beachrumbum
Senior Member
I dig it - your description of how it resembles the TDI in its general function is sound - but you missed a big variable, so here goes.
Alexandre has tested the AQ extensively against all existing PI detectors and has stated that the AQ will operate at 7mS in the same environment where the TDI has problems at 10mS.
How can that be? Easy - they are not the same machines. The AQ benefits from 10 years of development STARTING from where Eric Foster left off on the Goldquest series (the TDI is a Foster Goldquest with minor modifications.
The laws of physics don’t dictate how few microseconds of delay will function in a certain environment in ALL detectors. That would be like saying that because a Toyota Corolla an only go 30mph on a certain bad road that a Toyota Land Cruiser is likewise only ale to go 30mph.
I don’t expect you to take my word on this — I take Alexandre’s because I know and trust him even though I have had no opportunity to verify this in salt water with and AQ and a TDI, because I know he has done so.
Once this plague runs its course, the AQ will reach market. Then folks the likes of OBN will use it and tell us all his verdict on things like this. Till then I will continue to work to deepen my understanding of PI’s and the AQ and might occasionally post something about it.
The AQ is not the introduction of breakthrough technology - like the GPZ was. It is the product of the steady and effective refinement of established principles for the design of a ground balancing PI detector using two channels with sequenced sampling times. Operation principle - old hat - actual performance totally new - based on continuous improvement an several key innovations in how the signals are processed
Rick, I have to say I respect this answer. It appears to be an honest and well worded description of the detectors functions. This is actually more about the machine than I have heard in this entire thread.