Jump to content

Gold Detector Competition, We Are All Winners. Is Something Coming Gpx-8000?


Recommended Posts

Ive heard some talk as to why the delay in release of the 8000 and it had to do with the FAA and disruption of airline travel comms mostly from the US regulations I think.   It a came from a fairly connected source.  That makes my brain think they are striving for depth well beyond the 7000. Why bother with small gold in the shallows when the 6000 has that more than covered.  All though it would be great to get the bits past the 6000 capability too.  My money is on more sensitivity at depth, because really isnt that where every generation of detector leaves off?  For me I want a mining and prospecting machine for our claims that will go deep real deep.  But I suppose thats a little narrowly focused  for the masses.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 hours ago, Gold Ryder said:

Ive heard some talk as to why the delay in release of the 8000 and it had to do with the FAA and disruption of airline travel comms mostly from the US regulations I think.

FAA? Airline communications? No. Absolutely not. It’s actually impossible. As is any talk of metal detectors exceeding some kind of power transmission limits in the U.S. That’s always been a myth. Your “connected source” just lost all credibility and can be safely ignored in the future.

And delay? What delay? How can a detector that has never been announced and exists merely as rumors be delayed?

I’m not trying to jump down your throat at all. I’m just trying to stop misinformation being spread via these forums. I do agree however that any focus by Minelab with a new gold machine needs to be on depth attained on multi ounce nuggets, not the small bits.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

As is any talk of metal detectors exceeding some kind of power transmission limits in the U.S. That’s always been a myth.

Steve is this the first time you've shot this down??  :laugh:  (Being facetious for those not familiar with many previous posts over the years.)  We see it claimed here and at other forum sites (e.g. Dankowski's) rather frequently.  I'm thinking George's and Carl's book should be required reading as it addresses this and other myths besides explaining nicely how detectors work.  Yes, there are several BYO projects in there but IMO you can ignore those (as I have done), just read the explanations of what is going on, and still come out way ahead of the cover price.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve Herschbach said:

FAA? Airline communications? No. Absolutely not. It’s an actually impossible. As is any talk of metal detectors exceeding some kind of power transmission limits in the U.S. That’s always been a myth. Your “connected source” just lost all credibility and can be safely ignored in the future.

And delay? What delay? How can a detector that has never been announced and exists merely as rumors be delayed?

I’m not trying to jump down your throat at all. I’m just trying to stop misinformation being spread via these forums. I do agree however that any focus by Minelab with a new gold machine needs to be on depth attained on multi ounce nuggets, not the small bits.

Haha I should of said Kinda reputable but that being said.  We can hear them everytime they pass over with our machines as they are. So debunk the myth and explain why their is no effect on their systems.   I havent had the chance to be told why not.   And yeah If I was betting it will be a deep machine.   I have no doubt one is coming eventually the sales and technology have to go on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

Steve is this the first time you've shot this down??  :laugh:  (Being facetious for those not familiar with many previous posts over the years.)  We see it claimed here and at other forum sites (e.g. Dankowski's) rather frequently.  I'm thinking George's and Carl's book should be required reading as it addresses this and other myths besides explaining nicely how detectors work.  Yes, there are several BYO projects in there but IMO you can ignore those (as I have done), just read the explanations of what is going on, and still come out way ahead of the cover price.

It’s like whack-a-mole. :smile: But mainly just wanted to agree that Inside The Metal Detector is a real gem.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gold Ryder said:

Haha I should have said Kinda reputable but that being said.  We can hear them everytime they pass over with our machines as they are. So debunk the myth and explain why there is no effect on their systems.   I havent had the chance to be told why not.   And yeah If I was betting it will be a deep machine.   I have no doubt one is coming eventually the sales and technology have to go on.

Hearing airplanes with a detector is not a FAA safety issue. As far as debunking, well, you could read the book referenced above to learn how metal detectors function. They are not radio transmitter devices, but based on alternator theory. Here are some basics though…

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Gold Ryder said:

Haha I should of said Kinda reputable but that being said.  We can hear them everytime they pass over with our machines as they are. So debunk the myth and explain why their is no effect on their systems.   I havent had the chance to be told why not.   And yeah If I was betting it will be a deep machine.   I have no doubt one is coming eventually the sales and technology have to go on. 

Put simply, you're hearing the airplane's myriad of much higher power radio transmitters including radar transponder beacons and other communications and navigational radios.  These transmissions can be measured at a level of hundreds or even thousands of watts at the source.  Your detector is tuned to detect signals at the microwatt level (1/1,000,00th of a watt).  And only eminates microwatts of spurious EMI to the local area.

Since the plane is above you and has no line of site obstructions to attenuate the higher frequency radio signals, they travel unobstructed at power levels higher than a microwatt to your high gain electronics box and you hear them as electromagnetic interference in your headset.  Just as you would also hear the EMI given off by a local cell tower, radio transmitter, or high voltage power lines (though these "terrestrial" electromagnetic sources may be subject to line of sight attenuation) and even atmospheric lightning.

If you think of it like sound energy, the plane's radios are yelling through a Marshall Amp at you and your detector is whispering back at them.  You can hear them, no way can they hear you.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill have to read it. Im curious as to what makes the detectors pick up a plane signal and not emit back. 

Chase- Just read your post.  Thanks for that.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a bit of a experiment of say your Multi IQ detector, tune an AM portable radio into a weak station down around 600kHz first up, than see how close you can get your detector (detector on) walk around your radio receiver aim coil field at and away, see the effects on radios audio signal. If you`ve an Equinox and a Manticore handy you`ll see which allows you closest with detector coil field in same direction as that distant station transmitted signal. Now try it with the strongest fixed magnet you have handy. I am at a wee loss at Carl/Tye debate, both obviously know what they are on about. I understand as a user the magnetic properties of the detector coil field to some extent, also antennas as a HAM operator, mainly in practical terms, thus can see where Tyes coming from in above thread. My limited radio theory understanding tells me even a light bulb transmits more than just in the light frequency spectrum

Practically I know of this as I live in a fringe radio reception area and clearest closest AM station transmits on 558kHz and note detector effects when on because I usually have AM radio on in my workshop when buggarising around with detectors. The Manticore disrupts signal at more distance than the Nox. Tis cabin Fever induced interest fueled by always asking why is it so. Of course this is only a close to receiver effect and no way could it effect a planes receiver 100s of meters away or our detectors would be banned not just limited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People often say their detector picks up planes going past, yet two GPZ's can detect quite close to each other with no interference at all, it takes you going within something like 50 feet of each other to have an issue.  The same with the GPX 6000's, can detect right near each other no problems.  I used to have a little more trouble with my GPX 4500 picking up JW's GPZ from a good 100+ feet away and he was blind to my GPX with his GPZ. 

So they can pick up a plane from a great distance but can only pickup EMI from another detector from a very close range, kinda shows the detector EMI doesn't travel too far I think.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...