4/15/20 Report - 1944 Metal Detecting Experiences. Keeping Detecting Records. Using Statistics.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Illustration From 295 Combat Engineer Battalion History.

If you want to really learn history, one of the best things to do is research your own family.  You'll be surprised by the stories you'll find.

Here is how the young men of America were using metal detectors in 1944, as described in the history of the 295th Combat Engineer Battalion.

July, 1944. Normandy Campaign.   We didn't have much time to step back and admire that road.  There was too much to be done.  The Krauts had done their spring sowing early and well.  Mines were everywhere.  There were mines in roads, around roads, under dead cattle, and under dead doughboys.  We had to clear them.  

There's nothing quite so nerve-wracking as mine clearance.  One man walks along waving his mine-detector in the area before him.... suddenly the electric impulse from the apparatus detects something metallic lying in the ground.  A second man, walking in the footsteps of the first, cautiously digs his bayonet into the ground, feeling for the mine.  We must be very careful not to dig too hard.  

The mine is then uncovered and either de-activated or removed, or else blown where it lies.  There are booby traps to add to the discomfort and fear.  The krauts had lots of new tricks and ways to kill, but we were careful, and we had learned our lessons well in training.

It wouldn't have been so bad if there were always mines where the detector picked up something, but there would be days when only pieces of shrapnel were found, and days when miles of sweeping was accomplished, with nothing found at all.  The temptation to rush and become a little careless was always present.  Then we would hear stories of men who had rushed and we became careful again.  We swept mile after mile of road, scores of fields, and myriads of twisting footpaths.

There was a stretch of road near Villieres-Fossard which had been swept previously by three other engineer units and it was reported that vehicles were still hitting mines there, a  half-track being the most recent casualty.  "B" Company swept it and studied the pattern as reported by mines found in previous attempts at clearance.  They found three French mines and one German Tellermine still there.  The shrapnel was so thick in this sector that they still couldn't pronounce it cleared with assurance, so they got a bulldozer in there and cut off several inches of road surface and sept it again, then pronounced it cleared.  No more vehicles hit mines in that area.

Here is the link for more history on the 295 Combat Enigneer Batallion.

http://lct376.org/us295th/

And you complain about trash!

The young men of America, from coal mines, farms and city streets, went to foreign lands and saw unspeakable things nearly 76 years ago.  Many never mentioned them again when they came back home.

My father was clearing mines too, but from a minesweeper.

Thanks to my wife's research skills and patience, I've been lucky learn many interesting family stories, such as the one above and more.  They include Indian scouts, Revolutionary War battles, Civil War battles, and some very colorful stories that I might present some other time.

I tell you that to encourage you to research your family history.  While locked down in your house, besides developing comorbidities that put you at higher risk to COVID-19 as a result of the enforced sedentary lifestyle, you might as well do a little research.  You might also get some good clues for metal detecting sites.

---

Data can be useful.  I highly recommend keeping data on your ventures.  I was lucky to find some of my earliest records on my metal detecting finds.  Below is one page of that.

My Records of My First Metal Detecting Outings.

Having been a researcher before starting metal detecting and having a natural inclination to observe, collect data and analyze things, I started keeping records right off the bat.

I think this is my second page after I began metal detecting.  Here is what I found.

On 9/26, near the beginning of the entries I had $7.53 total face value of coin finds, and on the back of the page the last row shows that by 1/3 I had found a total of 2653 coins with a total face value of $197.48.  including 432 quarters, 622 dimes, 300 nickles and 1299 pennies.  Dollar coins and halves were not included in the total value (because of their relative rarity).  Foreign coins were recorded by not counted.  Jewelry was recorded too.  I see some Susan Anthony dollar finds, for example. The math seems to be off by less than a dollar.
As I said, I recorded the number of coins from each decade for each denomination.  Most of the hunts resulted in coins from the 60s, 70s, and 80s.  As I scan the records, I see that the first time I got many coins from the 20s, 30s and 40s was when I made a trip to Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

My record keeping evolved, and I learned things such as which sites produced the most coins and gold, the average time in the field it took to find a gold ring, how many coins I would find relative to each gold ring, the relative number of coins and rings found in the water as compared to land, which sites were most productive on average, etc.

Those records were from my time in South Florida.  Results on the Treasure Coast these days would be different.

For more on assessing the relative profitability of different detecting sites see my 1/11/19 post.

https://treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com/2019/01/11119-report-few-important-facts-about.html

---

It seems I was not clear, so I went back and modified the following.  I added underlining and additional comments.  The recently added comments are in square brackets.

General impressions are fine some of the time, but statistics can reveal a lot if the data collection techniques are valid and reliable.

I found an interesting article entitled, Let’s Visualize State-by-State Shutdown Effectiveness on COVID-19.  It is not in a peer reviewed journal, and I am not saying that the data or conclusions are valid, but the study does ask the type of question that needs to be asked, and attempts to address that question with statistics.

[So why do I present this study if the conclusions are not the point?  One reason: The study gives an example of the type of researchable question that could be addressed with real data, which is what I'd like to see done.]

Here is a short excerpt from the article to give you the idea.

I graphed the projected total deaths (past and future) using the IHME model versus how long it took a State to shut down from the time it started seeing people dying (when it reached 0.5 deaths per million).

[Notice that the study uses projected total deaths, not actual death statistics.   My point is that important questions can be addressed by using real data, although, as I've expressed before, I also have reservations about how cause of death is being coded.]

One would expect that the faster a State shuts down, the less deaths it would incur, but that’s surprisingly not what we find. There is virtually zero correlation between speed of shut down and expected death totals.

[Again, the conclusions were reached using projected death statistics, not actual real world data.  I'd like to see important research questions addressed using real data.]

Here is the link if you are interested.

https://medium.com/@yinonweiss/lets-visualize-state-by-state-shutdown-effectiveness-on-covid-19-e13a5cdb50ad

Again, I have not really looked at this research thoroughly yet, and I am not saying that it is valid (in fact I can think of one confounding factor right off the top of my head) but the study does suggest that statistical techniques can be used to inform significant real world decisions.

In metal detecting or other more serious business, you'll do better if you collect valid data rather than go on general impressions.  If you are open minded, you might be surprised by what the numbers actually tell you.

---

Thursday evening there will be a short period of seven or eight foot surf and ENE winds.  That might be interesting.

The tides are small.

Happy hunting,
Treasureguide@comcast.netr

4/15/15 Report - Different Detectors For Different Beach Hunting Jobs. Rosie and Merc.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.BlogSpot.com.

Two Silver Dimes With Different Patinas.

Before I start my main topic for today, here are two dimes with different patinas.  The Rosie is a 1963 that was graded by a coin dealer as proof.  The Merc is a 1944 and was graded AU.

The Rosie has a lot of lustre.  The Merc is more the color that you might expect, but the surface is duller.

Under magnification you can see that the bluish color on the Rosie is a very thin coating that has not affected the sharpness of the coin's details.   Both have been stored in a plastic coin holder for a good twenty plus years.

Just an example.  Now on with my main topic for today.

-----

Yesterday I began a comparison of three different types of metal detectors that could be used for beach hunting, but I only got the first done.  Today I'll get to the other two.

The purpose of talking about these three detectors isn't so much about the three specific detectors, it is more about how different types of detectors have different strengths and weaknesses and about how strategic decisions of detector selection should be made.  This discussion is therefore not a detailed analysis of each of the detectors or a analysis of depth or performance, but rather more of a discussion of features and how those features help determine how different types of detectors might be used strategically.

I started with the Ace 250 yesterday, which is a detector that would be a decent choice if and when the strategy is to quickly sift through dry sand for modern coins and jewelry, especially when there is some junk.  The disadvantage of the small stock coil on the Ace is compensated by the ability to quickly pinpoint and identify targets and the ability to hunt close to metal obstacles such as beach chairs.

The Excalibur is used by many Treasure Coast beach hunters who tend to be more oriented to old shipwreck items.  Treasure Coast beach hunters, as contrasted with South Florida beach hunters, tend to focus more on targeting old shipwreck items and generally hunt less crowded beaches that are visited by more conservative beach-goers.

The Excalibur, of course, costs about four or five times what the Ace costs.  The Excalibur is water proof and can be submerged for water hunting.   That makes it more versatile.  If you want similar performance at half the price and don't need a waterproof detector, the Minelab Sovereign would do about the same job while costing less.

Unlike the Ace, the Excalibur has simple linear discrimination.  One discrimination knob is used for discrimination and another for sensitivity.

The Excalibur is simple to operate.  There is no ground balancing.  It performs about equally well in dry sand, wet sand and under water.  It will do a good job almost anywhere on a Florida beach.  You can start in wet sand and decide to scan a little dry sand or go into the water and dive with it. That is all good and easy.  You can discriminate but even with no discrimination, the Excalibur is not as hot for iron as some detectors.

The biggest difficulty that I see with the Excalibur is with the casual detectorist who tries to use the Excalibur in the wet sand in motion mode.  The less experienced detectorists can find detecting difficult where the water is coming and going.

I once had a guy come up to me and ask me what settings I was using because he saw me working the wet sand where the water was moving in and out and he was trying to do the same and was having trouble.   The main difference was that he was working in the motion mode and hadn't made any other adjustments, while I was using the pinpoint mode, as I almost always do with the Excalibur.

Anyhow, the Excalibur is a good sturdy general-purpose detector with some discrimination that has a good response to gold and small targets such as small cobs or small gold rings.  If you are hunting shipwreck items in wet sand, it is an easy choice over the Ace, whereas if you are hunting the dry sand, the Ace might be the best choice in some situations.  The Ace is also much lighter to swing on dry land.

While the Excalibur is used by many on the Treasure Coast, the Minelab CTX 3030 is very prominent on South Florida beaches.  The CTX costs about twice as much as an Excalibur.

The CTX has a lot more features and settings than the Excalibur, including a screen for target ID, various program selection, GPS, etc.  Instead of a few knobs, the CTX provides a lot of flexibility and options.

South Florida beaches have a lot more valuable modern jewelry and that is what the hard-core guys down there focus on most of the time.   It is also easier to justify the additional cost of a more expensive detector in South Florida where you can hunt in the water more of the year and where there is a lot more expensive jewelry to be found.  The additional expense can often be paid off by a single find.

I mention the relative prominence of the Excalibur on the Treasure Coast as compared to the CTX in South Florida only to point out how situations affect detector selection.

The third detector that I want to discuss is the Garrett ATX.  The ATX is often used in the gold fields and has good sensitivity to small gold.  The cost of the Garrett ATX (just over $2000) is close to that of the Minelab CTX.

The ATX is very different from the Ace, the Excalibur and the CTX, which I just discussed in passing.

I've discussed the ATX some in recent posts.  The keep it short, the ATX is a not the easiest detector to use straight out of the box - at least not if you want to be absolutely sure that you are getting good performance from it.

The ATX is a Pulse Induction detector and is very sensitive to small iron.  If you are someone who likes using a lot of discrimination, the ATX is not for you. The Excalibur is not overly sensitive to iron, but the ATX is very sensitive to iron.  Yes the ATX offers discrimination, but if you use much of it, you will really reduce sensitivity to good low conductive targets and negate the very features you paid for.

The ATX has both a non-motion and motion mode.  The non-motion mode is the most sensitive, but also the most difficult to use.  Even the manual states that the non-motion mode is not for beginners.

To get near optimal performance out of an ATX requires experience and skill.  If you want maximum sensitivity and depth, which is considerable with the ATX, you need to get the settings right.

So when would you use the ATX on a beach or in the shallow water?  My answer is, When you want the best depth on small valuable targets and have the patience and skill to deal with junk.  

The ATX will detect near microscopic pieces of iron, but it also gives you good sensitivity to small gold.  It will detect a small gold ring deeper than it will detect a clad dime. You will get good depth on small gold IF you use the ATX well.

There are a lot of options and settings on the ATX.   Careful adjustment and proper use will pay off in good performance.

There are times when the ACE, costing around $250, would be the better choice than the ATX, which costs about ten times as much.  The ACE might well be the choice in dry sand when you want to quickly skim for modern finds, as one example.

This post is not about three or four detectors.  It is about making calculated strategic decisions based upon how features of different detectors match the circumstances and your goals.

----

Odyssey Marine Explorations stock has really fallen off as they are being sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

-----

On the Treasure Coast we have another couple of days of smooth surf and South winds.  Nothing new or exciting about that.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@Comcast.net