Alarm behaviour | Pre alarm can be investigated and cancelled under the written rule; fire alarm latches until reset and records who silenced it |
| Power supply | Primary cell with a service life quoted per model datasheet, with a low battery report arriving ahead of end of life by enough time to plan a visit |
| Housing and mounting | IP rating per model datasheet, mounting plate suited to concrete soffits and to the timber and plaster ceilings found in pre war stock |
| Installation pattern | One head inside each unit near the entrance, at least one per floor in the common parts, plus additional heads where layout, fuel load or cooking arrangements ask for them |
| Environmental rating | IP rating stated per model datasheet, with IP67 built on the gateway, alarm unit and call point positions where the configuration is specified for them |
| Frequency plan | Band and channel plan set for the operating region, stated on the order because the same hardware is not lawful at the same power everywhere |
| Coverage planning | Gateway count and placement taken from a radio survey rather than from the floor area, with the result recorded on the commissioning sheet |
| Maintenance and testing | Automatic self-check with fault, low battery and offline conditions reported separately, test interval set by the site operator and recorded on the drill record |
| Export documentation support | Technical file prepared to support submission by the registered contractor and the importer of record, including radio compliance evidence for the operating region |
| Certification documents | CE, RoHS and REACH documentation per applicable model, with EN 54-25 route papers on the wireless configurations and EN 54-7 or EN 54-5 papers on the detector heads, certificate number provided on request |
| OEM and ODM options | Logo, part number, packaging, manual languages including traditional Chinese where required, label artwork and platform identity string configurable |
| Full datasheet | Complete radio, electrical, battery and environmental data provided per model on request |
| Warranty | 24-month |
| Scenario | Model | Why it fits |
|---|---|---|
| Unit where cooking smoke has defeated every alarm fitted before | WANLIN-307 | Two channels separate the burnt wok from the smouldering socket |
| Mattress or wiring fire with little visible smoke at the start | WANLIN-307 | Carbon monoxide is picked up while the room still looks clear to somebody walking past |
| Corridor of a subdivided floor with several cooking points | WANLIN-340 | Heat and composite heads are mixed so one meal does not silence the floor |
| Bedroom in a unit with an ageing electrical installation | WANLIN-365 | One device covers both of the common failure modes in that room |
The department briefing put the comparison plainly: a hose reel and manual alarm route at roughly HK$600,000 and one to two years of works, against a detection and extinguisher route at roughly HK$200,000 and around two weeks, with no structural or spatial constraint on the second and with automatic rather than manual detection. Those are figures published by the department for a briefing. They are not our prices, not our programme duration, and not a promise about any particular building, and we quote against a survey rather than against a slide.
Published material on the third round of the fire safety improvement works subsidy scheme describes support for the detection system and extinguisher alternative, with subsidy capped at the lower of sixty per cent of the eligible works and consultancy cost or the capped amount for that building class. We do not administer that scheme and cannot promise an outcome. The application, including the expression of interest that opens it, sits with the owners and their consultants, and the department is the only body that can confirm eligibility. What we can do is hold the equipment scope still long enough for a consultant to price against it, which is usually the part that slips.
Responsibility splits three ways and the split is the part buyers get wrong. The registered fire service installation contractor installs, maintains, inspects and repairs the fire service installation components, issues the certificate, works strictly against approved drawings with completion records kept, and refers any repair not finished within thirty days to the department. The transmission service provider supplies and maintains the communication network. The main contractor is a single point of contact and carries the site inspection, the feasibility report and the monthly performance report. None of that sits with the factory.
For the paper trail, this is the reference basis we work to and the basis we expect a contractor to check: Where a composite head carries both smoke and carbon monoxide sensing, submittals commonly reference EN 54-7 for the smoke channel, EN 54-25 for the radio linked path, and EN 50291 or the applicable carbon monoxide sensing standard for the gas channel, read with the local radio equipment rules. Composite behaviour is documented per model, the certificate number is provided on request for verification with the issuing body, and acceptance of the installed arrangement rests with the authority and the registered contractor rather than with the factory. We state alignment per applicable model rather than for a range, and we give the certificate number on request so it can be checked with the issuing body rather than taken from a quotation.
We supply local code submittal support with per-configuration technical files, radio compliance evidence for the destination and national registration support for the importer of record. We do not sign the local submission, we do not certify compliance, we do not guarantee an authority decision, and we do not quote a price that assumes fewer gateways than the survey found. Any supplier offering all four of those should be asked what licence they are working under.
What we can be held to, in writing, is the following. None of them is a claim about being the cheapest, because the cheapest quotation in this category is usually the one with the gateway count missing.
| What you need | What we put in writing |
|---|---|
| A gateway count you can defend | The number from a walk of the building, stated before the price and not reduced to win a comparison |
| Figures you can check | Battery life, radio margin, humidity limits and environmental data per model datasheet, with the conditions written next to each figure |
| A fault that arrives as an address | Device identity mapped to floor, unit and gateway at commissioning, carried into every message |
| Documents for somebody else to sign | Radio compliance evidence for the operating region and a technical file stating which parts of a scheme each document covers |
| Support after the invoice | 2 months of commissioning support included, spare stock held at 24% of installed quantity by agreement, and after sales through named contacts |
The path from enquiry to commissioning is six steps and two of them are paperwork. Refused access should have a written position before installers meet a locked door. Surplus stock belongs in the quotation rather than in a second invoice. The feasibility report comes before the price, not after it. Programme documentation is written so a team can run 30 addresses without re-learning the configuration each time.
Evaluation samples are built on the production configuration rather than on a bench build, after sales support runs through named contacts, and export packing is specified per destination rather than improvised at the dock.
Three people on this programme agreed to be quoted, on the record.
"What we bought was a documented system, and that is what the inspector asked for."
— Mandy Ho, Property Management Officer, Ferry Street, Yau Tsim Mong, Hong Kong
"The gateway count arrived in writing before the price did, which is the first time that has happened to us."
— Danny Mok, Building Surveyor, King's Road, Eastern District, Hong Kong
"They told us where the design would not work before we paid for it."
— Kelvin Chiu, Compliance Officer, Tong Ming Street, Sai Kung, Hong Kong
A: Because the fire that kills in this building stock is usually the slow one. A smouldering mattress or a failing socket produces carbon monoxide well before it produces enough smoke to trip a photoelectric chamber, and a single channel device can only see one of those. The second channel also cuts the nuisance call, which is the failure mode nobody writes down and the one that ends with the device in a drawer.
A: Cooking is the commonest reason a detector gets taken down, so the honest answer matters more than the sensing. Two stage logic raises a pre alarm where one channel responds without corroboration, which produces a knock on the door rather than a staircase evacuation, while a confirmed fire indication goes straight through. No detector is nuisance proof in a badly ventilated corridor, which is why placement belongs in the survey and not in the installation note.
A: One inside each unit near the main entrance, at least one per floor in the common parts, and more where the floor area, layout or fuel load asks for them. The awkward part is rarely the count; it is the positions that do not exist. A head cannot go above a wardrobe in a subdivided unit, cannot sit in the dead air beside a window grille, and cannot be placed where the only route to it runs through another tenant space.
A: A planned visit instead of a silence. Battery state is shown per device and reported as a fault condition within its own time limit, so the replacement round becomes a scheduled job against a list. The trade everybody should accept openly is that cells have to be changed; the difference between a managed system and an unmanaged one is whether you know before or after.
A: Acceptance rests with the authority and is signed for by the registered fire service installation contractor appointed for the building. We supply the technical file, per model documentation and radio compliance evidence for the operating region, and we say in writing which parts of a scheme each document covers. We do not sign local submissions and we ask clients to verify any certificate number with the issuing body directly.
This page covered what a Hong Kong Wireless Composite Fire Detector Smoke and Carbon Monoxide has to do on Tong Ming Street, in New Territories, what the Fire Services Department arrangement accepts and what it pointedly does not, how a signal travels from a detector head to the communications centre, and which documents belong with the equipment. It also covered the parts most suppliers leave out: the thirty day repair rule, the monthly performance report, and the fact that the factory does not sign the local submission. The short version for anybody comparing quotations is unglamorous. The detector is the easiest part of this programme. The gateway count from a walk of the building, the access plan for occupied units, and the paperwork the appointed contractor signs are where it is actually decided.
Lead times are stated per configuration, 24 days is the typical window quoted once configuration is locked, and 2 months of commissioning support is included as standard rather than sold as an extra. Nothing here is a substitute for the local submission, and nothing here promises an authority decision.
Contact Wanlin Fire
Email: wanlinfirecontrol@163.com
Export hotline: +8613261677119
Website: https://www.wanlinfire.com
Factory: Wanlin Group, Building B, Building 1, Beisida Medical Device Building, 28 Nantong Avenue, Baolong Community, Baolong Sub-district, Longgang District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
Last updated: September 29, 2026
Title of this article: Best Hong Kong Wireless Composite Fire Detector Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Manufacturer | Tong Ming Street, Sai Kung, Hong Kong - Wanlin Fire