posted 04-06-2005 06:58 AM               

A Connecticut schoolgirl is fighting the federal government over an artifact of space exploration history.

Amanda Meyer, 15, of Madison, Conn., has launched a petition drive to have the Mercury spacesuit worn by Gus Grissom returned to his family. Meyer says the family told her they want the suit to tour the country to help keep the late astronaut's memory alive.

Despite almost 500 signatures on an Internet petition, the silver suit likely will remain in the Astronaut Hall of Fame near Kennedy Space Center, where it is the focus of an exhibit on the Mercury program.

"They have not offered any explanation," said Meyer, who said she plans to become an astronaut. "One NASA representative did e-mail me. They want to keep it."

The suit's staying put, said Peter Golkin, a spokesman for the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum, which claims the suit.

"You've got to give young Amanda credit for being interested," Golkin said. "Gus Grissom's certainly a great role model for someone who wants to be an astronaut. But I don't think she got her facts straight."

posted 04-06-2005 10:27 AM               

Once the first artifact is given over to private ownership, that will open the door and be used as the example for everyone else. And, before you know it, the courts will be agreeing and handing out all sorts of artifacts.

I don't beleive any of the Astronauts would cut up, deface or in any way, destroy the artifact. However, I do believe that, as these gentlemen pass on to their great rewards, you would see pieces of the artifacts turning up on ebay.

posted 04-06-2005 01:47 PM               

It's pathetic when a manipulated and uninformed little girl is given so much press of such a non-issue.

posted 04-09-2005 03:22 PM               

I think that Amanda needs to be commended on her stance. Not too many young people would do such a thing. She has stirred up enough smoke to get the attention of some big time players of this topic...the "owners" of the suit.

But Betty and the rest of the family had no idea.

posted 04-11-2005 09:04 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K. Rochester:
And just who is the "owner" of the suit considered to be , in the opinion of the Grissom Family?

---

posted 04-11-2005 10:48 AM               

While I admire Amanada's spirit and dedication, but it is misplaced in this instance. Protect and preserve, yes! But private hands would potentially ruin a piece of history that belongs to all of us.

NASA had no reason to protest the family's possession all those years and probably wouldn't have protested in the future, save the family's new adversarial nature due to their unfounded preceptions of conspiracy and coverup by NASA over the Apollo 1 fire. Possession, however, does not always denote owership.

Also, flown spacesuits are never disposed of in the matter Scott Grissom described on the petition website. Rather, there is a chain of events, just like there is today, to the disposal of an item (it has to be processed by the government for re-utilization, and then various other institutions. None of the flown spacesuits, to my knowledge have been disposed.

posted 04-12-2005 11:50 PM               

If for some reason, NASA caves in, then every taxpayer can request similar things that NASA can't use anymore. Just think, every astronaut that flies can then take their suits or helmets home.

There is a set way to do business with NASA or the Government for that matter. First, it has to be declared surplus to their needs. Any other agency can then request it, if it is not claimed, Then any non-profit organization has first dibs. if they don't want it, it must be auctioned off to the highest bidder which could be you or me. The sale is documented on a DD250 or DD1149 showing the disposition and transferring title to the high bidder.

No amount of petitions in the world can change the law. There is one way and that is to get a special bill passed by congress and signed by the president to cover the transfer.

I don't think that will happen.

Another thing, it appears that monetary reasons are behind this effort. Think how valuable this suit would be to a collector, bringing millions on eBay.

posted 04-13-2005 11:23 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by dtemple:
With no effort on NASA's part to have the suit returned until a few years ago, doesn't that mean the suit was abandoned property by NASA before they tried to reclaim it?

---

posted 04-13-2005 12:04 PM               

I still think that there should be like a counter petition to this thing stating that the suit should be put on display at the Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center with all the other Liberty Bell 7 artifacts that will be on display in June.

posted 04-13-2005 07:21 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
If the answer to these questions is "no" then it should not be any different for the loan agreement between NASA and Grissom.

---

Again, I am no lawyer, but do know the importance of signed documents outlining what will and will not be done. I have not seen any mention of a document regarding the spacesuit. Did Grissom sign anything regarding his taking the spacesuit?

If he just asked to take it and received verbal permission, there is no legally binding document. The other side is that there is no proof Grissom even had permission to take it if there is nothing official in writing. (I am not implying he did not have permission. Without documentation, though, there is a lack of evidence for a court of law.)

Who granted permission to take the suit? Obviously, if it was Robert Gilruth or Jim Webb then there is no one left alive to offer any testimony. Were there any witnesses? If so, are they still alive?

I have no idea how this will play out, but simply posed the possibility the suit might be judged in court to be abandoned property. If that happens, the Grissom family will get to keep the spacesuit.

In my opinion, the suit should ultimately go to the Smithsonian and then loaned to the Kansas Cosmosphere for display with Liberty Bell 7. The Smithsonian has the means to retard the decay of the suit and have received and preserved other such artifacts, thus they are the most logical choice to receive it.

However, I suspect the judge in this case will not consider the historical nature of the suit, but rather what the law says about its ownership. Hopefully, the law will say it belongs to NASA. If NASA had acted sooner on this (1963 for example), then this situation would not exist.

On a different note... if NASA was not going to destroy the suit as claimed, why did Grissom not return the spacesuit? He had plenty of chances to do so unless he did not take it as early as I assume he did.

posted 04-13-2005 08:25 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by dtemple:
Did Grissom sign anything regarding his taking the spacesuit?

---

NASA spokesman Robert Jacobs told collectSPACE that the agency has located the handwritten loan agreement between Grissom and NASA for use of the suit. Grissom borrowed the suit for his son's show-and-tell presentation in mid-1965.

posted 04-13-2005 10:54 PM               

NASA spokesman Robert Jacobs told collectSPACE that the agency has located the handwritten loan agreement between Grissom and NASA for use of the suit. Grissom borrowed the suit for his son's show-and-tell presentation in mid-1965.

posted 04-14-2005 09:20 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSpace86:
Why would a 15 year old be interested in the spacesuit going to the Grissom family?

---

posted 04-18-2005 05:19 AM               

I think that in reality, Scott knows that the suit doesn't belong to him or his family but it's just one more thing to keep NASA aware that he's still around.

Shortly after the fire, the families did sue North American Aviation (Rockwell International) and there was no contest, NAA paid off. I have been told that the amount was one million dollars split between the three families. Based on inflation, it would be about ten million dollars today. The problem, if a set sum was was being paid over a long period of time, based on the award with no COL adjustment, it probably wouldn't be much in today's economy.

I think it was said, that when they were selected as astronauts, they knew the dangers, their families knew the dangers, but they felt the rewards of being an astronaut was much greater, worth all that they might have to go through.

As a member of the space program, it was our job to make sure that everything was done to keep them safe. This we did, but sometimes things get a little out of control through no falult of our own. That's life, we must go on with our life, and I think that's what Gus would have wanted. In fact he said so in so many words shortly before the accident.

This constant bickering about the space suit by the Grissom Family is doing no one any good.

posted 04-25-2005 06:53 PM               

I will tell you from when we first began to tell Amanda the history of space flight, she related to Gus more than any other astronaut. Her interest in his life began to grow as she did through school. She wrote many reports on him, including a lovely report about what it means to be a hero.

This past January, we visited his grave at Arlington National Cemetery. Amanda was deeply moved. She wanted to do something for him and his beloved family, of whom we were honored to actually speak with Scott Grissom.

When she heard about the space suit, this was it. She would never believe Scott Grissom or his family would sell his space suit. The Grissoms have too much integrity for that. They want to have his space suit put where they would choose, and if a loan agreement was signed by NASA and the Grissom family regarding the space suit, doesn't that mean NASA regarded the suit as the Grissom's possession? If it didn't, why not tell them that before signing an agreement? You cannot borrow something unless the other person has posession.