Competition!

[ivconic]

I was thinking on "8" shape (twisted at center) and not on size like 8" (inches).
"8" shape coil has it advantages as more immune to noise and interferences.
But it is good that you explained.

[Tinkerer]

What's that?
An "8" coil?

Any size coil really. An assembly of 2 TX coils with the windings such as to make the interaction of the coil fields "aiding".
Now, if you add an RX coil over the center of the 2 TX coils, the fields of the TX coils would be cancelled in the RX coils, thus "balanced".

I am sure you have observed that a coin seen in the "flat" position gives a strong response and a coin in the "vertical" position gives a weak response. Therefore, this coil assembly will enhance the response of a coin in the vertical position.
Now, you probably have also noticed that a steel "crown cork" as they call the beer bottle tops, shows a resistive response in the "flat" position and a magnetic response in the "vertical" position. It is probable that this coil assembly will enhance the difference between magnetic and resistive response.

You can also wind the 2 TX coils with the fields "opposing". The effects will be very different.

[ivconic]

[Tinkerer]

Thanks Tony!
Finally something interesting!
What was the name of that detector?

At the time I was diving for treasure in Key West, Florida, USA. So I named the detector KW 1. I built a few dozen of them and sold them to other treasure divers.

[ivconic]

Here you have a new coil idea for a PI. the picture shows the magnetic field lines. Note that the field lines "illuminate" the target from a different angle than usual.

What's that?
An "8" coil?

[ivconic]

OK, here you have a simple non-motion PI. My first underwater detector. 1987. It used the NE5534 for the preamp, at that time something new and improved.

Thanks Tony!
Finally something interesting!
What was the name of that detector?

[Tinkerer]

Here you have a new coil idea for a PI. the picture shows the magnetic field lines. Note that the field lines "illuminate" the target from a different angle than usual.

[Tinkerer]

OK, here you have a simple non-motion PI. My first underwater detector. 1987. It used the NE5534 for the preamp, at that time something new and improved.

[ivconic]

Maybe moodz is right all along after all!
Entropy is nonsense!
And I'm too naive.
Maybe we should close this part of the forum only to the few members who always have enough will to do something?
Let this be one of the proposals.

[ivconic]

It's easy to wake people up to start criticizing and commenting on any other content...just not on a topic that could benefit everyone.
Everyone is waiting for the outcome of the idea about the new detector, only 2-3 write something about it and the rest are silent.
There is a way on the forum to see how many members are currently "online", you know?
It can be seen that a lot of them are present. And no one to get involved and say their opinion.
And then it is enough to write something provocative; and here, some people call right away!
And this story will come down to the same actors. Carl, moodz, Tinkerer, Skippy, Pito and me... as the main distraction character in their work!
Always the same "gang" of people do something and bunch of rest nothing!

[ivconic]

Ok, chime in and tell me what you think about the idea.
What kind of joint project would you like to see here?
I have written too much, it is time for others to be heard.

[MDfanatic]

ivconic I's a wonder how you can derail any topic with politics

I think we have enough politics everywhere around us, let's just enjoy our hobby without politics.

[ivconic]

Why do they try to explain that one hit the way they do in a "highly scientific" text?
Because it is the beginning of the end of the "invisible" industry.
And huge amounts of money were lost there. Billions of dollars.
On top of that, it's a huge shame.
The hitherto superior and invincible American military technology was defeated in the most shameful way possible. (as always in all the wars they fought)
And they never admitted anywhere that they had much more losses than that.
But we have material evidence, part of it is in military museums and part was distributed to the brotherly Russians and Chinese,
so that they could analyze that technology and make a new technology better than it.
It is about the fact that the American scientific brain (no doubt highly educated, super intelligent and advanced) has come to a state of "dogma" regarding
the top achievements in science. He took a dogmatic path from which he does not deviate at any cost.
And that led to the impossibility of thinking "outside the box".
Abstract science often does not go hand in hand with reality.
Where better evidence of this do we have than right here in metal detector technology!
They never forgave us for this. Even today, their policy is openly hostile towards us.
But in their madness they persistently avoid understanding a harsh truth!
We only defended ourselves, and they are the ones who traveled several tens of thousands of miles to come to our yard to bombard us with depleted uranium bombs
from a safe height... as a result of which, even today, babies are born here with various cancers.
And every year there are about 50,000 fewer of us. We are disappearing.
They do not understand that they are evil and to blame for everything.
And not us who defended ourselves on our doorsteps.
It is the height of inability to understand reality.
No, this is not off topic.
Because I see the same kind of inability to understand reality here among fellow detectorists.
They have superior knowledge, no doubt about that.
But it's as if they never went out with the detector on the real field.
It's like they've never had direct contact with real searching with a detector.
It's as if they've spent their entire lives in highly controlled simulators.
And as much as I try to point it out; I only encounter a bigger and bigger wall of resistance and misunderstanding.

[kt315]

LOL!

[ivconic]

I will point you on this story, read it, think abut it and disregard lame excuses and wrong interpretations from the article.
Because I was in uniform then and in course with events.
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-i...-allied-force/
There are several incorrect statements in that article.
The first is about the way it was done.
And the second is false information that only one was shot down.
In a period of 10 days, 4 pieces were hit, 3 fell and disintegrated.
One of them, badly damaged, managed to fly to a safe zone and fell there.
The crews of 3 survived by "catapulting", the crew of the fourth died in the crash.
We picked up all the parts from the field and later gave them to the Chinese!
That's why today the Chinese have a much more advanced version!
But how were they brought down?
By using "obsolete" and long-forgotten Russian radar from the time of tube technology.
What modern high tech radars can't see, these old ones can.
Because these old ones don't have "digital sampling", "digital filters", "advanced algorithms" etc.
They only have outdated tubes, a bunch of wires and old resistors and "oily" capacitors.
And the tactic was as follows: you turn on the radar for a short time, look at the picture and quickly turn it off.
So that the enemy would not detect the radar beam.
And you repeat it in irregular periods very often.
Within a few minutes you can clearly see the "invisible".
All you have to do next is point the anti-aircraft missile and fire.
In total, in 78 days, over 200 different aircraft were shot down in this way.
Here is an example of the superiority of "analog" over "digital"!
I'm sure the same analogy can be applied to detectors. 101% sure.