Lord, half a meter in the air! - about the absurdity of testing the range of detectors in the air

According to my morning schedule, after brewing my tea, I started browsing the net every day for interesting topics. The iron point is the search forums. So I went on one of them, and there, like primary school boys shouting over who has the more important dad, the searchers prove themselves which detector is the best. The lead line of attack is the coin range in the air. Absurd?

I have already written about the scope and its importance for the search (I invite you to read). So bearing in mind, that coverage is not the most important either, nor the only factor influencing the outcomes in the field is always shocking me, how much importance is attached to dry testing, and in particular to your favorite competition called "air test".

I remember perfectly well some time ago, writing a test of one of the detectors in the press, I was scolded by e-mail by a respectable gentleman, that I did not test for various coins in the air, which completely disqualified the test and without it there is no point in discussing the topic at all. I shouted something, because this approach scares me. Why?

First of all, let's look at the circumstances of such a test. Even ignoring the influence of the environment on the detector (which in a room full of interference, and under such conditions, typically such tests are performed), the procedure is completely unreal. First of all, we have countless comparisons and tests on YouTube and forums, it is like the fire avoiding the precise detector settings used during the test. This is especially important, when several devices are tested for comparison. Unfortunately, the test is usually to prove at any cost, that the A company detector is the best and that's it, so B and C's detectors are accordingly "undercut" on the settings, to adapt the test to the tester's requests. Ergo - no test without specifying the exact detector settings makes no sense.

The second thing, the most important for me, there is no point in testing in the air. The only detectors, which can be like this (though with difficulty anyway) compare, are economical detectors with basic options and ground balance set "rigidly". Because how to tune an advanced ground detector, as there is no ground? How this will relate to the test results, since such fine-tuning is required for proper operation? The answers are obvious, the field for distortions during testing as well.

Third point, why test in the air and confuse anyone. If anyone has a keen eye for creating a theoretical database of detector ranges, then apart from having access to a wide range of them, it should obtain a dozen or so objects corresponding to the character (size, Shape, metal) to the desired finds and create a reliable test plot. There is no problem with finding a piece of land in Poland, on which objects can be buried and appropriately marked for use as an indicator of the effectiveness of the detector range. It is worth mentioning here, that you can check, how the equipment will cope with an unusual arrangement of the object.

Virtually all airborne tests, which I have ever watched, are tests on a coin placed perfectly flat in relation to the coil. As you probably guessed, in practice it is not so colorful, and the position of the object in the soil has a profound effect on both range, as well as the identification of the object by the detector. Therefore, in my test plot, apart from the classic depth wells, I also placed several wells with objects arranged in a non-standard way, to have an idea of ​​it, how the range and ID change depending on the location.

So are the test wells the ideal solution?? Well no. It is true that the capabilities of the detector and its efficiency in terms of precision of detection and identification can be assessed quite well, but on the other hand, it's just a simulation of search conditions, and such a "nail test" on a freshly inserted nail will differ significantly from the analogous situation with a rusty object, which has arrested 100 years in the soil and created a completely different "echo" in the soil.

In other words, if we want to check the range - only on the test wells and with the full specification of the equipment used in the test, otherwise testing only introduces chaos and cannot be treated as a reliable assessment factor for the detector. The network is full of absurd tests, and I guess none of us are happy, when we are deceived in the living eyes by fanatical followers of the "only right" brand in their opinion, truth?

P.S. As soon as the aura improves significantly, depth tests of detectors in my test plot will begin to appear at the Explorer. HD video, with full details of detectors and trying out different programs.