Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Opinions & Advice
  336167903405: Gemini 8 crew-signed cover

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

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   336167903405: Gemini 8 crew-signed cover
randyc
Member

Posts: 957
From: Highlands Ranch, CO USA
Registered: May 2003

posted 09-12-2025 02:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for randyc   Click Here to Email randyc     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There's a Gemini 8 USS Leonard F. Mason cover that is 'signed' by the Gemini 8 crew on eBay. The eBay Item Number is: 336167903405. The signatures look a bit 'off' to me.

Would appreciate knowing what other members of collectSPACE think about the signatures.

yeknom-ecaps
Member

Posts: 954
From: Northville MI USA
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 09-12-2025 02:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for yeknom-ecaps   Click Here to Email yeknom-ecaps     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hence why "suspect" is in the title of the item...
Gemini 8 Recovery USS Mason Suspect Crewsigned Space

Ken Havekotte
Member

Posts: 4005
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001

posted 09-12-2025 02:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ken Havekotte   Click Here to Email Ken Havekotte     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yes, by all means, very much suspect and best to stay away from it, but just my own opinion.

randyc
Member

Posts: 957
From: Highlands Ranch, CO USA
Registered: May 2003

posted 09-12-2025 04:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for randyc   Click Here to Email randyc     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I saw that the description mentions that the signatures are 'suspect', but that's one person's opinion. And they could be wrong; the signatures could be genuine. That's why I was interested in additional opinions.

onesmallstep
Member

Posts: 1536
From: Staten Island, New York USA
Registered: Nov 2007

posted 09-12-2025 05:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for onesmallstep   Click Here to Email onesmallstep     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would stay away from that cover; yes, the Armstrong is very suspect but the Scott looks 'OK.' The reason I say that is the more 'complete' wording of 'Armstrong,' not rushed, is one he signed with in the early 60s, pre-astronaut selection, but the cover it's on was issued in 1964, for the NY World's Fair, so that in itself is a first clue.

As he became swamped later with signing requests, he adopted a simplified, distinctive style for his last name especially. I suggest you look over Armstrong signature expert Steve Zarelli's website.

Axman
Member

Posts: 811
From: Derbyshire UK
Registered: Mar 2023

posted 09-13-2025 05:16 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Axman   Click Here to Email Axman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm not convinced the Scott signature is genuine either.

hbw60
Member

Posts: 358
From:
Registered: Aug 2018

posted 09-13-2025 04:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for hbw60   Click Here to Email hbw60     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by onesmallstep:
...so that in itself is a first clue.
I agree that because this is Armstrong's pre-astronaut signature, it makes almost no sense for it to be signed on a Gemini-era postal cover. This type of signature was only used during his X-15 days, when he was notable enough to have people requesting his autograph, but not so famous that he needed to rush them.

But I do want to point out that during this time, it was not uncommon for people to collect signed blank postal covers that could later be postmarked on important dates. For example, it's entirely possible that someone would get Armstrong to sign a blank envelope soon after he became an astronaut in 1962, and then wait to get it postmarked until his first spaceflight. That way, it would have both a notable signature and a notable postmark. I've seen several items like this in the past. I even own one - an Ellison Onizuka signed cover that was postmarked on the day of his memorial service after the Challenger disaster. Steve Zarelli has certified it as authentic, and noted the postmark on the LOA. So a later postmark doesn't automatically nullify it.

However, I think the nature of this specific postmark does. This is actually a pretty special cover - it was postmarked onboard the USS "Leonard F. Mason" on March 17, 1966 - the date of Gemini 8's splashdown. In other words, this postal cover was actually onboard the ship when Armstrong and Scott were recovered. We know Armstrong didn't sign it at that point, because he would have used his 1966-style signature.

So if this was a previously-signed cover which had been set aside for a later postmark, that means the owner was somehow able to arrange to have it onboard the recovery ship. That alone would be difficult. But it's even more extraordinary when we consider the fact that the "Leonard F. Mason" was just one of several backup ships. It was NOT the intended recovery vessel, and it was on the other side of the planet from the intended splashdown. It only became the prime recovery ship after Gemini 8 was forced to make an emergency landing. For this reason, "Leonard F. Mason" covers for Gemini 8 are by far the rarest of the Gemini splashdown covers.

In short, for this to be a real signature, it would mean that the original owner had a blank pre-1963 signed postal cover, the ability to get it onboard a naval vessel during the Gemini 8 mission, AND the foresight to have it stowed on the exact backup ship that ended up recovering the spacecraft and crew.

Even if the signature looked authentic (and I agree with the others that it does not), the postmark alone is overwhelming evidence that this signature is fake.

astrobock
Member

Posts: 242
From: WV, USA
Registered: Sep 2006

posted 09-13-2025 05:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for astrobock   Click Here to Email astrobock     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am by far an expert but pictures examples I have of this longer signature style, the "s" in Armstrong is emphasized. Here it is not.

randyc
Member

Posts: 957
From: Highlands Ranch, CO USA
Registered: May 2003

posted 09-18-2025 11:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for randyc   Click Here to Email randyc     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The cover sold for $662.18.

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 1999-2025 collectSPACE. All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement