Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Websites
related space history websites

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Opinions & Advice
  172029061875: Gemini 3 autographs in "We Seven"

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   172029061875: Gemini 3 autographs in "We Seven"
Chuckster01
Member

Posts: 158
From: Orlando, FL, USA
Registered: Jan 2014

posted 12-14-2015 04:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Chuckster01   Click Here to Email Chuckster01     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would like other opinions on this book with laid in signatures of John Young and Gus Grissom. I have my GT-3 signed at the time of the flight as a comparison and the signatures do not look right to me. The list of reasons is to long for this post. I would like your opinion.

randy
Member

Posts: 1617
From: West Jordan, Utah USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 12-14-2015 07:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for randy   Click Here to Email randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm not sure about the Grissom, but the Young definitely doesn't look good to me.

Wehaveliftoff
Member

Posts: 826
From:
Registered: Aug 2001

posted 12-15-2015 12:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Wehaveliftoff   Click Here to Email Wehaveliftoff     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'd pass on this one.

capoetc
Member

Posts: 1857
From: Newnan GA (USA)
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 12-15-2015 04:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for capoetc   Click Here to Email capoetc     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Not an expert here, but these signatures look fine to me. I don't see the hesitation that one normally sees with a traced or painstakingly-forged signature.

Most importantly to me, it makes little sense to go to the trouble of creating a forged Gemini 3 crew signed item on a scrap of paper.

kosmo
Member

Posts: 301
From:
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 12-15-2015 10:15 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for kosmo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There is definitely a hesitation at the bottom off all three loops (J, Y and g) in the Young autograph that doesn't look good.

chet
Member

Posts: 1455
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 12-15-2015 03:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The (vintage) Young signature is absolutely fine, in my opinion, and I'd say the Grissom is possibly-to-likely authentic as well.

Bob M
Member

Posts: 1551
From: Atlanta-area, GA USA
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 12-16-2015 07:36 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bob M   Click Here to Email Bob M     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I agree with Chet.

Chuckster01
Member

Posts: 158
From: Orlando, FL, USA
Registered: Jan 2014

posted 12-16-2015 06:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Chuckster01   Click Here to Email Chuckster01     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have been looking at a lot of period John Young signatures and I will say "I am not an expert by any means" BUT every example I can find has a clear "OUNG," not just a squiggle.

John Young had very good hand writing and this does not look like the GT-3 I have (posted under the Mercury fragment Lucite thread) or others signatures I find from the early Gemini period. I still contend it looks like a skilled person trying to do Gus Grissom and John Young.

And as to the post why sign on a GT-3 on a scrap of paper, is easy. Its cheap to keep trying till you get a close copy and it's a rare enough combination to still be worth a lot even on a scrap of paper.

chet
Member

Posts: 1455
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 12-16-2015 06:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Chuck, there are many (early) examples of Young's signature that are VERY similar to the one on the paper scrap with Grissom's.

I agree that a paper scrap is much easier to use as a vehicle for a forger for the very reasons you mentioned, but that doesn't mean the signatures here aren't authentic. You're right to be suspicious due to that factor, but ultimately these signatures need to be judged on their merits. Again, I think the Young is a slam dunk, and though some doubt about the Grissom may be justifiable I think it's likely authentic as well.

mjanovec
Member

Posts: 3731
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 12-17-2015 12:08 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for mjanovec   Click Here to Email mjanovec     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by kosmo:
There is definitely a hesitation at the bottom off all three loops (J, Y and g) in the Young autograph that doesn't look good.

That's not hesitation, in my opinion. Some cheaper ballpoint pens will have a buildup of ink as the pen travels in one direction (especially during a long stroke) which will be deposited when the pen changes directions. You can also see the same blobs of ink at the top of the "o" and the top and bottom of the "h"... all after fairly long strokes of the pen.

I also believe both signatures are likely authentic.

kosmo
Member

Posts: 301
From:
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 12-17-2015 11:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for kosmo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I see that, even say, when the pen is put down to start a letter, at the top of the "y" for instance.

mach3valkyrie
Member

Posts: 590
From: Albany, Oregon
Registered: Jul 2006

posted 12-20-2015 08:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mach3valkyrie   Click Here to Email mach3valkyrie     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This item sold for $799. I thought both signatures were good and threw a bid in on it. Not enough to win, however.

Good to see some genuine Grissom signatures coming into the daylight so we can have a chance at them.

Steve Zarelli
Member

Posts: 556
From: Upstate New York, USA
Registered: Mar 2001

posted 12-21-2015 09:22 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Steve Zarelli   Click Here to Email Steve Zarelli     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Mark nailed it, in my opinion. Back in the 50s and 60s, ballpoint pens were much "blobbier" than they are today. Ink would build up on one side of the ball, and then leave a blob when the line direction or angle of the signer's wrist changed.

As a hint, some signers consistently left "ink drops" in certain parts of their signature. They can be a subtle characteristic to consider when assessing authenticity.

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 1999-2015 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement