Brunell 1965 Question

Can someone please remind me what stamps are meant by Brunell with:

1965: 10, 10u

I know 10d is the Memorial Dome and 10f is a flag. I am guessing 10 is Andrew Jackson in pink. But 10u?

Thanks,
Jan

10U=10 USPS multicolour

Aha! Great. Tyvm.

...... omg. I hate to ask. I've just been through Scott 1940 - 2000 multiple times, my own collection 1950 - 2002 and my Back of Book (just in case), but I cannot locate it.

I feel like I can see the exact design you mean in my head, but the only thing I am finding is the 10c Zip Code stamp? If not that, what year / Scott number is the one you meant?

Thank you.

Hi. Can you tell us what town and type your listing is for? I would like to see if I have an example.
Thanks

Sorry, I'm not identifying a specific town/type stamp here. I am just trying to be sure I know which are which (I have a list that I update when I find a designation in Brunell that I don't understand).

In this case, chasa told me that 10u is a 10c "USPS" multicolor stamp. I can see it in my head, but I have gone back and forth multiple, multiple times, but I can't spot it in the regular catalog of US stamps.

I'm hoping someone can tell me its Scott number or at least what year it was issued.

As I recall, the letters "USPS" take up most of the stamp, in bright neon-ish colors. And obviously it's a 10c face value. It's a bright colored stamp and I am frustrated near to tears that I can't spot it in the catalog. It should be so obvious ....

Brunell has 4 typical 1965 10 centers: 10, 10d, 10f and 10z. Jackson, Jefferson Memorial, flags and the "zip code" stamp, Scott 1511. This is a gaudy stamp you might be thinking of. There is also an 8c USPS in blue with an eagle, his 8u. Scott 1396.

I searched the pdf for 10u and I found on a quick and dirty review 3 places with a 10u. None of types have a 10z. My surmise is that Brunell accidentally used 10u for 10z. The listings are for Quincy Il. 241, Clinton, Ia 276 and Covington Ky. 243.

These are all listings that are expanded from prior editions by including the so-called traveling printing press stuff where Brunell was adding 100s of descriptions and may have not caught an error on these few in all that typing.

Hope this helps.

That sounds very plausible. I will make a note to this effect on my personal "Brunell interpretation" list and wait and see if I ever find a reason to contradict it.

Many thanks,
Jan