THE EDITORIAL CONTENT   (a give-a-buck.com exclusive)

Previous page  |  Index  |  E-mail

PREVIOUS EDITORIALS (click here)



Eureka! Journey Series Layouts Revealed


by Mark Marschner


Note: This article was revised July 15, 2011 to include new information. It has not been offered for scholarly publication (yet).

Introduction

          Research into Journey series Canadian paper money has focussed to this point on drawing associations between position numbers and serial numbers. The actual physical layout of uncut sheets has been a secondary consideration. It was assumed that sheets for this series were numbered in the same predictable fashion as previous series, i.e., with notes aligned chronologically in rows ascending from left to right. The discovery of "mini reams" reinforced the belief that notes issued by BAI had to be printed in a 9x5 format since the five positions of the mini reams conveniently fit into a complete row that was assumed to be along the bottom of the layout. However, evidence has been accumulating over the past few years, and this evidence in the form of numbering abnormalities and notes with cutting errors suggests that previous assumptions about layouts are incompatible with the upgraded Journey series.

          To this point, I have always presented data in the form of matrices using the presumed left-to-right, top-to-bottom physical layout that we know was used for the Birds series of notes. However, a number of Journey series notes with cutting errors were brought to my attention to show me that they did not fit into the matrix representation of the physical layout. The evidence presented by these notes was perplexing and very intriguing, but at the same time, there were no easy solutions to help in understanding these error notes, and the numbering patterns extracted from position number and serial number data of many thousands of notes remained valid.

          Before examining the error notes used in this report, it is necessary to show the matrix layout that numbering research to date presumed would be the actual physical layout of BAI-printed sheets. This layout was previously referred to as BAI Layout 3a and has been the cornerstone of Journey Series research up until now.1

  1 2 3 4 5
A 55/76 58/78 88/67 66/81 60/94
B 98/93 71/83 73/62 99/99 89/89
C 83/71 62/73 94/60 93/98 67/88
D 81/66 76/55 78/58 59/80 57/69
E 65/95 82/91 72/61 75/79 92/87
F 97/86 77/77 64/64 87/92 86/97
G 61/72 79/75 95/65 91/82 80/59
H 69/57 56/74 63/68 90/85 84/96
I 70/70 96/84 85/90 68/63 74/56

The "old" version of BAI Layout 3a.

The Error Note Evidence

          A few years ago, a collector reported finding a pair of 2006-dated $5 insert notes that were cut out of register. When you look at the back of a normal Journey series note, the position number is always at the right edge. The miscut notes had position numbers at the left edge, belonging to the note printed to the left. AOK 2041370 should appear at position A-2 in the layout shown above. Its position numbers, 55/76, come from position A-1 immediately to the left as expected. However, when we look at AOK 2040370, a note which should appear in position A-1 in the layout, it has position numbers 57/69 belonging to position D-5. There should be nothing to the left of A-1 since it occupies the top left corner of the layout, and so the error note should have no position numbers, and yet it does.

merge
A close-up of AOK 2040370 showing the back position number 69.

          More error notes were found by an anonymous brick hunter over the course of several years.2 Images of his notes appear below. He found a 2006-dated $5 note, APF 4256500, with salvage attached to the lower edge, indicating that it came from the lower edge of the sheet. The serial number and position numbers (76/55) both place this note at position D-2 in the middle of the layout. APR 9000400 is a 2008-dated $5 note with salvage attached to the upper margin, indicating it came from the top edge of the sheet. The serial number and position numbers (55/76) place this note at A-1 at the top of the layout, as expected.

errors1

APF 4256500 and APR 9000400, both showing cutting errors with extra pieces attached. Click the thumbnail to enlarge.
errors2



BFH 1897052, a $10 note missing one serial number die to a fold error. Click the thumbnail to enlarge.


          BFH 1897052 is a 2008-dated $10 note with one of the serial numbers missing from the back. The serial number and position numbers (78/58) place this note at D-3. If the missing serial number on this note was caused by a fold error, the anonymous collector surmised that BFH 1898052 (59/80) printed on the same sheet should also be an error note since it should be occupying the position to the right of D-3, but this note was found to be perfectly normal. Another $10 error note, BFG 2458855 (59/80), comes from position D-4, and yet it has salvage attached to the top edge, indicating it came from the top of the sheet. So two different $10 error notes seem to indicate that positions D-3 and D-4 are not, in fact, adjacent to each other in the layout.

errors3



BFG 1897052, a $10 note with a cutting error and an extra piece at the top. Click the thumbnail to enlarge.
errors4



APS 7796215, a $5 note with a piece of colour bar showing at the left side. Click the thumbnail to enlarge.


          Finally, the same collector found four miscut 2008-dated $5 notes, each note coming from the same sheet and pulled from four consecutive bricks. APS 7796215 (56/74), APS 7797215 (63/68), APS 7798215 (90/85), and APS 7799215 (84/96) come from positions H-2, H-3, H-4, and H-5 (respectively) which we would assume would occupy the same row. However, all four notes have salvage attached at the left side, indicating that each and every one of the four notes came from the left edge of the sheet! This impressive set of $5 error notes would seem to demonstrate that the sheet was numbered in columns instead of rows, and I would agree. However, if we simply rearrange BAI Layout 3a (above) and put the position numbers in five columns starting with A-1 in the top right corner, some of the other error notes would not fit this revised layout. Intuitively, there is a danger in mixing data from $5 and $10 notes because each denomination could be printed differently. In fact, there could be two or more layouts used within each denomination, making the possibility of finding a unifying solution even less likely.

BAI Layouts

          To make a long story short, a unifying solution was discovered. Explaining the process for arriving at the solution would be rather long and convoluted, so it would be preferable to explain a couple of guiding principles that helped in the process. First of all, we know that both note printers are each using a set of 45 position number pairs for all denominations that each company prints, and the numbering patterns are likewise identical for all of the denominations by each printer. That fact alone strongly suggests that each printer has one position number layout that is like a master key for how they print sheets. Secondly, we need to remind ourselves that serial numbers are printed in a separate process after the main design of the sheets is printed. The position numbers are printed as part of the main design (i.e., they are engraved right onto the plates). Thirdly, modern instrumentation used by the companies allows any serial number to be printed at any position in the layout. We know this has to be true because the earliest $20 notes printed by BAI had a skip interval of 24,000 and an effective ream size of 1,080,000 notes that rolls smoothly over prefix boundaries such that there was no way the same serial numbers could be printed at the same positions for each and every prefix.1

          With these principles in mind, it became essential to think of position number layouts and serial number layouts as separate entities. What this means is that the printers each have a 45/on position number layout that they use for everything they print, but they don't always use the same serial number layout with that position number layout. There can be two or more serial number layouts for each position number layout.

          Here, at least, is what I consider to be the definitive 45/on position number layout used by BAI...

  1 2 3 4 5
A 56/74 59/80 57/69 55/76 58/78
B 63/68 65/95 82/91 88/67 66/81
C 90/85 72/61 75/79 60/94 98/93
D 84/96 92/87 97/86 71/83 73/62
E 70/70 77/77 64/64 99/99 89/89
F 96/84 87/92 86/97 83/71 62/73
G 85/90 61/72 79/75 94/60 93/98
H 68/63 95/65 91/82 67/88 81/66
I 74/56 80/59 69/57 76/55 78/58

BAI Position Number Layout 3.

Letfs call this new layout BAI Position Number Layout 3. It is obviously a radical departure from the old matrix representation shown earlier as almost every position number pair has a different location in the layout from before. Every $5 and $10 error note discussed previously fits into this layout. The $10 note with the partial missing serial number would appear in the bottom right corner of the layout, so the assumption that a corner fold caused the misprint appears to be correct. The two consecutively-numbered $10 bricks, obtained by the owner of the error note, were not printed in adjacent positions in the layout. In fact, they were printed almost as far away from each other as possible.

          Because the error notes were used to build this new layout, a circular argument would be created by saying that these error notes prove the new layout to be correct. Hence there has to be something tangible and different to validate the layout's authenticity. By examining the new layout, we notice patterns in the distributions of position numbers that suggest it was created with purpose and thus cannot be the product of mere coincidence. There are five pairs of position numbers where the face and back position numbers match (70/70, 77/77, 64/64, 99/99, and 89/89). Notice how all five of these pairs are to be found in row E, the middle row. Next, you will see that the middle row acts as a mirror plane, and the two halves of the layout are like mirror images of each other. What I mean by this is the position number pairs have their "reflections" in the mirror expressed as reciprocals. For example, 56/74 is found in the top left corner of the first row. Its reciprocal, 74/56, is in the bottom left corner of the ninth row. All the positions in row D directly above the middle row have their reciprocals in row F immediately below the middle row. All the pairwise reciprocals are mapped out in a predictable manner, and the chances of this pattern being purely random are staggeringly small. It is interesting to note that the last five "mini ream" positions that were previously thought to occupy a row occupy instead part of one column.

          Using this new layout and the accumulated wealth of serial number data from previous research, it became obvious that the vast majority of Journey series notes printed by BAI used the following serial number layout:


BAI Serial Number Layout 3a.

          The numbers in the above layout do not represent actual numbers on the sheet. They represent the chronological order of notes on the sheet from 1 (the lowest number) to 45 (the highest number), with the actual gaps in serial numbers being equal to the skip interval. The blue lines serve to visually demonstrate the chronological distribution. It appears that the person(s) setting the serial numbers on the numbering device worked on two columns at once instead of one at a time, filling the numbers across one row before going down to the next row. One can only guess if this numbering pattern is deliberate or the result of worker preference.

          Previous research had determined that $20 prefix AYR (and a small range of prefix AYV) had been printed with an entirely different layout, but this is not the case3. The same position number layout was used, but the serial number layout was as follows:


BAI Serial Number Layout 3b. This layout was used only with $20 notes of prefix AYR (all) and AYV (8880000-8924999).

The difference between BAI Serial Number Layouts 3a and 3b is that one is the mirror image of the other. Instead of starting on the two rightmost columns, the numbering starts on the two leftmost columns, but the pattern of zigzagging from one column to the other and back again is in reverse. So it is shown that one position number layout has be used with different serial number layouts just as had been hypothesized.

          The last prefix of $20 notes printed in 2005 (ALV) has been the focus of a great deal of head-scratching for some time. From previous research, it was determined that BAI switched numbering patterns in prefix ALG, going from a simple skip-24,000 system to the more complicated skip-1,000 system using the offset "mini reams" to print two serial number ranges per sheet in creating a larger "mega-sequence" pattern 1. They used the latter system up to midway through prefix ALV, at which point they reverted back to the old system. Notes in the range ALV 5535000-6614999 were printed 45/on and skip-24,000. Notes in the range ALV 6615000-7199999 were printed 45/on and skip-13,000. Notes in the range ALV 7200000-7559999 would appear to be one ream of 360,000 notes, but the position numbers don't match any layout discovered to date. Instread of printing notes 45/on with a skip interval of 8,000, the last ream was, in fact, printed 36/on with a skip-interval of 10,000. The position number layout is identical to the first four columns of BAI Position Number Layout 3. I surmise that the printers had a batch of damaged paper, and they opted to use as much of it as they could rather than waste it. The security features of the high-priced banknote paper prevented any realignment to allow the leftmost column to be dropped as this is the only column numbered straight down. The zigzagging serial number layout was adapted to fit the new 36/on position number layout. Here are the layouts:

  1 2 3 4
A 56/74 59/80 57/69 55/76
B 63/68 65/95 82/91 88/67
C 90/85 72/61 75/79 60/94
D 84/96 92/87 97/86 71/83
E 70/70 77/77 64/64 99/99
F 96/84 87/92 86/97 83/71
G 85/90 61/72 79/75 94/60
H 68/63 95/65 91/82 67/88
I 74/56 80/59 69/57 76/55

BAI Position Number Layout 4.
  1 2 3 4
A 19 20 1 2
B 21 22 3 4
C 23 24 5 6
D 25 26 7 8
E 27 28 9 10
F 29 30 11 12
G 31 32 13 14
H 33 34 15 16
I 35 36 17 18

BAI Serial Number Layout 4.

So all upgraded Journey series notes printed by BAI can be attributed to two position number layouts (Layout 4 being just a 36/on truncated version of Layout 3) and 3 associated serial number layouts.

CBN Layouts

          What about CBN-printed notes? All of the $5 and $10 error notes reported earlier were printed by BAI. CBN has printed only higher denomination upgraded series notes ($20 and up) from 2004 to 2009. Without any error notes printed by CBN, we can't know for sure the exact position number layout, but we do know that the layout is column-based rather than the row-based layouts reported previously. This is due in large part to a numbering abnormality discovered within $20 prefix ELE. Notes in the range ELE 7110000-7469999 should all belong to one 360,000-note ream, but this is not the case. A healthy number of recorded notes from this range helped to determine that ELE 7110000-7397999 is printed 36/on instead of 45/on using the first 36 positions of CBN Layout 5. The skip interval is 8,000 for this range. Then, notes in the range ELE 7398000-7469999 are printed 36/on using the LAST 36 positions of the same layout, but instead of a skip interval of 8,000, they are printed with a skip interval of just 2,000. Just as BAI truncated their 45/on format to create a 36/on layout, it appears that CBN did much the same for some $20 ELE notes.

If we take CBN Layout 5 4and rearrange the position number pairs into columns instead of rows, and we start at the top right corner, here is what we get:

  1 2 3 4 5
A 54/12 51/32 53/18 50/16 52/19
B 43/38 15/37 30/41 10/14 36/31
C 25/46 29/21 35/49 13/22 42/28
D 48/11 20/39 34/44 17/23 33/47
E 27/27 26/26 24/24 40/40 45/45
F 11/48 39/20 44/34 23/17 47/33
G 46/25 21/29 49/35 22/13 28/42
H 38/43 37/15 41/30 14/10 31/36
I 12/54 32/51) 18/53 16/50 19/52

A proposed new look for CBN Layout 5. THIS LAYOUT IS JUST A HYPOTHESIS!!

We see that all of the position pairs with matching face and back numbers are in the middle row, and this middle row acts as a mirror plane with pairwise reciprocals distributed across the mirror in the same fashion as the proposed BAI layout. As before, the odds of such a patterned layout being mere coincidence are staggeringly small. However, it must stressed that there's no physical evidence to support this layout theory for CBN-printed notes. The layout could just as easily be presented with the columns ordered from left-to-right instead of from right-to-left. Moreover, we don't know if CBN Layout 6, the 36/on layout proposed for some $100 notes of prefixes EJF and EJG, bears any relation to CBN Layout 5 5. Initial indications are that there is no correlation.

          If the layouts shown above are indeed accurate, then it is only fitting that the Journey series will be retired soon and we can take a short recess before starting similar research into the first series of polymer notes. Let's just hope it will take less than a decade to come up with the results.

CBN Layouts

1.     CPMS Newsletter, Vol 16, Num 2 (June 2008), "Tackling the Sheet and Position Number Layouts of Journey Series $20 Notes (Printed by BABN)", pp 39-45. The article is also available online.

2.     The person has not expressly forbidden revealing his identity, but he has not granted permission either, and so I will assume that he wishes to remain anonymous. My thanks go to this anonymous donor.

3.     CPMS Newsletter, Vol 18, Num 2 (June 2010), "New Layout For $20 Prefix AYR Proposed", pp 49-52. This article is available online.

4.     The "old" version of CBN Layout 5 can be seen here: CPMS Newsletter, Vol 17, Num 1 (March 2009), "Journey Series $20 Note Printed by CBN: Position Number Layouts, Serial Numbers, and Insert Ranges", pp 9-15. This article is available online.

5.     CPMS Newsletter, Vol 18, Num 3 (September 2010), "CBN-issued $100 Journey Notes: Evidence of a New 36/on Layout", pp 82-85. This article is available online.







RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE (click here)
RETURN TO PREVIOUS PAGE (click here)