Active Sonar Frequencies

[Fandango]

Guys,

is there any database for ACTIVE SONAR FREQUENCIES out there?...I cannot find it at Bill's website... :cry:

Thanx!

[OneShot]

The only thing that comes to mind is the USNI Db, under Sensors (or so). But it only show ranges for certain types of emitters and not what frequency belongs to what emitter. Maybe the Db Wizards know more.

[Bellman]

:) Not seen anything specific to DW - I still have the SC/SCX active sonar ping frequencies, which came bundled with
a Campaign/Scenario that I downloaded from Bills.

From memory there was quite a lot of very usefull other spreadsheet and chart stuff.

[JoGary(sco)]

there acyually not to many diferent active freq used in DW. Think LWAMI had changed this so it can be used to identify diferent ships and torps now. SCX had a diferent freq for just about every active sonar in game. I hoping DW will some day have that. Now most use the same freq so it not to usfull for identification as it is. All torps use 20000hz i think and surface use 3500 and 5000 hz. Subs use 2500hz. That may be it but not sure. Oh bouys, cant remember what they use. 22000hz maybe.

[Kapitan]

i got one for SCX works fine for me and also timmygoos sonar profiles thats made for dangerous waters i can email it to you if you like send me a pm

[Fandango]

i got one for SCX works fine for me and also timmygoos sonar profiles thats made for dangerous waters i can email it to you if you like send me a pm

The PM is on its way... :-)

[Kapitan]

email on the way

[LuftWolf]

We've changed some of the torpedo frequencies, but have not done the active sonars for platforms.

Perhaps a little bit in the future... :hmm:

[Pigfish]

I once made one for SCX. I feel its kinda pointless for DW at present cuz as mentioned, there isnt a wide enough varitey of frequencies in DW as it stands now. If SCX ever comes out I would be glad to do the same again. Same if LWAMI make some new active sonars. :up: If some one else doesnt. ;)

[LuftWolf]

Honestly, it would be pretty easy to do, not requiring any real modding "work" just a little copying and reassigning and number changing... I'll add it to my list. ;)

[Pigfish]

Exactly. In my game my Russians use Bullhorn, Bullnose and Horsejaw etc. The Canadians Westinghouse etc. Go for it!

[Cyklop]

I would disagree with JoGary on this. The frequencies are actually diversified and can be very useful for threat classification.
DW v1.01 database (without LW/Ami mod) lists the following frequencies of active sonars:

Los Angeles - 2500 Hz
Seawolf - 2800 Hz
Akula - 4000 Hz
Kilo - 5000 Hz

FFG - 7500 Hz
Other surface - 3500 Hz

MH 60 Dip - 14000 Hz

DICASS - 10000 Hz

Weapons - all torpedoes and UUVs - 22000 Hz

[Fandango]

Los Angeles - 2500 Hz
Seawolf - 2800 Hz
Akula - 4000 Hz
Kilo - 5000 Hz

FFG - 7500 Hz
Other surface - 3500 Hz

MH 60 Dip - 14000 Hz

DICASS - 10000 Hz

Weapons - all torpedoes and UUVs - 22000 Hz

So, if the LWAMI has not changed the frequencies, this list is still valid... :-)

[MaHuJa]

LWAMI diversified further on torpedoes, I believe.

[LuftWolf]

We have just changed the active seeker frequencies for torpedoes thus far, and I have put it on my list to do the rest of the active sonars for the next version.

[Fandango]

We have just changed the active seeker frequencies for torpedoes thus far, and I have put it on my list to do the rest of the active sonars for the next version.

That's cool! :)

Anything else you've put on the "list"?... ;)

[LuftWolf]

http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=44500

I frequently update the first post, it's my working list. ;)

[Fandango]

Work on trying to automate Missile Transient Warnings

And what about eliminating current TIW warnings?... :-?

[LuftWolf]

That'd be nice... but I'm pretty sure that is a losing cause (read: not possible for modders).

Sorry. I would change that behavior if I could. :cry: ;)

[Fandango]

(read: not possible for modders).

Maybe Jamie is listening... :ping:

I assume SCS need only to "block" the command that enables the sound file...or is it more complicated?... :-?

[OKO]

Work on trying to automate Missile Transient Warnings

And what about eliminating current TIW warnings?... :-?

May I know why you'd like to eliminate TIW warning ?

[Bellman]

I would like to see a more realistic implementation if TIWs where they were only received where a torp
is 'registered' on the sonar of properly orientated platform/s.

That is to say where a torp is launched from a bearing which is baffled no TIW would be received unless
and until such bearing was covered by sensor/s.

I suspect that this would be difficult/impossible to mod. :hmm:

[Fandango]

Work on trying to automate Missile Transient Warnings

And what about eliminating current TIW warnings?... :-?

May I know why you'd like to eliminate TIW warning ?

1) As Bellman said, now you get TIW even if a torp is shot outside sonar range. This should be corrected ANYWAY...
2) If SONAR CREW ON is not activated, I would like to find out myself what's going on out there. An automatic TIW is a too big Situation Awareness HELP for somebody who wants to manage sonar stations by himself...

It's not that I want it eliminated completely...a "TIW disable" option would be enough and that would make both newbies and advanced players happy... :up:

[Molon Labe]

Work on trying to automate Missile Transient Warnings

And what about eliminating current TIW warnings?... :-?

May I know why you'd like to eliminate TIW warning ?

1) As Bellman said, now you get TIW even if a torp is shot outside sonar range. This should be corrected ANYWAY...
2) If SONAR CREW ON is not activated, I would like to find out myself what's going on out there. An automatic TIW is a too big Situation Awareness HELP for somebody who wants to manage sonar stations by himself...

It's not that I want it eliminated completely...a "TIW disable" option would be enough and that would make both newbies and advanced players happy... :up:

I disagree. If you leave the station to do something else, those warnings are pretty important. You can't enable the autocrew, because they'll frack up your tracker assignments. I suppose that we could have multiple levels of sonar autocrew, but that's asking for a lot and I don't think we'll get it. In the meantime, just think of the TIW in the same class as the "Chief of the Boat" autocrew for mast warnings. :D

[Fandango]

I disagree. If you leave the station to do something else, those warnings are pretty important.

Well, TIW is not the ONLY way to see if a torpedo is dropped...when you are back to sonar, you will find out yourself. HOPEFULLY, it will take some time before the torpedo reaches you... ;)

My idea was limited to a simple TIW warning option which the player can enable or disable; so, in your case, if you think that TIW are important, just keep the TIWs warning turned on. I personally would like to have the possibility to have a COMPLETE control of the sonar without any external aid...that's it. If that's too complicated to do, then AMEN... ;)

[Molon Labe]

I disagree. If you leave the station to do something else, those warnings are pretty important.

Well, TIW is not the ONLY way to see if a torpedo is dropped...when you are back to sonar, you will find out yourself. HOPEFULLY, it will take some time before the torpedo reaches you... ;)

Evasion needs to begin immediately even if launched from a distance; we also have air and rocket-dropped torps that sometimes don't give us more than a few seconds to react to.

Being able to turn on/off TIW warnings would basicly be a second level of autocrew. I think we're better of having that option than not having it...but, outside of a "standard" sub vs sub match, I don't imagine people ever turning the warning off. With multiple opponents or air threats, there's just too much for you to do without having this level of "autocrew" to help you out.

I think it would be better if the TIW was fixed so that it only occured if an unwashed, unbaffed, in-range sensor can detect it. In fact, even if we get the option to turn the warnings off, this fix won't be needed any less. Kinda like the aTMA fix that we need so badly; even if we can get rid of the problem by turning it off, we should be able to have it on without cheating. :)

[Bellman]

ML wrote:I think it would be better if the TIW was fixed so that it only occured if an unwashed, unbaffed, in-range sensor can detect it

Exactly. :up:

[Fandango]

ML wrote:I think it would be better if the TIW was fixed so that it only occured if an unwashed, unbaffed, in-range sensor can detect it

Exactly. :up:

I second that!!! :rock:

But with regards to the fact that nobody would ever disable TIW, there are people who even do MANUAL TMA...isn't that even CRAZIER?!?! :lol:

[Molon Labe]

Not at all. TMA is not the sort of thing that should be automated, it's a thought-intensive process requiring intuition and judgment. It's ideally done by a human. TMA is something that doesn't need to be done constantly too, you do it when you have data and update occasionally.

Scanning the sonar is much more mechanical, aside from classification there isn't too much judgment, it's just about seeing the lines and marking them. In terms of TIW, it needs to be done constantly; even leaving the station for 5 seconds without having a TIW warnings can be fatal. Not so with TMA.

[Bellman]

Tacking slightly on TMA in the Demo-

Jamie wrote 26th Oct.:-Dangerous Waters Update Version 102 Build 3XX (English) 'The way that TMA on submarines handles ''manual solutions" is improved'

Note this was listed after the 'Speed-lock'improvement.

There has been precious little feedback on changes to the way the subs handle manual solutions.
Or has it just skipped my attention ?

Has anyone observed any differences ? Wish Jamie would elaborate. It has a different feel but I cant put my finger on it ? :hmm:

[Fandango]

Not at all. TMA is not the sort of thing that should be automated, it's a thought-intensive process requiring intuition and judgment. It's ideally done by a human. TMA is something that doesn't need to be done constantly too, you do it when you have data and update occasionally.

Scanning the sonar is much more mechanical, aside from classification there isn't too much judgment, it's just about seeing the lines and marking them. In terms of TIW, it needs to be done constantly; even leaving the station for 5 seconds without having a TIW warnings can be fatal. Not so with TMA.

Molon,

I still can't understand why "objectively" having a TIW warning which CAN be disabled is a bad idea... :(

I'm not talking about changing parameters of modifing doctrines...just something ADDITIONAL that will modify the game as it is now only if the player wants it...

Probably you've intentionally "stretched" it that much, but by gaming experience (little experience, I admit) I don't see anything FATAL in realizing a TIW after 5 seconds it occurs. And honestly, we've got simulations out there where you don't even know a missile is shot at you and where missile cruising times are matters of seconds. An example above all is Falcon 4 Allied Force...

The purpose of disabling TIW warnings is that of making you more concentrated on sonar which is the station you are probably using more. Again, when playing alone, you may want to keep the TIW warnings on but while playing in multistation, you may want to give the buddy looking at the sonar a higher degree of responsability...

[Molon Labe]

Not at all. TMA is not the sort of thing that should be automated, it's a thought-intensive process requiring intuition and judgment. It's ideally done by a human. TMA is something that doesn't need to be done constantly too, you do it when you have data and update occasionally.

Scanning the sonar is much more mechanical, aside from classification there isn't too much judgment, it's just about seeing the lines and marking them. In terms of TIW, it needs to be done constantly; even leaving the station for 5 seconds without having a TIW warnings can be fatal. Not so with TMA.

Molon,

I still can't understand why "objectively" having a TIW warning which CAN be disabled is a bad idea... :(

I'm not talking about changing parameters of modifing doctrines...just something ADDITIONAL that will modify the game as it is now only if the player wants it...

Probably you've intentionally "stretched" it that much, but by gaming experience (little experience, I admit) I don't see anything FATAL in realizing a TIW after 5 seconds it occurs. And honestly, we've got simulations out there where you don't even know a missile is shot at you and where missile cruising times are matters of seconds. An example above all is Falcon 4 Allied Force...

The purpose of disabling TIW warnings is that of making you more concentrated on sonar which is the station you are probably using more. Again, when playing alone, you may want to keep the TIW warnings on but while playing in multistation, you may want to give the buddy looking at the sonar a higher degree of responsability...

Me neither. That's why I agreed with you that it would be nice to have. I just think fixing the way the TIW works needs to be the priority. Currently the TIW is a minor cheat, so fixing it is a high priority. An option to remove the TIW is a minor feature addition that will be used only by a small number of players in a small number of situations, so it's a low priority. What's worse is that SCS often looks for excuses not to do things (their resources are rather limited, after all), so if the TIW removal option gets done first, they might drop fixing the TIW from their "to-do" list.

You don't play against air platforms or Akulas very much, do you? 5 seconds can make the difference between getting the boat turned around in time to use your decoys properly or getting sent on a one-way trip to crush depth. It's not a stretch at all.

[Fandango]

I just think fixing the way the TIW works needs to be the priority.

We both agree on that... :know:

You don't play against air platforms or Akulas very much, do you? 5 seconds can make the difference between getting the boat turned around in time to use your decoys properly or getting sent on a one-way trip to crush depth. It's not a stretch at all.

That makes sense... :up:

[JoGary(sco)]

Yeh manual TMA is more importaint. But i would rather see the TIW fixed so it like Bellman and Malon Labe said than have option to dosable it. Both would be good but as ML said recources are limited at SCS

[jlmr1988]

The PM is on its way... :-)

I could REALLY appreciate it if you could send me those active sonar frequencies aswell, if you can still find them xD

Thanks

[FPSchazly]

I could REALLY appreciate it if you could send me those active sonar frequencies aswell, if you can still find them xD

Thanks

Unfortunately this thread is over 15 years old :doh:

Look in the "Manual" folder of your Dangerous Waters game directory and you'll find sonar profiles there. The stock game doesn't have much more granularity for active frequencies than "submarine," "surface ship," "sonobuoy," and the audio files that play when you get pinged are generally sufficient to tell those apart.

[KungPao]

I could REALLY appreciate it if you could send me those active sonar frequencies aswell, if you can still find them xD

Thanks


Los Angeles - 2500 Hz
Seawolf - 2800 Hz
Akula - 4000 Hz
Kilo - 5000 Hz

FFG - 7500 Hz
Other surface - 3500 Hz

MH 60 Dip - 14000 Hz

DICASS - 10000 Hz

Weapons - all torpedoes and UUVs - 22000 Hz

Can't remember where I found this. It is probably from a pdf file that discuss DW stock platform. I copy paste it on my spreadsheet. I hope this will help
:Kaleun_Salute:

[snak3gam3r!]

Unfortunately this thread is over 15 years old :doh:

Look in the "Manual" folder of your Dangerous Waters game directory and you'll find sonar profiles there. The stock game doesn't have much more granularity for active frequencies than "submarine," "surface ship," "sonobuoy," and the audio files that play when you get pinged are generally sufficient to tell those apart.

I know the thread is really old, but I didn’t know it was literally 15 years!!!