CPM Forum
Special => Insert & Replacement Notes => Topic started by: Roberto on May 02, 2007, 11:58:04 am
-
colectionnor to prepare your money, its is expensive
IS 15 RANGES INSERT OF AOH :'(
SHEET REPLACEMENS
AOH 1.120-1.200
AOH 1.320-1.360
AOH 5.760-5.800
AOH 5.960-6.000
AOH 9.240-9.280
AOH 9.440-9.560
AOH 9.840-9.920
SINGLE NOTE REPLACEMENTS
AOH 1.083-1.086
AOH 5.709-7.710
AOH 5.730-5.731
AOH 9.387-9.388
AOH 9.496-9.497
AOH 9.499-9.500
AOH 9.540-9.541
AOH 9.549-9.550
AOH 9.639-9.640
AOH 9.657-9.658
-
Correction to AOH 9.440 - 9.560 , should be AOH 9.440 - 9.480.
-
SORRY Dr.Bill
Look the list wiki.bwjm
AOH 2006 9.440M - 9.560M Confirmed Insert Range
http://wiki.bwjm.ca/index.php?title=Canadian_Journey_Series_2006_%245_Jenkins/Dodge_Notes
Roberto
-
Before this gets any further:
The Wiki has the correct info, up to date as of Thursday.
-
According to this list, how the "single inserts" AOH 9.499-9.500; AOH 9.540-9.541 and AOH 9.549-9.550 can be included in the "sheet inserts" AOH 9.440-9.560 M" range ??? ??? ??? How on the earth one can tell which is which in that case? I don't understand the logic... :-[ :P ??? :(
-
The Wiki site has not been updated yet with the latest replacement ranges.
Think about it, it is not possible for single note replacements to fall within sheet replacement ranges. Therefore, single note replacements can not be included in sheet replacement ranges.
-
Dr. Bill is correct.
A direct quote from Gilles as per phone call Thursday afternoon.
A SINGLE NOTE replacement range CANNOT lie within the boundaries of a sheet replacement range.
This is also proven with the matrices.
Second, I look at the wiki, and it is not updated in full yet. WHY? There is a correction letter coming out from Gilles. BWJM may be waiting for that to arrive so he can do it all at once.
I assure you that it will all shake out in the next few days as the proper letters reach the proper people. Gilles has reviewed his data, and HOW the notes were found.
Please be patient. The letter he said would be going out Friday or Monday (tomorrow) latest. Like I said, there are corrections - addressing EXACTLY your concerns.
Until then, the May list from Gilles stands, aside from BEY replacements and ALK replacements, which have been corrected on WIKI, as per proper procedure, (BWJM getting word directly from Gilles in a 3 way phone call which I was also a part of).
Until then, please be patient. The single note replacements crossing into the sheet replacements is a non-issue.
-
its fact 50 years that them singles notes renplacement exists
-
Roberto,
Where do those 17 ranges you've posted come from? I only see 4 ranges listed on WIKI
Anyone?
moneycow
-
Craig,
I just emailed you the most up to date and accurate listing of all confirmed Journey note sheet and single note replacement (SNR) ranges.
Wiki will be updated shortly with this info.
...Arthur
-
Thank you Arthur, much appreciated. I'll check my email when I get home tomorrow. What is the source of that information. Newest CPMS newsletter?
Craig
-
Directly from the confirmation source for all Journey inserts i.e. Gilles Pomerleau.
This information will most likely appear in the next published CPMS newsletter as well.
-
The statement that "Single note replacements can not fall within a sheet replacement range" is based on a very large assumption.
The assumption that a ream set aside as replacements is used entirely as sheets or is entirely cut into bricks, is not necessarily the case.
I can visualize a ream set aside as replacements being partially used as sheet replacements and the remainder being cut and used as single note replacements.
In my opinion, single note replacements found within an established range of inserts are merrily part of the broader range.
To disallow inserts to fit the quoted statement is a disservice to the hobby.
Other matters are currently taking my attention and time, but I shall address this topic again once I get the time to go through a large brick data base gathered from a number of brick searchers.
JWS
-
we do not know it, we are not there. ??? ??? ??? ???
-
The statement that "Single note replacements can not fall within a sheet replacement range" is based on a very large assumption.
The assumption that a ream set aside as replacements is used entirely as sheets or is entirely cut into bricks, is not necessarily the case.
There is a slim possibility, but thats why we need the hard evidence.
This assumption is based on the fact that if you use the 000 sheet as a replacement, then each and every sister brick is now missing a single note. Here are the possibilities:
a) That missing note would have to be replaced from somewhere somehow (putting replacement notes into replacement notes - yikes), or
b) Each brick which is missing that sheet, also has the rest of that brick's sheets designated as replacements (sheet or single)
From what I understand, the evidence found points to b, and in sheets.
Suppose:
I find wxyz120-126 in my brick, you find wxyz225-226 in your brick, and Mr X. finds wxyz662 in his brick, and Mr. Y finds wxyz855-870 in his brick.
In this example, each finding would be from bricks that come from different reams (thus each "regular brick showing different replacement needs).
I think the point I was making is: as soon as a sheet is used as a replacement from the "replacement ream" then there can only be a maximum of 999 consecutive serial numbers (repeated 39 more times).
We have no concluding evidence of course to say wether single note replacements are from a full brick, versus perhaps just one or two bundles. If single note replacements are as small as 100 notes for example,
Then, if it lies within a sheet replacement range:
then that means that there are 100 sheets that are spoiled from being sheet replacements - because their sheet is incomplete by one note per sheet.
Therefore, you would have 40 single note replacement ranges of 100, all within one ream that has been designated as sheet replacements.
Note: even if this were the case the overall replacement range would not change at all.
Once evidence of sheet replacements are found, the assumption is that the entire ream is used as sheet replacements. From what I have learned, the finds validate this assumption. JWS, I humbly welcome evidence showing what you are proposing.
In my opinion, single note replacements found within an established range of inserts are merrily part of the broader range.
This would be the case if in fact single note replacements were found within a ream that also showed signs of sheet replacements. Agreed.
To disallow inserts to fit the quoted statement is a disservice to the hobby.
I see your point. I am not making the rules of what is allowed and what is not (I apologise if it sounds like that), I am doing my best to present the logical storyboard about what happens in bricks and what is [impossible] - how about least probable. -- And again, that is from the evidence that I have learned from, and in talking about finds.
To clarify perhaps would be the best thing:
"A SINGLE NOTE replacement range CANNOT lie within the boundaries of a sheet replacement range."
In more detail means:
If replacements are found from 000-999 in the ream, with sheet replacement characteristics showing, then a single note range cannot be - because all the notes are occupied in a sheet replacement form.
Its the mathematical "pigeon-hole principle". If the notes are found to be sheet replacements, then they cannot also be defined as single note replacements. One pigeon (sheet vs single replacement note) per hole (note position in the 3D matrix).
JWS, I know you have more data stored than I do, and alot more experience, so I am anxious to learn more about what you find.
Regards,
H
-
Hello Hudson,
Single note replacements are notes found with front and back position numbers different from the brick they were found in. If the position numbers matched, it is indicative of a sheet replacement.
I don't have the time to go through my entire data base at this point, but will give you a few examples for now.
BEY29312xx, FP#79 & BP#75, were found in BTD2672xxx, FP#95 & BP#65, and BEY29313xx, FP#79 & BP#75, in BTD2956xxx, FP#56 & BP#74. These single note replacements fall within an established range of inserts, BEY 2.660 - 2.740, and thus, in my opinion, don't qualify for s.n.r. status.
AOH95130xx were found in AOL3445xxx, plate position numbers did not match. These were listed as falling within insert range AOH 9.440 - 9.560 on Gilles' list of March 2007. The May list from Gilles shows a range reduction to AOH 9.440 - 9.480.
Are the AOH9513xx inserts s.n.r. notes, or have they disappeared?
HOH96445xx and HOH96470xx were found in a mixed brick of HOT131xxxx with mismatched front and back position numbers. Again, these fall within the established range of HOH 9.440 - 9.680, and should remain as part of the broader range.
JWS
-
AOH 9,513 - 9.514 are now confirmed single note replacements. It was confirmed on May 2, after the list came out.
AOH 9,551 - 9,552 are also confirmed single note replacements.
Both ranges will be added to the July list!
-
Hi John, thanks for your info.
The info I report is based on Gilles data conclusions.... now to say the word "impossible" fair and clear, as I previsouly conceeded, might not be 100% accurate.
Your example is good- shows that some oddities happen- which also shows the limitations in nailing everything perfect- I appreciate you bringing that up.
Now, there is something I want to point out:
Single note replacements are notes found with front and back position numbers different from the brick they were found in. If the position numbers matched, it is indicative of a sheet replacement.
This is correct, but only to a degree - the case where it would not work out is when either the mother ream of notes or the Replacement note's ream, were part of the mini matrices.
At first I thought yours were one of these special situations, but after writing up a big response I realized they weren't :P.
The info you have is with Gilles, and if in combination with the other data the sheet replacement conclusion was made, then that is beyond what I have access to.
The one thing that is certain, 100% is that the REAM of BEY in question is exactly
2,900,000 -
2,940,000.
Supposing that the data showed sheet replacements, then this would be the replacement size.
So, I see your point.... and perhaps there was an oversight ??? (I don't know). I guess this is why we need people to be on top of this.
Either way you look at it, those BEY you mention show exactly what you say. I would be interested in knowing the rest of the data for BEY replacement finds between 2900-2940.
Is there a way you can get this from GP?
Thanks again-
H