| Author |
Message |
    
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 6823
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 9:25 am: | 
|
This Topic has been moved here from the Open Area of the Forum.
Lon
Tech808
CEF808
N9OSN |
Deer_hunter
New member
Username: Deer_hunter
Post Number: 6
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 9:02 am: |
|
Using Firestick with 18' coax on rear bumper mounted on Jeep Wrangler have SWR of 1.3. Antenna tip clears roof line less than one foot. Good, but I thought I would try 102" for the height advantage. SWR went to 2.5 or so. I tried a 21' coax and SWR went to 3.2.
Any thoughts or experience with this problem. |
Al_lafon
Member
Username: Al_lafon
Post Number: 72
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 10:11 am: |
|
Hello do you have a 6in spring with your 102
as it is 108 for a full 1/4 wave ant.Also what mount is in use here. |
Nobodyknows
Member
Username: Nobodyknows
Post Number: 78
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 10:35 am: |
|
Are you using that big spring between the mount and the 102 whip? My SWR's get to too high if i dont use the spring. |
Karatebutcher
Senior Member
Username: Karatebutcher
Post Number: 2043
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 11:01 am: |
|
Mine also, try the spring, Copper has them |
Hotwire
Intermediate Member
Username: Hotwire
Post Number: 496
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 11:37 am: |
|
I've had trouble with the 102 also. Even with the spring my SWR was at 2. Grounded everything too. Used the best materials I could afford. Bolted the mount to the vehicle. Tried all over the car. Now the roof was a bit better but not practical because of height. Some have been lucky enough to get a low swr 1.1-1.5 with a 102 ss whip. Cars today have less and less useful counterpoise. Now this is my personal OPINION....I believe it is almost 99% imposible to obtain a VSWR of below 2.0 with a stainless steel 102 inch whip. I suppose if the ss whip was at 2.o it would perform as well or better than say a Wilson type antenna with a lower SWR because of its overall size. Hey just some thoughts and I'm not stressing anything as a fact to anyone just opinions of course. Hope I could help. 73 |
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 258
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 12:24 pm: |
|
No, it is not impossible. It means you have *some* sort of unapparent ground issue. If you ever get hold of a 102" again, get some transformer wire ( 22 gauge)and wind 21 turns of wire around a 1/4" dowel. Take this little coil and attach one end to the feedpoint in series, the other end to nearby ground. It sounds like an impedance issue where your impedance is off for some reason. An antenna analyzer would be nice so you could measure the feedpoint impedance. It should at or very near 50 ohms at the feedpoint. Coax length has NOTHING to do with it (what the heck do you do with 18 feet of coax in a Jeep  ?).
Impedance is another way to express "ground". RF ground is not the same thing as DC ground! It CAN be, but often what RF sees into a given medium is not a "ground". So you can remedy the impedance issue with a small capacitor, a toroid, or a small coil as I have described.
There are THREE factors of impedance an antenna system must see: FEEDPOINT impedance, COIL resistance (if any), and RADIATION resistance. We can't do much about radiation resistance as it is usually a matter of the material the antenna is made of and the air (medium) the antenna (whip) itself. So, in the case of the whip say your feedpoint resistance is 35 ohms and the radiation resistance is 5 ohms. By inserting the correct capacitance, and/or resistance at the feedpoint we can RAISE the impedance of the SYSTEM to 50 ohms! The radio wants to "see" a 50 ohm load; it doesn't CARE where it gets it from. In this case we need 10 ohms, or thereabouts, to get this. So we can wind a little coil and put it at the FEEDPOINT to raise the value. The coil is easier as you can add or remove turns to achieve the right impedance.
So I betcha you can get a whip to work!~ ;)
73 |
Vtwinn
Member
Username: Vtwinn
Post Number: 73
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 1:28 pm: |
|
I just put a 102" whip on my jeep and had the same problem above 3 on all channels, grounded everything and still the same. I added a spring and a 6" shaft from a wilson 2000 with a coupling nut and 1.3-1.5 on the Mfj ant. analizer and just below 2 on the 7 other bands, I think I am happy with that, Oh forgot to mention I bolted the one side of a trucker mount to the bumper on the left side of the jeep.
Bob CEF544 |
Karls357
New member
Username: Karls357
Post Number: 2
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 2:24 pm: |
|
a buddy of mine was talking about a cb radio that scans the channels does any one know of this model and brand , and are they any good? thank you karl |
Hollowpoint445
Advanced Member
Username: Hollowpoint445
Post Number: 701
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 3:09 pm: |
|
It sounds like you're having the same problem that lots of people have with 102" whips - there's a fair amount of metal in parallel with the whip causing a matching problem. Mount it high on the body - not on the bumper or tire rack. A ball mount and spring mounted on the side near the rear will probably be your best bet and (I think) looks really good on a Jeep.
Rover - There's virtually no way the feedpoint impedance is going to be 50 ohms with a 102" whip unless it's used as a base antenna with drooping radials. The feedpoint impedance of my 102" whip was more like 36 ohms - I forget the complex numbers - sorry. It was mounted on the roof with a ball mount and 6" spring and easily worked on 10 and 11 meters. |
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 259
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 4:50 pm: |
|
Um, isn't THAT what I said? Isn't THAT what I said-that it could be RAISED with a little coil or a cap? Didn't I SAY 35 Ohms? I thought that was what we were trying to achieve--a match? And, yes, having a lot of the whip next to the body DOES negatively affect the antenna. BUT if you will experiment with the little coil, it CAN be at or near 50 ohms. You may have to lengthen or shorten it, but it WILL work! You can even get a pocketful of "lily pad" capacitors and experiment with the values.
Check out a Hi Q HF antenna. The impedance of it will be around 17 ohms! Using the principles outlined above as to antenna impedance, you can bring the impedance up to 50 ohms with the devices described. Perhaps an antenna CAN'T be roof-mounted or it MUST be on the side. But I stand by my theories. (See "40 + 5 Years of HF Mobile" by Don Johnson, W6AAQ) And, yes, impedance issues CAN sometimes be solved with matching solutions like the little coils!
|
Hollowpoint445
Advanced Member
Username: Hollowpoint445
Post Number: 703
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 6:28 pm: |
|
Calm down Rover - I wasn't trying to bust your chops - I was making a point about the numbers you chose and your solution to the problem. The feedpoint impedance would be about 36 ohms if it was mounted in the center of the roof like mine was. With the capacitance of parallel metal it wouldn't be 35 ohms - it would be lower, but never having mounted an antenna in that manner I can't say how much. It would be low enough that I would worry about blowing the final transistors of my radio though.
Adding a coil of the appropriate value certainly would match the antenna - inductance to counter the capacitance - but the efficiency would still be poor because of the parallel metal. The feedpoint is the lowest impedance point on a 102" whip and as such is where the most signal is radiated. That signal would be lost to the parallel metal.
Moving the antenna to a better location would be the best choice. If that's not an option then choosing an adjustable top loaded fiberglass whip would be preferable. Because of the top load the impedance would be low right up to the loaded portion of the whip which hopefully would be much higher than the parallel metal. Maybe that's why they're so popular among truck drivers and pick up owners? |
Deer_hunter
New member
Username: Deer_hunter
Post Number: 7
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 6:47 pm: |
|
Thanks for all of your help. Yes, I have been using the 6" spring from the beginning. The mount is a flat bar to rear bumper at bumper support. The only thing I changed was from the Firestick(excellent SWR) to the 102"w/spring. I will work with your ideas. Yes, 18' or 21' of coax is lot in a Jeep, but a CB shop said I needed the 21' w/the 102". I am thinking of trying shorter than 18'. When I went from 18'to 21' the SWR increased. At least some of you had trouble so at least it is'nt just my ignorance of all the technical aspects. |
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 260
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 8:32 pm: |
|
Hollowpoint, agreed on all but 1 thing. The DC current would be the highest at the feedpoint, the highest RF voltage would be at the top. To prove it, measure the currents/RF at the ends of a dipole and at the feedpoint. If the most radiation occured at the feedpoint, then we wouldn't need the rest of the whip! LOL!
|
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 261
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 8:43 pm: |
|
All you are doing fiddling with "coax length" is fooling your meter! Your trouble is not with the coax and antennas are not resonated by the coax length, but by adding and or subtracting length of the whip or adding/reducing turns in the loading coil (if there is one)--such as with the spring.
I suspect, and agree with Hollowpoint, that your problem is caused by proximity of the whip to the body thus "shielding" part of the antenna, AND causing a higher SWR. This will apply to any antenna. (How many of you have seen a base-loaded coil on the bumper of a car? Makes ya wonder why they didn't notice *something* was wrong!
The other trouble can be with grounding and the impedance issue. I would try to move the antenna somewhere else. |
Kid_vicious
Advanced Member
Username: Kid_vicious
Post Number: 525
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 10:41 pm: |
|
deer hunter, NEVER, EVER, EVER let that CB shop work on your radios. if the tech told you that you needed a certain length of coax with a 102" whip and didnt tell you to NEVER MOUNT AN ANTENNA ON YOUR BUMPER, then he does not know what he is talking about and he will break your radios.
i have read the above posts (arguments) and they are neglecting to tell you that the only reason you had a good SWR (not actually an efficient antenna) is because firestik knows that their antennas are not resonant at 27 mhz without using a certain length of coax. what they dont tell you is that "if changing the coax length changes your SWR, then you most surely have a non resonant antenna and the coax is actually radiating some of the signal itself". the whole point of using coax cable instead of just a piece of wire is that the coax DOES NOT radiate any of the signal.
if mounted properly, a 102" whip with the spring will have an SWR of 1.5 to 1 or better. i have never seen a 102" whip that was installed correctly have an SWR higher than that.
you are not going to get that or any other antenna to work well mounted on the bumper.
be mad at me all you want, but it's the same old story. "i want great performance, but i dont want a big ugly antenna sticking up on top of my vehicle." too bad. the laws of physics have not changed and you need to mount any antenna so that barely any of the antenna is below the top of the vehicle.
do not add the coil as suggested. that will only fool your radio into thinking that you have a good antenna. it will not make you get out any further!
if all of this seems to be too much bother, just go buy a wilson 1000 magnet mount and be done with it. |
Deer_hunter
New member
Username: Deer_hunter
Post Number: 8
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2005 - 7:34 am: |
|
Kid vicious, thanks for information. Hey, I am not mad or why should I be? I am thankful for people much more knowledgeable than I am willing to take their time and share their knowledge. I know very little about the technical aspects that is why I have to ask probably dumd sounding questions to long time radio users. Thanks for heads up on the CB shop. It does seem that if he was unaware of such an obvious error than what else does he not know? With a Jeep Wrangler with fiberglass hard top I do not envision any other way to mount 102" on roof unless I install a luggage rack. I have a Wilson 1000, will try it. It worked great on my truck roof but had to go to a Lil Wil for clearance purposes. |
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 262
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2005 - 6:46 pm: |
|
All agreed--except for the "no coil" thing. As Hollowpoint said, I suspect that the proximity of your whip and bumper mount IS a lot of the problem. Now, normally, the higher you go in frequency (we are talking about HF here)the higher the natural impedance of your antenna will be. Hollowpoint already pointed out that that natural impedance is going to around 35-36 ohms.
Antenna length and proper matching is still an issue. Adding impedance is NOT a function of "getting out"; it's a known factor. If the impedance of the antenna is off, the antenna will exhibit a high SWR. *SOME* antennas will show around 50 ohms right out of the box, and often CB antennas will do that. However, this thing about 50 ohm feedpoint impedance is rarely mentioned in the CB world and little understood. I suppose that is where that "coax length" thing came from. In normal conditions, 1 foot, 6 foot, 11 foot--whatever floats yer boat works because it simply has very little to do with it! If your feedpoint
impedance is off, it STILL will not work and you will still wonder why your SWR is off. One of the best instruments around today is the MFJ 259B
antenna analyzer which will tell you exactly what your antenna is doing.
Another way to mount your whip would be a ball mount on the side (left). I know, I know, people cringe when you suggest drilling holes in a vehicle, but these days an antenna mount doesn't even cause a wink, much less shock. It will not hurt the value of your Jeep. In fact, it *may* be an asset to a hard-core Jeepster! BTW, I have a '51 Willys M38 Military Jeep that I plan to restore back to military livery. |
Hollowpoint445
Advanced Member
Username: Hollowpoint445
Post Number: 709
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2005 - 7:13 pm: |
|
I agree - a ball mount on a Jeep isn't detrimental to it's value, it's probably an enhancement for anyone who actually uses a Jeep for anything more than a commuter car. |
Kid_vicious
Advanced Member
Username: Kid_vicious
Post Number: 531
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2005 - 11:40 pm: |
|
knowing that its a fiberglass hard top; i guess the mag mount wont work too well.
do you have a spare tire on the back of your jeep?
if so, you can probably find a mount that will attatch to it. make sure you grind off the paint, and run a ground strap to the vehicle body.
you'd be surprised what a well greased hinge can do as far as ruining your ground.
rover, nice jeep! i want one!
matt |
Vtwinn
Member
Username: Vtwinn
Post Number: 74
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
I will try to get some pics of my mount, it works great, One side of a mirror mount bolted to the bumper with a ground braid running to the body underneath the jeep. 102" whip with a 6" shaft and a 6" spring, 1.3swr.
Bob. |
Rover
Intermediate Member
Username: Rover
Post Number: 265
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 10:42 am: |
|
Kid Vicious,
Go to this website: www.g503.com. It is devoted to Jeeps of all sorts--especialy the military ones!
73 |
Deer_hunter
New member
Username: Deer_hunter
Post Number: 9
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:57 pm: |
|
Hey Vtwinn and Kid Vicious,
Of the various ideas posted I thought I would try modifying your bumper mount idea. Also keeping Kid Vicious's idea in mind about mounting high. Not yet being mentally ready to drill holes into my Jeep body I mounted a piece of angle iron on the bottom of the left rear bumper with the end even with my tires(12.5x33). I then bolted at 90 degrees a piece of angle iron long enough to bring it even with the body/top(Kid Vicious height idea). Then mounted 102w/spring-SWR went crazy high. Reduced vertical piece to 6", improved SWR(1.6). Removed vetical piece and mounted ant. bracket to piece at same height as bumper. Antenna height is shorter as a result but the SWR is 1.2. Do you know of a material I can use to give more height without pushing my SWR but up to unacceptable limits? Would a non-metal vertical support with proper grounding be okay? |
Kid_vicious
Advanced Member
Username: Kid_vicious
Post Number: 538
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 9:35 pm: |
|
congratulations deer hunter, you did it!
yo do not need to get that antenna up any higher.
if your SWR is 1.2 then it's going to perform great!
i know you want to get the base of the antenna higher; (good for you!) BUT, let me tell you a little story.
when i got an aluminum truck bed tool box for my f250, i had dreams of putting mast mounts on the box, and putting a four foot mast on the mounts, then i would use a luggage rack mount (the angle iron looking one) on the top of the mast. this would put the base of my 102" whip right at the top of my truck. i had everything grounded really well, but my SWR was almost 3 on every channel. i mounted the luggage rack mount to the side of the truck box, and it came down to 1.3 on all 40 channels.
the moral of the story is: you cant have the antenna base too low, but too high is just as bad.
the way you have it now is perfect!
happy DX-ing.
matt |
Deer_hunter
Junior Member
Username: Deer_hunter
Post Number: 10
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 10:21 pm: |
|
Kid vicious,
Thanks for your congratulations. Have not checked all the 40 CB channels but so far everything is 1.2 or so, some even look like 1.1! . Now the antenna sits about 6" out from the corner and side of the body. Using two flat washers per bolt on bottom two ant. bracket bolts I have a slight forward leaning whip but on the road it is not bent rearward as much.
Question: I have never owned/used a CB radio w/sideband. If you must tune in a freq. how do you do that if there is no freq. counter? Some radios have counters built in, some have a plug for an add-on and some have neither. I have a lot to learn but this forum and its many memebers who are knowledgeable and willing to share is a huge benefit. Thanks. |
Sarge
Junior Member
Username: Sarge
Post Number: 25
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 7:42 pm: |
|
On a stock CB radio the frequency is preset by the channel selector (similar to tuning your TV set). You just select the desired CB channel and the desired sideband (upper or lower). The only tuning involved is a receive-only function. You adjust the "clarifier" control for the best voice clarity of the station you are listening to. You will never achieve the same clarity on SSB as you would with AM, but the signal requires less bandwidth and you can transmit with 12-watts of power in SSB mode instead of only 4-watts with an AM-only CB radio.
It doesn't matter which sideband you use. Some areas have folks on the lower sideband (LSB) and other areas use the upper sideband (USB). You just have to listen and see where they are. If you can't clarify a person's voice on LSB, chances are they are on USB. Switch to USB and adjust the clarifier control again. It all depends on what sideband people in the area feel like using.
Commonly used Single Sideband (SSB) channels are 16 and 36-40. Channels 16 and 36 were commonly used as calling channels. Stations would monitor the calling channel, then move to another channel after establishing contact if the conversation was going to be lengthy.
Someone monitoring CB channel 36 on lower sideband would write that as "36L" on their QSL card or other correspondence. They might say on the air that they were monitoring the "lower side of channel 36".
Because the channel frequencies are the same, there are no adjustments needed for your antenna. An antenna tuned for the CB channels will work fine regardless of the mode of transmission (AM or SSB).
The Export CB radios with "extra channels" also use a simple channel selector. A "band" switch lets you select from 40 channels in different ranges. Most band switches are labeled with letters for the different positions. So position "A" gives you 40 channels, then you switch to position "B" for another 40 channels. But you have to carry a reference card with you at all times to know what frequency each channel actually is when operating outside of the regular 40 channels (unless the radio also has a built-in frequency counter).
Under the "TOOLS" heading to the left of this screen is a "Frequency Chart" for the "export" CB radios that shows the typical frequencies selected by the various band switch positions. Band "G" gives you the 40 CB channels.
But that's the basics on Single Sideband (SSB). It gives you more bang for the buck in the form of increased power output and range. Fun Stuff! |
Beeker7104
Junior Member
Username: Beeker7104
Post Number: 44
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 1:21 pm: |
|
I myself in the past has had difficulty with the SS whips. most of my problem was not centering the "centerload" of the mount properly. I was basically grounding the antenna as a whole. but you learn from mistakes. the length of the coax shouldn't be a factor(coax characteristics do not change) Grounds however do change....Especially on rusty automobiles(like one of mine) I've gone as far as grounding everything on my car to get a proper ground. Double ground the antenna,the doors, hood,trunk,making sure radio is grounded not only to the neg. on the battery but to the frame as well. I don't get the high SWR readings anymore. now I keep a constant 1.1:1 ratio. (I am using 12feet of the "mini8" for my coax with gold plated PL259's) |
Hollowpoint445
Advanced Member
Username: Hollowpoint445
Post Number: 849
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 7:08 pm: |
|
Deer_hunter - You don't need a frequency counter because you are adjusting the clarifier to someone's voice making it sound clear. The clarifier only varies the frequency range about 3 KHz in stock form. Even if both radios are off frequency you still hear the person's voice and with a little experience you can tell which way you need to move the clarifier to tune them.
About the only reason I can think of to use a frequency counter is to go between channels to the 0 KHz frequencies. Even then you're just using the counter to get close, and then adjust the frequency so the voice sound best.
Once you use one it'll make much more sense. |
Hollowpoint445
Advanced Member
Username: Hollowpoint445
Post Number: 851
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 9:44 pm: |
|
"You will never achieve the same clarity on SSB as you would with AM"
I disagree. Because of the tighter filters there might be a little loss of the higher audio frequencies, but it can and should sound as clear as an AM signal if the radios are frequency stable and you can use the clarifier control properly.
I'd suggest you back down the range of your clarifier if it's range has been expanded, add a second pot in series as a fine tune control, or change the clarifier's single turn pot to a multi-turn pot to gain more control. Lots of people who never liked SSB suddenly loved it when the Cobra 2000 came along with it's dual clarifier controls. It took a lot less finesse to use.
Other notes about SSB:
Most CBers use LSB, but occasionally you'll hear some USB.
38 LSB is the defacto calling frequency.
SSBers don't particularly like echo, roger beeps, noise toys or anything else that gets in the way of communication.
Because of the advantage of tight filtering and 12 watts PEP in only one sideband, you would have to operate an AM radio at nearly 100 watts to have the same kind of operating range.
|
Freebird
Intermediate Member
Username: Freebird
Post Number: 309
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 - 1:42 am: |
|
I guess I'm lucky I put my 102" steel whip on a trucker mirror mount with no spring and got a 1.1 swr from 26 up to 27.905 anything over that it goes to 1.3.I never liked that big spring it makes the 102" whip bend backwards on the highway.Sure do hit lots of low branches with it too.LOL |
Kid_vicious
Advanced Member
Username: Kid_vicious
Post Number: 847
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2005 - 12:31 am: |
|
freebird, the spring is not an "option" that you can choose to use if needed or not. a 102" whip is designed to work with that exact spring. if you were to bend the spring open, you would see a thick copper strap inside. this strap provides the additional length needed to make a true quarter wave antenna.
also, achieving a 1.1 to 1 SWR with a 102" whip is pretty much impossible, since a quarter wave radiator over a perfect groundplane will have an impedence of about 30 ohms. do the math and you will see this equals out to a 1.5 to 1 SWR. (i think i remember this correctly)
judging by this, and your other response about the 102" whip on an antron; im starting to think you need a new SWR meter!
matt |
Marconi
Intermediate Member
Username: Marconi
Post Number: 485
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2005 - 6:01 am: |
|
Have we all forgotten that on a resonant antenna system that does not show a perfect resistive match, we will at some point on the line find a point where we might place a meter that may in fact show a perfect SWR. That is if we are lucky or we trim to that point.
That ain't foolin the meter, that is just what the meter sees at that point in the line due to the mismatch present. It sure don't hurt the TX'r if located at such a point in the line, but any mismatch there is still remains in the system. Isn't this sort of like using a tuner where we fix the TX'r end of the line, but do nothing about the antenna end.
Test for this is, if you change the length of that feedline the SWR will likely change, or try placing the meter at any other point, a different spot on the line. If the line is long enough, then you could have several good spots and many bad spots. Only salvation here is we don't have a real bad match if the mobile installation is good otherwise.
If the feed point were fully resistive at 50 ohms somehow and matched to resonance by some addition of length for 11 meters, then we would likely not see any change when moving the meter around. Isn't this what our friend Rover is talking about, fixing the real problem?
Marconi |
