Click for a larger scan
The postmark on the above cover appears to be missing the time slug. While it is possible that the time slug missed being inked, the indications are that it was actually missing when this cover was postmarked. A careful examination of the area under the 9 with a magnifying glass shows not even the slightest sign of ink, while the rest of the date is very well inked. The postmark appears to have slipped slightly during the process causing a slight double postmark, again with no ink in the time slug position. Is this an extemely rare (maybe even unique) postmark variation? It is certainly the only one I've seen.
Update
Tom Steiner has now reported a second copy of this postmark. I therefore believe this is a valid variation and worthy of note.
Further Update
Andre Gutmann has provided an example of a USS Spiegel Gove postmark with a wider thicker time slug. Further he notes that the 'postmark with a missing time slug; it seems I have found a cover with the same postmark including the time slug: the regular version of this postmark has a rather thin time slug "P M", but my cover has a fat "P M". I compared the position of the year date "1971" to the letters "GROVE" and I think the postmark with the fat "P M" is the same like the one with the missing time slug. Look at the detail pictures'
This page © Dr Ross J Smith
This page is maintained by the Webmaster
Last modified on 12 April 2020