Ladies, half a meter in the air! - about the absurdities of testing detectors in the air
According to my morning plan of the day, After brewing tea, I started daily browsing the network in search of interesting topics. Search forums are an iron point. So I entered one of them, and there, Like boys from a primary school shouting who has a more important dad, seekers prove to themselves which detector is the best. The leading attack line is a range of coins in the air. Absurd?
I wrote about the very coverage and its importance for the search before (I invite you to read). So bearing in mind, that the range is neither the most important, nor the only factor affecting the results in the field invariably shock me, what importance is attached to dry tests, and in particular to your favorite competition called "test in the air".
I remember perfectly well for some time ago, Writing the test of one of the detectors in the press, I was sorted by an e -mail by a respectable gentleman, that I did not do tests for various coins in the air, which completely disqualified the test and without it it makes no sense to raise the topic at all. I felt a bit, because this approach scares me. Why?
First of all, let's look at the circumstances of such a test. Even even the influence of the environment on the detector (which in a room full of interference, and in such conditions such tests are usually carried out), it offends the total unreliability of the entire procedure. First of all, like comparisons and tests on YouTube and forums, we have a lot of, How fire is avoided by providing precise detector settings used during the test. This is particularly important, When several equipment is tested for comparative purposes. Unfortunately, the test usually is to prove at all costs, that the company A detector is the best and enough, So the detectors of the B and C company are "undercut" at the settings, To adapt the test to the tester requests. Ergo - no test without providing accurate detector settings makes no sense.
The second thing, The most important for me, There is a sense of testing in the air. The only detectors, which you can (Although with difficulty) to compare, These are economical detectors with basic options and ground balance set "rigidly". Well as you get an advanced ground detector, Like the ground? How will it be for the test results, since such tuning is required for proper operation? The answers come by themselves, Field to distorts during tests the same.
Third thing, why test at all in the air and mock someone's head. If anyone has a jam to create a theoretical database with detectors, It is in addition to access to a wide range of them should buy a dozen or so objects corresponding to character (size, form, metal) for the desired finds and create a reliable test plot. In Poland, there is no problem finding a piece of land, on which items can be buried and determined accordingly for use as determinants of detector range effectiveness. It is worth mentioning here, that you can check, How the equipment can handle the unusual arranged object.
Virtually all tests in the air, I have seen, These are tests on a coin placed perfectly flat relative to the coil. As you probably guessed, in practice it is not so colorful, and the arrangement of the object in the soil has a huge impact on both coverage, as well as identification of the item by the detector. That is why I also placed a few holes with objects arranged in a non -standard manner in my field of test plots in addition to classic depth holes, To have a view on this, how the range and id changes depending on the location.
So are the test holes an ideal solution? Well, no. It is true that the detector's capabilities and its efficiency in the precision of detection and identification can be quite well assessed, But on the other hand, it's just a simulation of conditions during the search, And such a "nail test" on a freshly inserted nail will differ significantly from the same situation with a rusty object, who was lying 100 years in the soil and created quite different "echo" in the soil.
In other words, If we want to check the range - it is only on the test holes and when providing the full specification of the equipment used in the test. In any other case, the testing introduces only chaos and cannot be treated as a reliable detector assessment factor. On the web is full of absurd tests, and probably none of us is nice, When we are cheated in vivid eyes by fanatical followers of the "only right" brand in their opinion, True?
P.S. As soon as the aura will significantly improve, Depth tests of detectors on my test plot will begin to appear at the explore. HD video, With full provision of detectors and trying various programs.
