posted 01-16-2015 11:59 AM               

• Background colors are different. I could accept this as color saturation as Liem says, but the inner yellow and middle yellow are almost the same. With color saturation, light yellow would be one of the first colors to wash out to almost white.
  
• outer yellow is vastly different. And given that the 2 inner yellows are almost the same, this is then suspect.
  
• fonts are different weights. Look at the "N" at the end of Fullerton.
  
• the stitching in the windshield is actually different. Not just color. In the two center sections, the stitching is at different angles, particularly the center left panel. The far left panel is also different. But it's most notable in the center 2.
  
• detailing in the cargo bay is different. It's minor, But differences are there.
  
• the merrowed edge starts/stops in differed places. The overlap in particular is different. The stitch pattern is also slightly different.
  
• finally, the shading on the wings is different.

posted 01-16-2015 12:30 PM               

1. Lettering thickness varies from patch to patch

2. The similarity of the "COLUMBIA" is just too close. These vintage patches were made on machines using paper tape encoding (Schiffli). So replicate that stitching so exactly, I find to be implausible. This is not a modern fake unless someone found a supplier in China or India that still uses Shiffli machines. (Believe me, I'd love to find one for making commemoratives!)

3. Subtle differences in details between patches is not uncommon. Any section of detail like that between runs happens all the time.

posted 01-16-2015 03:08 PM               

This seller has listed and sold four examples so far.

posted 01-16-2015 06:52 PM               

I have only sold one patch so far at a painful price of $12. I can tell you that the STS-3 patch given to me by Commander Jack Lousma, the one I purchased from Ken Havekotte a year later and all 50 of the one I recently acquired are all virtually identical. That is why I started this thread as the ones being sold on eBay are very good copies but not authentic by any stretch of the imagination.

posted 01-16-2015 08:36 PM               

And like I said, if it is a fake, it was made 10+ years ago because no one is using Schiffli machines anymore.

Click for larger:

posted 01-17-2015 02:53 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kevin T. Randall:
Another seller who is based in nearly the same part of Florida has listed four examples of the STS-3 'Crew' patch, (sold three), one still listed. He tells me he bought a full sealed pack of 25 of these patches at a local estate sale.

---

posted 01-17-2015 07:38 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liembo:
If the "crew" version in question is a fake, than one of the these souvenir versions is a fake as well...

---

I would assume all of the official astronaut worn crew patches were made at one time by one manufacturer in one production run. Again this is an assumption but it would make sense. Even the patch on crewpatches.com is an exact match and if I may say so every rare patch I own in a exact match to the one listed on that website with almost no variation at all.

posted 01-17-2015 01:27 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chuckster01:
The patches you posted do not list a manufacturer so they may not have been made by the same company or even in the same year?

---

quote:

---

I would assume all of the official astronaut worn crew patches were made at one time by one manufacturer in one production run.

---

quote:

---

I am wondering if anyone has run across crew patches with large variations in the production from what is listed on crewpatches.com as so far I have not.

---

Apollo 17 early runs — vertical embroidery around galaxy, only seen on cloth back, early issue patches. Very minor, but helps dial you in to more "period" issue patches if you're a stickler about tht kind of thing.

Skylab Project Patch — extra embroidery on Skylab (L), smaller lettering:

STS-3 A-B odd Canadarm placement — see this thread.

STS-51L missing star — see this thread.

This wouldn't be on crewpatches.com because it's modern, but A-B at somepoint completely changed the embroidery of the STS-84, and I believe there's at lesat one more version from A-B with a narrow yellow flame.

posted 01-17-2015 02:36 PM               

I suspect that these STS-3 patches will end up being something like the "STS-3 AB Emblem variant 2 patch [STS3ABV2]". Not a crew patch, but also not a fake, just another variation run that is a hybrid of souvenir and crew features. A quantity of 50 identified patches means it was an intentional run, most likely by A-B Emblem. Their value? One can only guess.

posted 01-18-2015 12:22 PM               

The word "fake" implies intent to fool someone in to thinking it is something that it is not (aka counterfeit).

So in the end, is it a "Fake STS-3 Crew Patch" or an "STS-3 Variation." Without further photographic evidence or provenance, it will likely never be a "STS-3 Crew Patch Variation" but it could be a "Vintage STS-3 Crew Patch Replica." Semantics. All depending on your point of view.

Looking at this thread, the crew version itself wasn't widely uncovered until 2011/2012, which means the counterfeiter was ahead of the game by 10-15 years. Intent to subterfuge doesn't add up unless they miscalculated the demand. Again, I defer to Occam's Razor.

posted 01-18-2015 04:13 PM               

I went back and reread the listing on eBay. No where does the seller claim this patch to be a crew version. All they say is that it is a NASA shuttle patch with Lousma and Fullerton. I point this out because it was *us* that brought in the discussion about it possibly being a crew patch. From there, we all followed along and played this game.

In the end, I too agree that it will be interesting to see Kevin's pics when he posts them. Then we will know for sure what it is. But the fact is, the seller made no such claims and it was us that wrapped ourselves around this axle, so to speak.

posted 01-19-2015 08:20 AM               

First, this is a new thread about a new listing on eBay. This is NOT an old thread that has been dug up in an attempt to disparage the seller.

Second, the seller did not imply this listing was for a crew version patch. That is something those of us that have posted in this thread has interjected into it. Therefore, nothing said in this thread had the intent of hurting the sale.

Third, Liem is right. In our discussion the term "fake" was used as a description. Due to the fact that the seller did not in any way imply that was a crew version, "fake" is a very strong word. It is a word that should not have been used. As Liem pointed out, to be a "fake" implies intent to mislead. Since the seller made no such claims that this was a crew version, no "fakery" was done. What is true about it is that, as we have pointed out, there are some issues with calling this a crew version. And that was the point of the question — is it a real crew version patch? It kind of looks like a duck, it was probably made by the same maker as other ducks, but that does not mean it is a REAL duck. Nor has anyone said that this patch is not authentic, in that it is not from AB as the original crew version(s) or souvenir version(s) have been.

Lastly, as all this thread has had to base its judgments on were the images posted, and those do not include the important back of the patch, there is a lot of conjecture about what this patch may or may not be. To that end, we await Kevin's images in the next few days once he receives the patch. Only once that is done can we attempt to make any kind of authoritative judgment on the status of this patch.

What I do find interesting though with this is that there have been times in the past where an STS-3 patch has been questioned as being a crew patch or a souvenir version. As such, we need to be careful about what this patch may or may not be. For some reason, the STS-3 patch has seemingly been questioned more than other STS patches. I'm not sure why, but I know from personal experience that this is not the first time an STS-3 patch has been questioned. Why STS-3 is my question.

posted 01-20-2015 07:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlueHalo:
Has anyone black light tested the patches? I bought one of those STS-3 patches from eBay and it did not fluoresce when exposed to a UV light source. So that tells me one important thing, that it is not modern. The use of the old thread is no longer in use (especially on a Schiffli), and was changed out around the mid 1980s, because cotton thread can not withstand the force and tension of the new digital embroidery machines, causing birdnesting, breaks and other messes. Today, most all threads are made out of synthetic fiber mercerized cotton with a polyester core, which glows brightly under a black light.

To date, no one has been able to “beat” the black light as a detection method used to determine an embroidered reproduction of a vintage era patch.

---

BH is mostly right. They started using the newer threads in the mid-late 80's. Patches made before then will never flouresce under a black light, whereas modern patches will if the whiteners are present (most likely but not guaranteed). So if it florences under a black light it proves its a modern patch. Whereas if it does not, it is only highly likely an old patch. It does not guarantee it. Patches can still be made with the old threads. Just like a lot of things can still be made using true vintage methods.

posted 01-21-2015 09:54 AM               

I have put all my STS-3 'Crew' patches under black light (UV), and there is no reaction on any of them, so they are all vintage patches.

Here are front and back, side by side images of three versions of the AB Emblem manufactured STS-3 'Crew' patches.

The top left patch is the one with the darker outer flame star that four examples have been listed and sold on eBay recently. The backing used on this patch is the dimpled plastic backing commonly used by AB Emblem. (The origin of these four patches was from an ex Grumman employee).

The top right patch is the one from the Al Bishop collection. The backing used on this patch is a smooth waxy plastic coating also quite commonly used by AB Emblem.

posted 01-21-2015 05:11 PM               

I don't think the differences between cargo bay details are quite sufficient to say that its a poor replica because, clearly, the two other patches in Kevin's photo have subtle differences as well. If someone were holding just one of those patches in their hand independent of the other, they would have little hestitation in saying, "yeah, this is a crew patch". Side by side with another one, you will invariably find minute differences.

So, either one of the other two patches in the scan above is a replica, or we have to accept that, even in crew patches, there will be slight differences in embroidery.

The question remains: does a difference as obvious as color eliminate this patch as a crew patch given that the other difference are so minute that they are irrelevent?

One could speculate that perhaps it was rejected and someone grabbed a few as factory seconds? Were they prototypes who's colors were not satisfactory?