November 2006

It has been nine months since this website was updated. A series of unavoidable events over this time period has caused both our webmaster, Andrew McFarlane, and myself to not have the time to put into the site. We hope to keep everything up-to-date going forward, and will strive over the next few weeks to bring this site to where it should be.

We do need your help, however. Review the features that we presently have and see if you can supply us with material for the various sub-pages. Additionally, if you can come up with a new feature please let me know. We’ll see if we can work it in.

Once we get the current site up to date we want to begin to feature some actual exhibits. I would like to begin with one-frame exhibits that have received at least 85 points either at a National, Continental Federation or FIP show. Let’s see how collectors have put together top quality single frame airmail exhibits. If you have one of these exhibits please scan it at 300 dpi and submit it to me as an e-mail attachment. Let me know the number of points that the exhibit achieved as well as the name, date and location of the show, and its level.

Elsewhere on this site you will be seeing the results from Washington 2006 and ESPANA 2006. While these exhibitions were totally different in style they both were outstanding. The Organizing Committees from both of these shows should be congratulated for a job very well done.

Airmail Stamp Exhibits

In Washington there were several exhibits entered in the aerophilately class that focused on airmail stamps. Included in the exhibits were the issued stamps, as well as production material, varieties, errors and, of course, covers. Most of these exhibits were transferred to Traditional. 

In Malaga there was an outstanding SCADTA exhibit entered as Traditional. It was transferred to Aerophilately.

The question then becomes “When is an airmail stamp exhibit an Aerophilately Exhibit, and when is it something else?”

I have begun a dialogue with Jussi Touri, Chairman of the Commission on Traditional Philately, and we have come to some initial understandings. First, however, let’s review what the SREVs and Guidelines for the Evaluation of Aerophilatelic Exhibits have to say about this.

SREV 3.1 Aerophilately represents a study of the development of air mail services and a collection of documents pertaining to such development.

An Aerophilatelic exhibit has therefore as basic contents: 

3.1.2 Official and semi-official stamps issued especially for use on Airmail, in mint or used state, but principally on cover.

Guidelines 3.1.2 Stamps and Essays

A. Adhesive stamps issued or overprinted specifically for use on airmail are part of aerophilately, even when used for other postal purposes.
B. Postal stationery, including aerogrammes and airmail postcards, issued specifically for airmail use is aerophilatelic material.

C. An exhibit may also include related material, such as:
-Essays and proofs
-A study of printing methods or reconstruction of printing or overprinting plates
-A study of paper varieties, watermarks, perforations, etc., or printing/overprinting errors.

So, when is an airmail exhibit aerophilately and when is it traditional? (It could also be something else, but for the moment let’s concentrate on the Aero/Traditional problem.)

Jussi and I have agreed to the following initial statement which, while somewhat oversimplifying the matter, gives us something that may be permanent or may be the basis for something somewhat more detailed. Here it is:

Guidelines 3.1.2 Stamps and Essays

New D. While both a traditional and an aerophilatelc exhibit may contain the material in “C”, above, it is the treatment of the covers that will determine whether the exhibit will be judged by a traditional or by an aerophilatelic team.

To be judged as aerophilately the covers must be organized to show the development of airmail services. In other words, there must be a recognized aerophilatelic theme.

If the covers are arranged to show usages of the stamps in a traditional way then the exhibit should be judged as a traditional exhibit.

We would enjoy hearing your comments.

Necrology

We are saddened to have to report the passing of the following outstanding aerophilatelists in 2006. If we have missed someone please let us know and we will rectify that in a future column.

• Keith Griffiths (New Zealand)
• Alex Newall (U.K.)
• Robert Lana (U.S.A.)
• Robert Spooner (U.S.A.)
• Keith Fitton (U.K.)

The problem here is that as that we have very few new people coming up to replace these outstanding researchers and exhibitors. It will be very difficult to replace this group.

Stephen Reinhard,
Commission Chairman
sreinhard1@optonline.net