Junkyard Owner Saves Lunar Rover Prototype (vice.com) 130
An anonymous reader writes: On Tuesday, Slashdot users learned that a man in Alabama sold a lunar rover prototype for scrap metal. We now learn that the junkyard owner has saved this important piece of scientific history. The man claims that, upon receiving the prototype at his scrap facility, he set it aside because he knew exactly what it was.
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Insightful)
it's OK - they had to wait until Tuesday to collectively mock all the people who live in Alabama. Now that they've realized that a junkyard owner there knows more about space history than they do, they can take the whole day Friday to reflect on how much the experience has caused them to grow as individuals.
Re: (Score:1)
The junkyard owner is an Alabama resident too.
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Funny)
whooooosshh. You must be from Mississippi.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well they didn't need to mock them anyways. It's already been done:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Insightful)
The Junk dealers is ALWAYS going to know how much it's really worth (and if he's not sure he'll put it aside until he does know) and I highly doubt he's going to voluntarily hand it over without receiving a check for how much it's worth.
One of the prime profit opportunities in the junk business is to receive items that aren't junk. Dealers are always on the lookout for special non-junk items they can make a bundle on because some ignorant dumbass sold it to them for a few cents a pound. It's not that much different than the pawn business where they are always on the lookout for antiques and other items they know are worth far more than the owner believes.
When I heard this story I was at first incredulus that the guy didn't walk across the street and tell the neighbor what it was. Then I realized that the chances the Junk dealer wouldn't put it aside and determine the worth before melting it down was near zero. Then I realized the guy that didn't walk across the street basically screwed over the neighbor by not telling him how much it was worth with the side realization that he may have cut a side deal with the junk dealer by tipping him off.
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Insightful)
My experience is mostly with automotive wrecking yards. The big recyclers aren't much fun to deal with, the staff doesn't care and just goes through the motions. The small private wrecking yards usually have the owner right there in the office, and sometimes one can buy whole cars with title for much less than he'd get if he's willing to sit on it for a couple of years to part it out, as he likes cars too and actually does restore them and values others that do the same.
Unfortunately there are less and less owner-operator types anymore.
As for this particular man, I don't have a problem with him making some real money selling the rover back to NASA or some other government agency. He's arguably the first person to care about it for quite some time, and it's not his problem that NASA and the other intermediate owners didn't value it at the time as much as he does now. If I were in his shoes I'd be tempted to restore it myself, just to be able to claim that I did, if no one was willing to come to a price I was willing to agree to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least some recycling center people are smart enough to figure out when they have something that has a value beyond the scrap value on their hands.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing could be further from the truth. I frequent a local scrapyard (electronic/industrial, not car) and in their mind, everything they get is just being shredder and recycled. I come in sometimes, buy stuff, and sell it on eBay/craigslist. I've bought thousands and thousands of dollars worth of computers, LCD monitors, etc, literally for a few cents a pound.
The amount of stuff (LCD monitors and TVs in particular) I've seen there that almost certainly worked when they got it, but they literally just th
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of valuable test equipment gets junked this way. On the other hand, if one is vigilant and has the opportunity, it can sometimes be saved and restored providing features which would cost 20 times the price new or even higher.
Test equipment produced starting in the early 1990s is largely unrepairable though so this is a diminishing activity.
The thing I find really annoying is when they cut probe cables or separate probes from their test instruments. Then the equipment often does become junk at any pr
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
That reminds me: You know why the US gov't settled Werner Von Braun in Alabama? 'Cause they figured a Nazi would blend right in.
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're going to go around making bigoted and stereotypical remarks yourself, perhaps you shouldn't whine when other people do it.
Re: (Score:1)
It's okay. He's a progressive. We he makes a questionable remark, it's demonstrating his broad range of knowledge. When others do it, it's demonstrating their small-mindedness.
Not to mention it's been obvious for a while now he's a troll.
Re: On Monday (Score:4, Funny)
Did I post a sexist/racist comment? Last time I looked, there were people of all races and sexes in Alabama. And most of them are related by blood.
Re: On Monday (Score:5, Funny)
I've always wondered. If a couple in Alabama get a divorce, are they still brother and sister?
Re: (Score:2)
Cue the obligatory toothbrush joke.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but would you care to explain what type of humor it *was*?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It really destroys Progressive thought when it claims to be tolerant and openminded and then non-ironically makes dated, stereotype-based hate posts.
And if you're going to criticize Alabama, it has one of the highest rates of black people in the nation, so you're a racist as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you can find people in the US who are repressed, then we might have a conversation about it.
Currently, the only repression happening is the people repressing themselves, at least in the US, I don't live in another country, so I can't speak for how it is there.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, in redneck territory a junkyard owner is a successful business person, the local ruling class in fact. And wise to worldly ways, educated in metallurgical topics. Probably subscribes to Scientific American or Popular Science. Of course he knew what it was. Even a typical idiot would know what it was, especially near a space program facility.
Re: On Monday (Score:4, Informative)
Considering that junkyards today are pretty detailed about separation of items depending on metal type and sometimes even alloys they need to identify what they are working with to put stuff in the right bucket. Unusual devices requires extra consideration not only from the perspective of metals but also from hazardous material.
Junkyards are no longer a local hobo operation but actually pretty detailed in what they do - and regulated. So if stuff ends up from someone that do have some unusual labeling like NASA or so then they will at least take a second look. They usually want to make sure that they avoid the Cobalt-60 incident [wikipedia.org] from December 1983 in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico and similar.
Re: (Score:2)
I was at the scrap yard a couple months ago selling some old auto parts, (I got $3 for my old brake rotors) and most of it was pickups full of mixed metal, which gets piled as steel, aluminum, copper. They just weigh the truck before and after. And then they "sort" it in detail with a backhoe.
Something like this is going to get set aside at the start, unless it is in somebody's truck of scrap and they prop it up onto the pile. Then it might indeed get sorted by the backhoe into the car squash pile.
The reaso
Re: On Monday (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you implying that the internet has people who reflect, grow, and learn from their own mistakes? Besides, Friday is the day we rant about social justice folks. I don't think we'll have time for introspection and personal growth. We've got howler monkey screeching and poop flinging to do, ain't nobody got time for self-improvement on Fridays.
After which it was taken to Las Vegas (Score:5, Funny)
Where Rick offered 500 bucks for it, Big Hoss asked whether the moon landing was faked, the old man mentioned the Navy and Chum sat on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Where Rick offered 500 bucks for it, Big Hoss asked whether the moon landing was faked, the old man mentioned the Navy and Chum sat on it.
At least Big Hoss didn't try to buy it with his own money then take it to Danny to get it tricked out. Because you know Chum would want to put hydraulics on that thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I see those are words but they don't make a whole lot of sense to me. Comedy show on television? Another cult classic that I've somehow missed? Bad re-write of some Japanese animation that takes place in Las Vegas? :/
Too many results for Rick in Google to narrow this down. /. does confuse me once in a while but this post is strange enough to remark on. That there are two of you indicates that there's something that I am missing. Google is not helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
The main joke deal with all the people that bring stuff in that is worth $1000 and they want the full $1000. Ignoring that the store has to make a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I have yet to come across that one. I don't watch much television - I've just got better stuff to watch than what I found on television. Well, better stuff for my wants/needs. A quick Google says it's a reality TV show type of thing so it's unlikely that I'd have seen it. I did see another one, at a friends, and it wasn't very interesting. Ah well...
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm... Thanks. I've seen a pawn shop program at a friends place. I don't think it was that one. I think it was in Detroit or something. It was not very interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
It certainly looks odd and something you might want to identify before you put it in the garbage smasher.
Re: (Score:2)
It looked like a crappy old go-cart to me. I would have crushed it in an instant.
Re: (Score:3)
Not at all, those of us who were alive at the time who watched the rover on televison would recognize the frame instantly, just as we would recognize the ascent and descent stages of prototype Lunar Module either together or seperately. You must be young.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone was a space nerd. That's a VERY famous photo from 1967 with Von Braun. He did documentaries on TV in the late 60s of moon program and space travel.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
you were 2 or 3 years old when that photo was taken. would you recognize a photo of LBJ?
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot more historical leaders of men then there are moon rovers.
Re: (Score:2)
most leaders of men lead the way in killing or maiming people, or taking their property or raping their women
Re: (Score:3)
I'd have been ten when the picture was taken (probably, technically, nine) and I recognize it. I'd also recognize LBJ. I don't know how tall he was but he always looked like a big man in the film footage. Anyhow, it's got a big fucking NASA logo on it and it's in Alabama. Of course you don't smelt it down instantly. Junk yard owners are not dumb, I'm not sure where that stereotype comes from. I think I might recognize it but I have the benefit of now knowing about it so I can't really say.
Actually, I just c
Re: (Score:2)
http://motherboard.vice.com/re... [vice.com]
I don't know, it looks pretty rough. The first picture in TFA is from the junk dealer of the actual rover, I can tell from comparing pictures that they are the same design, but beyond that, I likely wouldn't know what the hell it is. This is good reason for the junk dealer to set it aside to try and figure it out though.
Re: (Score:2)
My sentiments exactly. Sure, I know the picture. That was everywhere. The one in the junk yard? I honestly don't think I'd have recognized that. It'd be nice to claim I would but I don't think I would have. I'd have recognized that it was unique and, from the looks of things, fairly well made. The wheels, especially those, would have made me think that it should be held on to until I found out exactly what it was.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I recognized the picture - I did not recognize the picture of the junk. Well, I don't think I'd have recognized it. It would have been curious enough to set aside and find out what it is, however. The wheels, especially, would have piqued my interest.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Pretty well everyone back in the day who read newspapers would fit that broad description of space nerd.
Re: (Score:2)
Von Braun sitting in it is a dead give-away. ;)
Granted, without him, without the NASA logo on the box on top, and without the dish antenna it might be a little harder to recognize. (Partly due to its simplicity. Many of the rover prototypes back then were more complex and instantly recognizable, especially the six-wheeled or pressurized ones.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I recognize the photo the GP linked to. I then checked the article (just to see if it had a pic, nary a whole sentence was read - I'm no heretic) and there's no way in hell that I'd have recognized that. I'd have kept it until I did know what it was, however. The wheels and tires are too specific to be ordinary junk. They're simply not typical designs on any type of vehicle that I'm familiar with of that age, of today, or at any time in history. They're similar to some but not so similar as to be ordi
Re: (Score:2)
"Von Braun sitting in it is a dead give-away. ;)"
I had to zoom it, because I thought for a moment that it was Donald Trump.
Re: Sure. (Score:2)
I grew up making plastic models of all things Apollo. I would not have known "exactly" what it was. However, if there were lots of one-off, precision machined components, made out of unusual alloys, AND I lived near a NASA facility, then I would have at least had my suspicions and looked into it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all, those of us who were alive at the time who watched the rover on televison would recognize the frame instantly, just as we would recognize the ascent and descent stages of prototype Lunar Module either together or seperately. You must be young.
Except that it does not look anything like the actual lunar rovers which were sent to the moon, because this was only a prototype for testing various components...
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
One of my favorite TV shows is Rocket City Rednecks [wikipedia.org]. Changed my opinions (just a little bit!) about people from Alabama. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Since the space program had a major presence there I can see a savvy junk dealer coming to the conclusion that it at least might be something that came from NASA and contacting them.
It's inevitable (Score:2)
Faith in humanity: restored. (Score:2)
Seriously, this news made my day much nicer.
Thank you (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why did NASA lie about it being destroyed? (Score:5, Interesting)
According to the article NASA knew exactly where it was, that it was not destroyed and had even come to inspect it.
"NASA knew it was still available. In my mind, they tried to play a trickery game. They wanted me to loan it to them, but I think they just wanted to get it into their possession. They offered me [perks], they offered me everything but cash," the junkyard owner said. "NASA told me when they came out to inspect it that they had looked for it for 25 years. It is the von Braun, the first and last they made. I was told it is the rarest of all the units."
So what's the deal?
I imagine it went something like this:
NASA Rep: That's GREAT! You've done your country a great service by preserving this priceless artifact. When shall we pick it up?
Junk Yard Owner: Now hold on a minute! This ain't free. I want to be paid.
NASA Rep: OK. How much do you want?
Junk Yard Owner: $BIGNUM
NASA Rep: This is a side project. We don't have that kind of budget.
Junk Yard Owner: This is a limited time offer! If you don't pay $BIGNUM by X, I will melt it down! Then what will your superiors say?
NASA Rep: My superiors barely approve of me spending time on this. I think it is important but there is no way I can get the money you ask.
Junk Yard Owner: I'm serious! I'll melt it down!
NASA Rep: Well, then I guess we're done here.
[Time X + Delta]
NASA PR: A priceless artifact of the Apollo program has been melted down.
[Time X + Delta + Y]
Junk Yard Owner: I did not melt it down. NASA just has to pay me.
Absurd (Score:5, Insightful)
More like:
Junk Yard: You can have it for $FAIRLY_LARGE_SUM, or I'll sell it to the highest bidder. But out of deference, I'm willing to give you first access without bidding.
NASA: Give it to us for free, or we will use legal acton (which is why junkyard owner brought in lawyers and kept silent).
NASA probably lied to try and cast doubt on the authenticity of what he had to reduce the selling price so they could get it cheaper. Far more believable than your absurd fantasy of the junk yard owner threatening to melt down a priceless artifact.
Re: (Score:2)
You discount the possibility that the junk yard owner actually could make a great PR event of it, good reputation is often way better in the long run than just the money involved.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
If the prototype was taken from NASA without permission, technically it's stolen government property. And they can just take it back without paying the guy anything. Furthermore, I think knowingly taking receipt of stolen government property and attempting to sell it back to the government is a crime. If the guy tries to be difficult, they'll probably play that card. NASA's initial feelers are p
Re: (Score:2)
RTFA, it was purchased at auction from NASA, then rotted in someone's yard, then they tried to scrap it to get some cash. Scrap-yard owner decided it was worth saving and has done.
Re: (Score:2)
That fact is inconvenient and will likely be denied.
Re: (Score:1)
Lol, scrapyard likely wants more money than NASA received when it sold the rover in the auction.
And he should, too!
Why should he give it away, when he was the one who recognized it and saved it. If it were not for him it would already be Gone.
If he were rich and wanted to donate it, then that would be his choice. But not everyone is a billionare... 8-)
Re: (Score:3)
"If the prototype was taken from NASA without permission, technically it's stolen government property. They can just take it back without paying the guy anything."
More precisely, the government can claim that a given artifact was stolen and just grab it even if it has no proof. If you have a sufficiently large amount of money and a period of years to devote to the effort, you can make them give it back eventually.
To see what I mean, look up 'Langbord Coins".
Re: (Score:2)
If they were stolen, how could a government with all the legal power in the world lose the case?
Re:Why did NASA lie about it being destroyed? (Score:5, Interesting)
They offered me [perks], they offered me everything but cash
The deal is that thanks to Congress NASA has no budget. They are scrambling to put together a bake sale to raise money for buying the rover, but it's hard to get aerospace engineers to bake anything that someone else would want to buy and eat.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
The deal is that when it comes to Government it's a Budget concern. They need to follow The Budget at any price, no matter what, and if they need to buy it back with money then they need to have An Account.
A lot of other action can be absorbed into the daily work, but as soon as you purchase something it must be on The Budget and there nut be An Account for said purchase.
Forget the NASA crap... (Score:2)
Did he kept The Vulture from being scrapped?!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvage_1 [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
There was never an indication that they were the exact same iterations. There were many rover prototypes, not just the one.
Look Again (Score:3)
The wheels in the two photos are identical, apparently you can't count very well. Either than or you are unable to recognize the difference between light cast onto cross-beams on the back of the wheels from the holes themselves...
The cross-beams on the wheels you can't see well (only back-right wheel) in the current-day picture, but it's still pretty obvious in the original photo what is going on light-wise.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it is a different roll bar.
In the original picture it doesn't look as if the console and the antenna on top were welded on. It seems more as if they were bolted on with a fitting around the bar.
As to pointy and not: the roll bar is assymetrical. It has a pointy side and a more round side.
The two photo's (old and new) are in reverse angle (you can see that by looking at the position of the roll bar and the wheels that have a different fitting fore and aft).
So he "claims"... (Score:2)
...but I don't believe it.
Not the same rover (Score:1)
another twist to the story (Score:2)
The "original" "rover" may or may not have been melted down, sold to the Chinese or some pets.com mogul or turned into a bitchin' electric dunebuggy [wp.com].
This is a SF story, sort of (Score:3)
Last night I bought a Baen EBook: Terry Bisson - Numbers Don't Lie. [baenebooks.com]
The book consists of three stories, one of them is about a "Hole in the Hole", a Brooklyn junkyard which uses a spacetime rift connecting the junkyard to the Moon in order to get rid of old tires. Our protagonists tries to use said rift to retrieve one of the three Apollo Moon buggies that were left behind.
Terje
This cannot be real..... (Score:2)
Because this JUNKYARD owner doesn't have a REALITY TV SHOW -- and everyone knows that all Junkyard Owners have reality TV shows!
The question now becomes... (Score:2)
Re:Typical Liberal boondoggle (Score:4, Funny)