Author
Topic: AOH is expensive  (Read 4671 times)
JWS
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2007, 06:00:53 pm »

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


« Last Edit: May 14, 2007, 06:06:07 pm by JWS »
Dr.Bill
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
  • CPMS Member 1520
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2007, 06:24:48 pm »

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!
« Last Edit: May 14, 2007, 06:30:14 pm by Dr.Bill »
Hudson A B
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,503
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2007, 06:49:14 pm »

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

CPMS Lifetime Member #1502.
 

Login with username, password and session length