HomePatrol/Sentinel-State of Colorado DTRS Question

[4436time]

Anyone know the significance of the Sites (not Departments) created directly under the State of Colorado DTRS when adding a Favorite using the Sentinel software?

In other words, if/when I create a Favorite, and the freqs I select comes from anywhere within the State of Colorado DTRS, a list of 175 or so additional Sites are automatically added under the new Favorite. They are not part of the original selection but show up automatically.

As seen in Sentinel:
Favorite Lists
Colorado State Patrol (newly created favorite)
State of Colorado DTRS
Colorado State Patrol (actual selections are contained here)
12 Mile (Pueblo) (v v v 175 Sites automatically added v v v )
Abajo Peak, UT (San Juan)
Adams County Simulcast
...
...
...

The reason I ask is that I just spent the last few hours troubleshooting why the scanner wouldn't add and therefore scan the new Favorite. It would display a warning message related to the Location, Range, Service Types, or something to that effect, and no matter what changes I made, it wouldn't scan. So in my last ditch attempt at figuring it out, I discovered that, in my effort to organize (hide/remove) unwanted information, it was setting the 175 sites to "Avoid" that was the issue. Unbelievable. And nor can the Sites be removed. Otherwise, the new Favorite selections go with it. So what is the significance of those 175 sites and how are they related to the State of Colorado DTRS if at all? Because they obviously can't be set to Avoid or deleted.

Thanks

 

[wozz]

So what is the significance of those 175 sites and how are they related to the State of Colorado DTRS if at all? Because they obviously can't be set to Avoid or deleted.

They should be deletable within Sentinal. I ran into similar problems, and was able to trim the site list down to nearby sites.

 

[4436time]

That's possible because I didn't take the time to narrow down which one(s) aren't allowed to be removed. But if all 175 are, things don't work. I wish someone would test my theory as it's 100% reproducable, even after removing the software several times, including deleting original directories, cleaning the registry afterwards, and reinstalling into different directories.

 

[wozz]

That's possible because I didn't take the time to narrow down which one(s) aren't allowed to be removed. But if all 175 are, things don't work. I wish someone would test my theory as it's 100% reproducable, even after removing the software several times, including deleting original directories, cleaning the registry afterwards, and reinstalling into different directories.

The sites can definately be removed in Sentinal. I've done it several times. You may want to set the Favorites list to not use Location Control. That may be the source of your troubles if you aren't near enough to any of the sites for the HomePatrol to think you can receive them.

 

[4436time]

The sites can definately be removed in Sentinal. I've done it several times. You may want to set the Favorites list to not use Location Control. That may be the source of your troubles if you aren't near enough to any of the sites for the HomePatrol to think you can receive them.

Thanks for the reply. Actually, I'm not using Location Control within Favorites. And, I've tried several times removing the sites and not once after doing so have I been able to successfully use that new Favorite. I get the warning telling me that all Sites in this Favorite have been Avoided and that I need to either change the Range, Site Selection, (and one other I can't think of) which I did and nothing. But when I leave the Sites I get no warning and have no problem using the Favorite.

Let me work through it and see if I can't narrow down exactly what's happening and I'll update the post with my findings.

 

[4436time]

I ran into a similar issue (probably related) where deleting a listing within a Favorite removes all other listings at the parent level. And I say similar because the entry isn't located under the State of Colorado DTRS like the 175 I mentioned above. It's located directly under the Favorite name..if that makes sense.

So I have a Favorite set up for the north side of town and within it resides Arvada/Westminster Public Safety (parent). If I highlight Arv/West PS in the left pane, on the right exists Arv PD/FD, West PD, and Eld Mtn., each owning their own set of freqs/info. But Eld Mtn is listed as type Site (as are the 175 mentioned above) while all others are all categorized as Departments. If I highlight Eld Mtn and hit the red X, the entire Arv/West PS group disappears. So the common theme seems to be related to removing Sites. They apparently are needed, I just don't understand why because like you said, a person should be able to trim things down a bit.

>>>That may be the source of your troubles if you aren't near enough to any of the sites for the HomePatrol to think you can receive them. <<<

I checked and all are within range according to Sentinel.

 

[wozz]

Sites are the physical antenna locations and their associated frequencies. There are no frequencies attached to a group, only to a site. When you add something to a favorite, it will add all of the sites associated with the something that you added. Eldorado Mountain is a site (the only site) for the Arvada/Westminster system. When you delete the Arvada groups, there is no reason for the site to be there, so it is removed. If you delete the site, then all the Arvada groups disappear because the only site for the system has been removed.

DTRS, on the other hand, is a multi-site system, deleting a site should not remove any groups until you delete the last site. You can delete sites that aren't anywhere near you, but you must have at least 1 site or the groups will be removed.

I'd suggest some of the problem here is just a misunderstanding of what you're looking at. The HomePatrol forums here might be a better place to learn how the HomePatrol works, as none of these problems you're having are specific to the Colorado DTRS system.

 

[4436time]

Thanks for the input, it makes perfect sense. I concluded by the way the software was behaving with the second finding that there was a relationship, I just wasn't sure what it was. But I intend to experiment with it and eventually research how the systems work, I just need more time. I appreciate the insight.