- Posts
- 1,716
- Likes
- 5,190
Screwbacks
·that law pertains only to artifacts used in the apollo-soyuz project, not particularly moon landing project. therefore, artifacts of the apollo 11 project including sn#43 must be returned.
Lost S/N 43, Apollo 11, 50 years ago
Locked
- Posts
- 2,058
- Likes
- 4,635
77deluxe
·+1 Pictures would help.
- Posts
- 9,547
- Likes
- 52,659
gbesq
·I’m willing to bet that the OP also knows the identity of the second shooter on the grassy knoll as well as the whereabouts of Amelia Earhart.
- Posts
- 3,817
- Likes
- 16,153
- Posts
- 3,817
- Likes
- 16,153
- Posts
- 9,547
- Likes
- 52,659
- Posts
- 3,859
- Likes
- 6,566
Vercingetorix
··Spam RiskI’m willing to bet that the OP also knows the identity of the second shooter on the grassy knoll as well as the whereabouts of Amelia Earhart.
- Posts
- 29
- Likes
- 10
Steve Morley
·Doesn't everybody?
- Posts
- 733
- Likes
- 1,457
WatchCor
·I think that the content of this letter is somewhat general knowledge, is it not?
I would also kindly ask if you could post some photos of said watch. Thanks
- Posts
- 907
- Likes
- 1,293
mancio
·Pictures of the watch.
We had Enough paper photographs😉
We had Enough paper photographs😉
- Posts
- 602
- Likes
- 548
MCC
·+1 for pictures, it would be great to see the watch.
- Posts
- 2,058
- Likes
- 4,635
77deluxe
·The letter simply indicates that the speedmaster is the correct reference and that the bezel is incorrectly positioned.
- Posts
- 5,501
- Likes
- 9,399
BlackTalon
··This Space for RentHmmm, a letter indicating the watch has a 321 caliber, which is the same caliber used on the moon mission. Sweet -- I have one of those as well!
- Posts
- 18,107
- Likes
- 27,413
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...That does not state your watch is a NASA watch. The 321 movement was in all Speedmasters from 57 through 68.
Furthermore that document actually proves your watch is not a NASA watch as it’s delivery date is way past when NASA took delivery of the watches for the Apollo missions. The delivery date of those is well documented.
Furthermore that document actually proves your watch is not a NASA watch as it’s delivery date is way past when NASA took delivery of the watches for the Apollo missions. The delivery date of those is well documented.
- Posts
- 29
- Likes
- 10
Steve Morley
·That does not state your watch is a NASA watch. The 321 movement was in all Speedmasters from 57 through 68.
Furthermore that document actually proves your watch is not a NASA watch as it’s delivery date is way past when NASA took delivery of the watches for the Apollo missions. The delivery date of those is well documented.
- Posts
- 1,716
- Likes
- 5,190
- Posts
- 3,817
- Likes
- 16,153
Fritz
·How did you know!?!
I live two doors down and am getting pretty tired of patio parties which include 3am renditions of "hound dog" by a drunken "king", Buzz Aldrin and the guys from area 51.
@Steve Morley ... Odd how the letter is longer than the page... you've gotta work on your photoshop skills...
pictures!!!! or its all fiction!
- Posts
- 18,107
- Likes
- 27,413
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...You know that serial numbers in that period for Omega have been documented as being non sequential right (well batches tended to be sequential)?
Additionally we also know that some of the watches, where sent back to Omega for service and received new movements. There are three glaring examples that proves that on your spreadsheet. How exactly was a movement not produced until 1968 used on missions in 1965?
Additionally we also know that some of the watches, where sent back to Omega for service and received new movements. There are three glaring examples that proves that on your spreadsheet. How exactly was a movement not produced until 1968 used on missions in 1965?
- Posts
- 18,107
- Likes
- 27,413
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...@Steve Morley
Look we really wish that you had that watch, and would be even more impressed if you could retain ownership of said watch. Looking at it from very informed non biased eyes, there is no way yours is the watch you want it to be, just from what you have provided.
There are multiple problems in the documents you have provided. The delivery date is way to late, is a big one, as it is common knowledge they wore these watches during the training program, and it has been photo documented in the years proceeding the missions, some members here have talked about the history of the watches with the actual astronauts and confirmed when it was received, if it was the same one during training, and the disposition of the watches post mission. If NASA or Omega could confirm it as the correct watch they have no reason not to, they recovered one of the lost watches last year in fact from South America. My understanding is while yours is marked with a number it is missing the rest of the NASA added engravings in the correct style, and does not match the correct serial number that is not common knowledge.
Look we really wish that you had that watch, and would be even more impressed if you could retain ownership of said watch. Looking at it from very informed non biased eyes, there is no way yours is the watch you want it to be, just from what you have provided.
There are multiple problems in the documents you have provided. The delivery date is way to late, is a big one, as it is common knowledge they wore these watches during the training program, and it has been photo documented in the years proceeding the missions, some members here have talked about the history of the watches with the actual astronauts and confirmed when it was received, if it was the same one during training, and the disposition of the watches post mission. If NASA or Omega could confirm it as the correct watch they have no reason not to, they recovered one of the lost watches last year in fact from South America. My understanding is while yours is marked with a number it is missing the rest of the NASA added engravings in the correct style, and does not match the correct serial number that is not common knowledge.
- Posts
- 2,443
- Likes
- 4,231
wsfarrell
·
"Morley contacted the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum and NASA directly and both took the matter very seriously. Morley also began a legal dispute for its ownership and in turn, NASA arranged for an expert opinion report to verify its authenticity. It was determined one year later, that Morley’s Speedmaster was not the original Moonwatch. Buzz Aldrin and the United States also publicly confirmed that it was not authentic."
I'm hoping there's an OF member who's with the FBI. This person could PM Morley and offer him $5 million for the watch. If he has the watch (.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 probability) he can be arrested. If he doesn't have the watch---well, of course he doesn't have the watch.
I'm hoping there's an OF member who's with the FBI. This person could PM Morley and offer him $5 million for the watch. If he has the watch (.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 probability) he can be arrested. If he doesn't have the watch---well, of course he doesn't have the watch.
Similar threads
- Posts
- 6
- Views
- 342
- Posts
- 8
- Views
- 1K
- Posts
- 26
- Views
- 3K
- Posts
- 208
- Views
- 23K
- Posts
- 5
- Views
- 3K