odd happenings re: CDOT Region 5 & 8 TG's

[natedawg1604]

Lately I've been hearing CDOT trucks using "Maintenance Section 8-related" call signs on several non-patched Section 5 Talkgroups. Earlier today, for example, while running Pro96Com I heard repeated instances of a CDOT crew member using the call sign "8-18" on the Highway 5 TG (TGID 2500), and during each instance there was no associated patch in use. In the case of "8-18", the driver was using Radio ID 139693.

Likewise I've also been hearing "8-Mary" trucks talking on the 5-Mary TG (TGID 2506) while the TG was in a "non-patched" state. Notably I also heard units using "5-Mary" call signs on TG 2506 contemporaneously with the "8-Mary" call signs, again with no patches appearing. Anyone have any ideas on what could be happening here?

[As a an aside, recent scanning suggests the 9-Paul TG (2465) is the "new" primary talkgroup for Eisenhower Tunnel Control. Also in the last couple months it seems like CDOT "dispatchers" (presumably from the Traffic Operations Centers) have become less involved in dispatching CDOT trucks generally, and Denver CSP dispatchers seem to be more involved.]

 

[dw2872]

odd happenings re: CDOT Region 5 & 8 TG's

You are right about Tunnel Control TG. Back on December 3rd around 6 pm, I heard CDOT crews complaining that Tunnel Control was yelling into the radio on DTRS-2465 and he said that it was their problem and to just turn down their radios. I saved that audio into my huge archives of funny things heard on the radio.

 

[natedawg1604]

Update: I've also been hearing CDOT trucks using "Section 5" call signs on the 8-Nora & King channel (TG 2311) while TG 2311 was "unpatched". "Highway 5" (TG 2500) and "Highway 8" (TG 2319) are frequently patched, so presumably some CDOT trucks in Section 5 & 8 are used to talking on the same TG.

In any event it appears that some CDOT drivers are using a call sign inconsistent with their assigned/selected radio channel.

It's my understanding that CDOT is in the process of "re-purposing" 10 TG's, but I'm not sure if that relates to the above-referenced issue or not.


-Nate

 

[rfburns]

CSP dispatch doesn't even have a map of the new boundaries. And when they got on District 8 and asked a supervisor, the supervisor says he doesn't know what they are. To some degree, you can figure them out by listening to the highway numbers and mile markers.

 

[Steve2003]

A Google search found this on the CDOT website:
CDOT Engineering Region Boundary Changes 12/21/2012 — CDOT
(this is for the engineering regions, apparently maintenance regions changed as well)

• Summit county moves from Region 1 to Region 3. Eisenhower/Johnson Tunnel is entirely in New Region.
• All engineering and maintenance of Park County to Region 2.
• All of Jeffson County will be in New Region.
• All of Boulder County will be in Region 4, with the exception of the US 36 corridor (south of Baseline Rd.) which will move to New Region.
• Majority of Broomfield County in New Region with the exception of a small portion north of SH 7.
• All of Adams County will be in New Region.
• All of Arapahoe County will be in New Region.
• All of Elbert County will move from Region 1 to Region 4.
• All of Lincoln County will move from Region 1 to Region 4.
• All of Kit Carson County will move from Region 1 to Region 4.
• All of Cheyenne County will move from Region 1 to Region 4.

 

[Steve2003]

Found the new maintenance maps!
Map Search

For the map type select "Maintenance Section Map".

(Maps last updated on 7/1/2013)

 

[rfburns]

It's my understanding that CDOT is in the process of "re-purposing" 10 TG's,

I believe Section 8 went away. Most of Section 8 would now be Section 5.
Some dispatchers still use the word highway with the Patrol. Such as "Highway 5 King 28". Maybe its the older dispatchers that are use to doing it that way.

This is what I have as of today after 4 days of listening about 12 hours a day. The high incidence of abbreviated call sign usage makes it difficult and some of the maps are still not up to date.

2309 Section 5 John
2311 Section 5 King, 5K28
2504 Section 5 Lincoln
2506 Section 5 Mary
2319 Section 5 King, 5K3, 5K5
2315 Section 9 King
2502 Section 2 Mary and Section 2 Paul
2465 Section 9 Paul
2491 Section 1 Mary
2495 Section 1 John
2499 Section 1 Lincoln
2777 Section 4 King Tac

2502 may only be 2 Paul and 2 Mary jumps over there to coordinate work at the Patrol boundary west of Copper Mtn.

The Burlington area should be Section 1 Mary.

 

[natedawg1604]

I believe Section 8 went away. Most of Section 8 would now be Section 5.
Some dispatchers still use the word highway with the Patrol. Such as "Highway 5 King 28". Maybe its the older dispatchers that are use to doing it that way.

This is what I have as of today after 4 days of listening about 12 hours a day.
....

Thanks for all the hard work! When you say "dispatchers", are you talking about Eisenhower Tunnel Control or something else? Over the last few months it seems like CDOT hasn't been using ANY "dispatchers" of their own, except for Eisenhower Tunnel Control and Courtesy Patrol Shifts. (However, I suspect that Mile High Towing might use their own dispatcher for Courtesy Patrol units on Traffic 2/TG 2331).

Back in the summer and early fall CDOT had a dispatcher on TG 2500 known as "Aurora Base", and that dispatcher would talk to various CDOT trucks as well as CSP Dispatch. However I've not heard "Aurora Base" active for several months. Are you aware of any other "CDOT Dispatch locations" that have been active recently??

Also, the forum archives indicate there are 4 unknown TG's which might belong to CDOT, namely 2310, 2312, 2314 and 2316. A few days ago I heard a small amount of voice traffic on 2314 from Thorodin, and it might have been CDOT-related.

-Nate

 

[rfburns]

I used "dispatcher" generically to include Hanging Lake, Eisenhower Tunnel, Aurora Base and CSP. Aurora Base has been on the air the past few days on TG 2311.

Listening today it seems like TG 2465 is Highway 9 and 2315 is Section 9 Tac. Section 9 is mostly 9 Paul, but I did hear 9K27 on Hwy 285.

2305 is quite active today and I think that will be a 9P Tac on the east side of EJ tunnel.

On the air, dispatchers have said that the mountain courtesy patrol only has cell phones for comms.

 

[natedawg1604]

I used "dispatcher" generically to include Hanging Lake, Eisenhower Tunnel, Aurora Base and CSP. Aurora Base has been on the air the past few days on TG 2311.

Listening today it seems like TG 2465 is Highway 9 and 2315 is Section 9 Tac. Section 9 is mostly 9 Paul, but I did hear 9K27 on Hwy 285.

2305 is quite active today and I think that will be a 9P Tac on the east side of EJ tunnel.

On the air, dispatchers have said that the mountain courtesy patrol only has cell phones for comms.

Ah, got it. All courtesy Patrol units on Traffic 2 (2331) seem to use call signs consisting of three "sections": the first section seems to be a single digit (1-9), then "Paul", followed by another numeric digit. I always wondered if the first digit was the maintenance section, and I'm pretty sure I've heard courtesy patrol units using call signs with all 9 digits (i.e. 1 Paul x, 2 Paul x, etc). However, it seems unlikely that all courtesy patrol units throughout the state would be affiliating on Denver-Metro DTRS sites, so maybe the single digit at the beginning refers to "unpublished" "Denver-Metro Courtesy Patrol Districts"?

 

[rfburns]

TG 2505 appears to be Section 1 George and Burlington is probably 1G not 1M. Workers on this TG like to use Rancher's names for their landmarks.

I'm not submitting these CDOT TG's to the database so that everyone has a chance to chime in with their opinion since the maps and radio traffic at least for sections 1, 5 and 9 are much less than crystal clear.

 

[natedawg1604]

I believe Section 8 went away. Most of Section 8 would now be Section 5.
Some dispatchers still use the word highway with the Patrol. Such as "Highway 5 King 28". Maybe its the older dispatchers that are use to doing it that way.

This is what I have as of today after 4 days of listening about 12 hours a day. The high incidence of abbreviated call sign usage makes it difficult and some of the maps are still not up to date.

2309 Section 5 John
2311 Section 5 King, 5K28
2504 Section 5 Lincoln
2506 Section 5 Mary
2319 Section 5 King, 5K3, 5K5
2315 Section 9 King
2502 Section 2 Mary and Section 2 Paul
2465 Section 9 Paul
2491 Section 1 Mary
2495 Section 1 John
2499 Section 1 Lincoln
2777 Section 4 King Tac

2502 may only be 2 Paul and 2 Mary jumps over there to coordinate work at the Patrol boundary west of Copper Mtn.

The Burlington area should be Section 1 Mary.

Not to add even more complications, but 2500 and 2319 have been regularly patched for quite a while and they are still patched as of tonight (with 2319 being the "supergroup"). Alternatively, 2500 and 2491 are also frequently patched with 2491 as the "supergroup" (they were so patched as late as yesterday). Hopefully someone can catch these TG's in an "un-patched" state in the near future...

 

[natedawg1604]

UPDATE:

*For the last 3-5 days I've not seen any CDOT TG's patched together (as per Pro96Com logs). Perhaps the Talkgroup reconfiguration was designed to eliminate "routine" patches, which would be wonderful.

*CDOT TG's are much more active during snowy/icy road conditions requiring substantial deployments of plow trucks and staff. So, it is best to scan/log during these periods. Numerous TG's have definitely been re-configured and it will take a while to re-create the new layout.

*As noted in a recent post CDOT seems to have deployed TG 2310, which might be the new "5 John" channel.

*TG 2315 seems to be 9-Paul TAC.

*Recently I've been hearing "Aurora Base" (albeit intermittently) on TG 2500 again, which still seems to be the "Highway 5" channel used by Denver CSP Dispatch. "Aurora Base" does not seem to have a fixed schedule, so I'm thinking they serve as a "backup" or "overflow" dispatch center of some kind.

*For the last month+ I've heard no references to "section 8", so that section is likely gone for good.

*CDOT may be using "Sam" and "Robert" as new call sign-prefixes.

 

[natedawg1604]

So, I just submitted the following update requests to RR:

TGID 2505, new description/alpha tag: "Section 1 - George"
TGID 2309, new description/alpha tag: "Section 5 - John"
TGID 2311, new description/alpha tag: "Section 5 - King"
TGID 2315, new description/alpha tag: "Section 9 - Paul Tactical"

It appears that TG 2319 is now used for Section 4 in the Pueblo area. I don't quite understand this because they already seemed to have 2 "highway" channels for section 4 (2508 and 2518). Maybe they are repurposing 2508 and 2518, and making 2319 the new (single) "Highway 4" channel. Also, I've been heavily logging and/or scanning CDOT in the last 24 hours, and I've still not seen any patches whatsoever.

 

[Spirit]

Is this the recent updated map of CDOT sections or has it changed again? I did not see a section 8 on the map.

http://dtdapps.coloradodot.info/staticdata/Downloads/StatewideMaps/MaintSectionsBase.pdf

 

[natedawg1604]

Is this the recent updated map of CDOT sections or has it changed again? I did not see a section 8 on the map.

http://dtdapps.coloradodot.info/staticdata/Downloads/StatewideMaps/MaintSectionsBase.pdf

It appears that is, indeed, a current map. Section 8 appears to have been eliminated entirely.

 

[natedawg1604]

UPDATE: As of right now, TG 2500 (Highway 5) and 2491 (Highway 1) are patched again, with 2491 as the supergroup. So, apparently they still do use patching at seemingly random intervals...

 

[Moosemedic]

As long as they are redistricting, and eliminating district 8 all together..... Would now be a good time to maybe, even make them sequential in some fashion? Clockwise, or across in rows? This looks like more of a dice throw than a plan ... just saying

 

[natedawg1604]

UPDATE: I just submitted another RR db update, as follows:

TGID 2502, "Section 2 - Paul"

There is definitely a corresponding 2 Paul Tac channel as well, I just haven't found it yet. Also today I've been noticing that CDOT trucks seem to be using call signs more consistently (when they do use call signs at all). It remains to be seen if this was a "fluke" or an intentional change...

 

[n0nhj]

Managed to catch a fair bit of traffic on 2319 (no patch), and it appear that it's CDOT 4R - Park County. Park County used to be split between several maintenance sections, but the 2013 map has it all in section 4.

So I've submitted 2319 as CDOT 4R