Posts: 52698
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-27-2022 06:09 PM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
I've always thought there had to be another way "to save the mission" so-to-speak if it wasn't for the pen used by Aldrin.

---

When Aldrin reported finding the broken circuit breaker after coming back inside from the moonwalk, the lunar module engineers at Grumman began devising a workaround.

From what I understand, in part from what Tom Kelly wrote in his book and also in talking with some of the flight controllers, the procedures were ready to read up to the crew, but Aldrin beat them to it by coming up with the idea to use his pen. If that hadn't worked or if the timing had been a bit different, the Grumman workaround might have been used instead.

As for signing and inscribing artifacts, I believe that someday in the future collectors will regret that we, the current generation, had the astronauts write on these items. You don't see or need inscriptions on the artifacts displayed in museums to trust that they are real. Other provenance exists to document chain of ownership and use on the mission.

(Mind you, I am only referring to artifacts; not the memorabilia that was flown on the missions as souvenirs.)

Posts: 1551
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 07-27-2022 08:01 PM               

---

I think Robert is quite correct and bidders seemed to have agreed regarding the importance of the pen as an instrument that "saved Armstrong's and Aldrin's lives, and ultimately the Apollo program" (as dramatized by Sotheby's).

The pen happened to be a convenient quick fix, but suppose it wasn't the right fit for the panel, does anyone believe another way wouldn't have been devised to arm the ascent engine? The pen and nib are great artifacts and are part of an interesting happenstance, but the reason it didn't get the same results as Aldrin's suit seems pretty clear.

Posts: 52698
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-27-2022 08:45 PM               

---

To be clear, workaround or not, if I had $2.8 million to spend and was given the choice between the jacket and pen, I would pick the latter every time.

The jacket is a superb artifact and I can certainly see its appeal given how prevalent it is in photographs and footage from the mission, but, to me, the pen and nib have a much more interesting story that is unique to Apollo 11.

I was surprised when it didn't sell. To me, it was the highlight of the auction.

Posts: 3830
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001

posted 07-28-2022 08:41 AM               

---

To better clarity my remarks about aerospace artifacts and memorabilia having been owned by an astronaut flight crew member, of course, it would depend on the type of items being considered for a verified C/LOA, etc.

For flown manuals, used checklists, cue cards, and other kinds of ephemera, I would love to have a hand-written-annotation by its used-by astronaut owner. Sometimes, though, such documents and others do not provide enough room or space for such an authentication. For such material as this, it would be best to have a signed letter provided with significant details and perhaps a photo of the astronaut with the actual item in hand, if possible, but not always necessary.

For artifacts and hardware that Robert was referring to, in my opinion, it would depend on what type of artifacts are being considered along with their surface conditions. Concerning the flown Aldrin lot of his inflight Apollo 11 jacket with his name tag, US Beta flag and mission emblem, that would be a difficult call for me. If appropriate and perhaps in a good location, I wouldn't mind Aldrin signing something like "My inflight flown Apollo 11 coverall jacket," or something similar, and signed. But in all consideration, I was never a fan of having Beta materials signed, along with a few other astronaut-used garments, mainly because most ink/felt pens do not take too well on Beta fabrics along with a few other clothing attire, but if you must, a better marker pen could be used in some instances.

Posts: 2101
From: Fairfax, VA
Registered: Feb 2007

posted 07-28-2022 08:54 AM               

---

My favorite two items were the two TLI cue cards - one "merely" showing columns of numbers, and the other a checklist of steps for TLI. On both of them, crew members had written "35575" to show the velocity of feet per second. (Collins on one; Armstrong on the other.) Those were amazing, showing the work done to leave Earth for somewhere else for the first time.

I had hoped that maybe they would get lost in the shadows of other, flashier items and sell for close to their opening bids. I went so far as to spend time reading the Apollo 11 voice transcripts for the TLI portion to see what was being referred to on the cards, in preparation of figuring out my top bid for a museum-quality item.

But nope and darn - they went for about $20,000 and $35,000; about four times higher than their estimates.

Posts: 728
From: Alexandria, VA USA
Registered: May 2006

posted 07-28-2022 10:39 AM               

---

I agree with you, Steve, those TLI cards were on my radar as well for much the same reasons as you stated. As you probably remember, I currently own both of the flown TLI burn monitoring cards from Apollo 12 which were offered at auction by Dick Gordon many years ago. However, I was still hoping against hope that I could get my hands on these TLI items from Apollo 11 as well. In the end, like you, no joy.

If anyone here was the lucky bidder on any of these TLI items, they may also like to know that they were once on display at the NASM for many years, apparently on loan to the museum from Buzz. That’s probably why they were not on the market until just recently.

Posts: 53
From: Akron, OH
Registered: Feb 2021

posted 07-28-2022 02:00 PM               

---

I agree with you Robert on the prevalence of astronaut writing on artifacts and much prefer accompanying provenance and paper trails.

Inscriptions from the event that tell a story are valuable, an example of this being Michael Collins' "best ship to come down the line" remark in command module Columbia and the Smithsonian's intentions to preserve it.

Objects of high importance speak for themselves without later handwriting being added. An example of this is the Stafford Air and Space Museum in Oklahoma. The museum is undoubtedly world-class, but you are hard-pressed to find artifacts without Tom Stafford's signature added in the recent past, often with no discernible benefit.

Posts: 469
From: Switzerland & France
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 08-03-2022 12:24 PM               

---

How nice to realize that you guys also think that signatures on hardware are often superfluous or even irrelevant. These objects are perfect as they are. Yes, a MIR stamp on a flown glove is a plus, but these Cernan Apollo 17 checklist pages with his large and ugly sticker, not only his signature, is definitely not, in my opinion.

I own original race used Formula One racing helmets, and though a picture of them with the piece is a nice bonus, their signatures on the visor are the last thing I want to add. Same for my space hardware.

Posts: 1434
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 08-03-2022 07:36 PM               

---

I think that talking about museums and the infallibility of their provenance is fallible, a mistake. I have found that museums get so much material in from donors that it is hard for them to have good provenance on many items on display. Is this a case where we believe that because it is in a museum, it is real, and the provenance is solid? Do we believe every fact that is in a book because it is written down? I doubt it.

I love museums, but I must disagree that because an object is inscribed by the actual user of the item, it devalues it. Does the fact that Monet signed his work devalue the piece? I know that it enhances the value of his artwork as it provides the necessary provenance of ownership of his work.

So, I think that an artifact inscribed and signed by the astronaut who not only used the artifact, but kept it in his collection truly certifies the provenance of the object. And sometimes, we don’t have a choice because the astronaut signed something like a checklist on the cover as flown before it was offered for sale. If it is at all possible, when I buy a piece, I ask the astronaut to inscribe and sign his object in a discrete location.

Posts: 338
From:
Registered: Aug 2018

posted 08-04-2022 01:54 AM               

---

I can see both sides of the debate regarding signatures. I was saddened to see Eagle's water dispenser marred by Aldrin's heavily-degraded signature. The signature doesn't add anything, but it does make the viewer wince to imagine Buzz painfully struggling to sign it more than 50 years after the mission.

But most of all, the reality is that astronaut signatures are not rare or historically relevant. The last 50 years have seen a massive rise in the production and availability of notable signature. People like Buzz Aldrin have signed tens of thousands of autographs. Anyone can go online, choose from hundreds of options, and add one to their personal collection. And so an autograph on a space-flown artifact isn't nearly as significant as it would be on a more ancient artifact, before artifacts/autographs became a major for-profit industry. Imagine seeing a piece of railing from HMS Victory in a museum, and how much more amazing it'd be to see Horatio Nelson's signature on it. Or to see Napoleon's signature on the inside of one of his hats. Or to see Alexander the Great's name etched into his Macedonian sword.

But of course, it's easy for us to feel this way, because we're lucky enough to have been alive at the same time as these astronauts. Today, we can look at astronaut autographs on these artifacts with a sense of despair. But if humanity manages to survive another 500 years, I imagine that going to a museum and seeing the signatures of those ancient explorers who took the first voyages into space will inspire quite a bit of awe.

Posts: 3079
From: Guyton, GA
Registered: Jan 2006

Posts: 1465
From: London, United Kingdom
Registered: Mar 2012

posted 08-04-2022 11:03 AM               

---

For me, it depends on the article. So long as it doesn't detract from the piece itself, I'm happy with signatures.

The big stickers on checklist pages are a huge turnoff for me, for instance, but a signed flag is great.

Posts: 469
From: Switzerland & France
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 08-07-2022 09:31 AM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Larry McGlynn:
Does the fact that Monet signed his work devalue the piece?

---

Well, for the last 200 years, signatures in paintings are part of the art process. It is not an addition, it IS the painting.

While the (sorry to take that example again) atrocious stickers on Cernan flown items are not. The addition of a non flown, irreversibly glued, large and badly made sticker decades later, on even small documents, is historically disastrous.
It doesn't add anything, on the contrary it damaged several precious documents of our History. However, I agree that the Cernan exemple is among the worst case.

Posts: 5365
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999

Posts: 381
From:
Registered: Oct 2020

Posts: 338
From:
Registered: Aug 2018

posted 08-07-2022 12:32 PM               

---

Stickers can be easily removed from metal, so I think it'd be fine.

However, you might want to consider making a standard paper label instead, and then use double-sided scrapbook tape to apply it. I like to cover the entire back of the label with non-overlapping rows of tape, giving it an even surface with no gaps/bumps. I let the tape go over the edges to ensure a tight coverage on the seams. Then I flip it over, and carefully trim the excess tape from the edges.

The result looks like a standard label, but it's adhered using acid-free, removable, photo-safe tape.