Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Steve Herschbach

Latest On Fisher Impulse AQ - Production Delay

Recommended Posts

In a weird way I see this as good news. Apparently Fisher was ready to start producing the Impulse AQ. The reason I know that is there has been a publicly announced "production delay" over some sort of mechanical aspect of the detector. So I read that as meaning that as soon as this hardware bug gets addressed units will be rolling out the door. The only problem is we don't know how long it will take to fix the bug, but they must be on it 24/7 at this point. Management has to be cracking the whip hard by now to get it out the door. I have to assume we will see this before end of summer. Fingers crossed! :smile:

Source for the info at Dankowski Forum

Fisher Impulse AQ Data & User Reviews

fisher-impulse-aq-pulse-induction-metal-detector-beach-gold-rings-waterproof.jpg
Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, I went to that forum to have a read about the delay, went back a page to find it and just saw everyone abusing each other so shut it down.  Not my kind of place.

It's a shame about the delay but better to delay than release a bad product, maybe they've learnt from past mistakes.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, this one is a big deal for First Texas. I am sending mental waves of support to Carl Moreland as he is probably stressing out big time right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ever since the 35cents/used condom debacle, I've avoided beach hunting. so what does this detector offer those of us who don't beach hunt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By, what I understand this is mostly a beach hunter. 

Seems like the big competitor for the Pulse is

The deep salt capabilities may be hard to beat.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, gambler said:

ever since the 35cents/used condom debacle, I've avoided beach hunting. so what does this detector offer those of us who don't beach hunt?

Nothing except the possibility of a dry land gold prospecting version someday. Not a peep on a new flagship coin detector to replace F75.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As one of the participants on that thread on Dankowski, I will offer a couple of comments.

That forum get a bit “frisky” at times, it is loosely moderated and pretty wide tolerance is evident. That particular thread has been a focus for a lot of folks who have been hearing about the upcoming Fisher beach PI for almost two years now and are increasingly frustrated by the fact that it seems to be a case of “so near, yet so far”.  Fisher showed a pre-production machine at the big outdoor expo in Germany in the winter and now folks are really hot to see it released, but that hasn’t happened yet.

A few minutes ago, I got a “ping” from my iMail app.  It was one of those annoying reminders from Linkdin - the career/jobs website that I am on - not because I want a job - but because it gives me an alternative to Facebook for following folks I know from when I was working. On Linkdin, I follow Alexandre Tartar (who is the designer of the AquaManta - now Fisher AQ).  The reminder was an invitation to congratulate Alexandre on his anniversary of two years as an employee of  First Texas Products.

Two years ago, Tom Walsh, the CEO of First Texas, opened his cash box and did an “aquihire” - acquiring the rights to Alexandre’s Manta Project and hiring him and his team.  In the two years since then, the project has apparently been moving steadily towards production and market launch. 

I think everyone who has been following this project expected a launch as early as 2018, now 2019 doesn’t look like a “slam dunk”.  That is disappointing.  

Two years is a long time to wait.  It isn’t such a long time however in terms of the process of development and bringing to production status of a new platform, one which shares virtually nothing with any of First Texas’ existing products. Not an excuse, just an observation.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my perspective and others it’s been more like a ten year wait. Nobody feels like it’s been two years. That’s internal information that really does not matter. And after people have waited all this time for a new flagship this still is not it. This is a niche product in a niche market. I did not hear everyone wanting a new beach detector. People want an answer to the Equinox from First Texas. So while this is an interesting product for a few people I don’t think it changes anything in the big picture really. Most First Texas fans won’t care about this detector and are still going to be waiting.

It’s too bad Alexandre won’t post anywhere but Dankowski. The forum has its fans but it barely gets enough traffic anymore to even generate an Alexa ranking. That’s what happens to all forums that let the trolls run loose. People leave. I watch but I will never participate again while trolls like shoveler are allowed to abuse other forum members with impunity.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken.  I posted what I did mostly because the Linkdin reminder served to remind me about how long it has been since the Manta was “Fisherized”.  Also because this thread was about AQ production delays.  

As far as the wider topics of First Texas needing a new top of the line general purpose detector or the fact that a high priced specialized beach machine being a niche product - all true enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your posts are always appreciated Rick - thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Joon hawn oh
      Don't you know when it's going to be released?
    • By Rick Kempf
      The latest developments of the AQ pre-production platform continue to increase the utility of the ferrous discrimination capability of the machine. Steady refinement of the design have made the machine not only deeper overall but greatly narrowed the gap between sensitivity in all metal and sensitivity in the iron ID modes of mute and multi-tone. 

      I suspect that if no iron/steel trash existed at the beach, no serious beach hunter would use anything except a Pulse Induction machine - unless they were in dry sand, and maybe not then. The reason I say this is that the depth advantages of existing PI machines is well demonstrated since they can operate on most beaches without the penalty of using ground balance. Also, except for iron/steel, no other level of discrimination is useful since gold jewelry can appear almost anywhere in the ID range above iron. So of the iron wasn’t there - PI’s would likely dominate. 

      In the case of Phase shift discrimination systems like VLF IB detectors use, the strong iron signal dominates the audio output, either silencing the audio entirely in the case of a single tone VLF, by nulling like an FBS/BBS - or by giving a lower tone in a multi-tone Detector. Even in the case of the multitone VLF’s, hearing the non-ferrous target depends on the recovery speed of the processing hardware in the detector. 

      With the AQ’s PI time-based discrimination, The discrimination of iron is reported to the user either as silence (in the mute mode) or as a low tone (in the case of multi-tone). 

      In mute, not only do you not hear the iron, but you hear instead silence - unless there is a non-ferrous target, in that case you hear the target with no hint of the iron at all. In this mode, the AQ software simply makes the ferrous targets disappear - just disappear. 

      In the case of multitone, you hear a high tone for non-ferrous low and medium conductors and a high tone for ferrous targets - close or even superimposed, makes n difference you would hear both tones in any case. 

      This has several major advantages. 

      First, there is “zero recovery speed” - All targets produce an output signal if they return one - the ferrous is - by operator choice - either silenced or assigned a low tone. The low/medium conductors always return their characteristic high tone. This occurs 100% of the time - there is no “switching delay” from target to target based on processor speed limitations happening. 

      Separation distance between adjacent ferrous and non ferrous targets is ZERO. 

      By zero, I mean exactly that, even non-ferrous directly beneath ferrous gives a clear non-ferrous high tone and the iron simply “isn’t there” (in mute - in multi-tone it gives a low tone which you would hear along with the non ferrous high tone). 

      This means that “silent masking” that Tom wrote about long ago, where even a tiny bit if ferrous like a common staple can mask a deeper and larger valuable target, is largely eliminated. 

      Now this isn’t magic, it’s just that the iron is above the ground balance point (or at it) and you are hearing the signals below the GB point and the ones at or above the GB point are silenced (or give a low tone). 

      Is it perfect? - no. In discrim on the AQ some high conductor targets will be “above the GB point” and be treated as iron. If your idea of a good beach hunt is finding a bunch of dimes and quarters in dry sand, then stick with whatever light, cheap VLF you want, they can help you avoid all that aluminum and gold which would just slow you down - lol 

      All this is clearly demonstrated in the video I have linked to before. The machine in the video is the Manta prototype from 3-5 years ago. The system has gone through a lot of development since then, including the very latest gains in overall depth and depth in the iron ID modes which I reported in the first sentence in this post. 

      Will the AQ “obsolete” any other detectors? Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The gas turbine aircraft engine (the jet) quickly replaced the extremely complex, high maintenance multi cylinder reciprocating aircraft engines for heavy, fast and high aircraft, but lots of light aircraft are still piston powered. The piston engine is still undergoing development for some aircraft applications. 

      So I expect that IF the AQ in the hands of the early buyers lives up to its claimed capabilities, that serious beach gold hunters will adopt it quickly. When a new tool in the hands of early adopters proves to be superior at doing a specific job to the previous best tools for the job in question, those who are really serious about performance for economic or other reasons will adopt the new tool and stop using the old one. How many framing carpenters still use a hammer. Not many if the compressor/nail gun noise at any construction site is any guide. The framing hammer is not obsolete - it still works just fine - but for serious users the nail gun became “compelling”. 

      Time will tell how “compelling” the AQ will become for serious beach jewelry hunters.
       
    • By Steve Herschbach
      There is on-going field testing of the Fisher Impulse AQ in progress trying to improve the discrimination. This despite the machine getting ready to go to production at any moment.
      For those that do not know metal detector development never stops. It just gets to a point where it is good enough and you launch. Engineers can improve for eternity if you let them. This does raise a concern however. This machine is as far as I can tell using a new premise for what it does, and is obviously up against deadlines to get out the door. There is nothing here about internet update capability, and in fact it seems I recall somebody at FT saying there never would be such a feature on their machines. But given that nearly every serious platform released by FT sees software bugs and updates in the first year, including the recently released F-Pulse, the odds are this machine would benefit from an update once it gets into user hands and the inevitable bug is found. It really is a set up for having to mail machines back to be updated.
      I would like to be one of the first to jump on one of these but given the First Texas poor track record in this regard a lack of update facility does give me pause, especially in a detector that will likely be over $2000. I get a cheap detector having no update facility, but First Texas may end up regretting not putting the capability in this detector. Forget the unhappy customers - it costs the company money if it ends up having to physically reprocess every machine sold to perform some kind of software fix. In this day and age internet update capability is an expectation - every Nokta/Makro machine no matter the price has it, even the upcoming under $300 Simplex. I am a bit amazed that there is no mention of this capability on what appears to be the most expensive First Texas metal detector ever made. 
      Source thread at Dankowski Forum
      Fisher Impulse AQ Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Demonstration of how the new Fisher Impulse AQ handles non-ferrous items surrounded by or under ferrous trash. ZTS® "Zero Target Separation" 3/19/2019 Official Fisher video.
      Fisher Impulse AQ Detector Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZTS® "Zero Target Separation"
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Explanation of new coil mounting system on the new Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector. ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology" 3/19/2019 Official Fisher video.
      Fisher Impulse AQ Detector Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology"

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology" detail image
×
×
  • Create New...