8 ms·

Jeff Bezos Finds Apollo 11 Rockets

284 points by josephmosby 15y ago

fmstephe 15y ago
I am glad that we have in this world at least a few rich people with uncontrollable curiosity. It seems like wealth is wasted on some.
siavosh 15y ago
Since I was a kid, space has always been a deep source of curiosity and wonder for me. With events like James Cameron's dive last week, Elon Musk's work, and this, it heartens me that private citizens are attempting rekindle the wonders they felt when they were younger for a new generation. All in reaction to the governments budget cuts and the limited ambitions of today's industry titans. The longer term solution maybe showing tax payers scientific/statistical evidence that these sorts of 'stunts' really do yield an impressive ROI. It's a tough thing to do, but might be our way back to places like Mars.
- sopooneo 15y ago
  How strange that this amazing dream, now rekindled, was originally born of cold war.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - ericd 15y ago
    It's not that strange, competition breeds ambition and innovation. It's in humans' fundamental nature to compete by out-innovating, which is one of the strongest arguments for free markets. Since the fall of the USSR, more competition has been inward focusing, between companies. Most companies tend to compete at a lower level than nation-states, which is why you don't see as many of these huge projects. I think if the US became openly competitive with China, you'd start to see some very large projects again.
grecy 15y ago
I like where he says "I imagine that NASA would decide to make it available to the Smithsonian for all to see." - creating enough publicity around it's eventual public display that NASA will have no choice but to do just that.
- josephmosby 15y ago
  It does make sense - the Apollo 11 command module is already on display in the Air and Space Museum, as is one of the Saturn 5 rockets.
  - HCIdivision17 15y ago
    I remember as a kid going to Space Academy in Huntsville, AL. A camp counselor told us how the engines came to find a home at the Rocket Park of the Alabama Space and Rocket Center. NASA had placed the Saturn V on tour to show off this amazing machine - this particular rocket never went in space, but it was a _functional_ vehicle. The story goes that once the rocket was set up, the governor rallied for the rocket to be labeled a historical landmark. And since it really is an incredible chunk of American history, the motion passed. And, as it turns out, you can't move historical landmarks. Apparently NASA was furious, but played it cool. Or so a museum counselor told a band of 7th graders. More on this particular rocket: http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/butowsky4/space12.htm http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/butowsky4/sp...
ConnorWGarvey 15y ago
I like how Jeff Bezos talking about hiring a team that found the engines ends up with the headline, "Jeff Bezos Discovers ..."
- mdonahoe 15y ago
  Based on the title, I naively assumed it had more to do with his Blue Origin company. He paid for the effort, so I see nothing wrong with the title. "Jeff Bezos' team" is certainly more accurate.
- johngalt 15y ago
  And Steve Jobs never wrote a line of code for the iphone. So he didn't create it right?
  - pavanky 15y ago
    He did not.
stcredzero 15y ago
This is what gets me about the moon-shot deniers. If NASA was motivated to save expense and risk, doesn't the act of launching the first stages of a bunch of Saturn rockets going to mostly squash any savings flat? Those things are huge, their launch was witnessed by many 10's of thousands, and their flight was tracked by the USSR and anyone else with the technical capability to do so. (Admittedly, the latter is probably only sporadic, but still an effective deterrent.) The second stages -- also huge, also tracked by the USSR and anyone else with the technical capability to do so. The third stages: the same. Even the command module+LEM: freaking conspicuous. And it's not as if you can send them up there, then fake the thing coming back -- you had to actually bring the freaking things back so the USSR and everyone else could track it then too. So, after going to all that trouble, exactly how much money is going to be saved? How much risk is going to be saved? If you're faking a flight to the moon, and your fake command module misses its burn and flies off into the void, you're going to have to fake the deaths or kill off those astronauts anyways. If anything, one has greatly increased the risks by engaging in a such a huge and technically challenging conspiracy. Kudos to Bezos for finding the engine!
- mindslight 15y ago
  Maybe most moon landing deniers are actually just a conspiracy of scientists hoping to goad NASA into doing it again.
- driverdan 15y ago
  You give moon landing denier kooks too much credit. They don't care about the evidence.
  - conradfr 15y ago
    Yes, the problem is never asking questions, it's not accepting the answers.
- nitrogen 15y ago
  Wouldn't the mirrors left behind by various missions be the most convincing evidence of all?
Jun8 15y ago
"Though they've been on the ocean floor for a long time, the engines remain the property of NASA." Interesting, I thought Law of Finds stated that abandoned property belongs to the person who salvages it (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6896645.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6896645.stm), or maybe the engines were not abandoned?
- swalsh 15y ago
  Not a lawyer, but I would imagine the definition of abandoned has some sense of an indistinguishable owner. In the case of Apollo 11, the owner is quite clear. On the other hand, if you consider the law of "Finders Keepers, losers weepers" It is clearly Bezos to do what he wants.
  - smackfu 15y ago
    Well, I don't see how it differs from a sunken ship, really.
    - _delirium 15y ago
      In that case, the owner of the ship typically is still the original owner, but there is a whole "law of salvage" that determines what payment, or share of the treasure if it's things like sunken gold, the finder should get.
      - omegant 15y ago
        I don't know if that is the case with state ships. Recently Spain has recovered a gold and silver treasure from the odissey company(they recovered it from a spanish sunked 1800s tall ship)
- arjunnarayan 15y ago
  I find it odd that it can be considered "not abandoned" when NASA didn't even _know_ where they were. I can understand if NASA said something of the sort "its at XX latitude and YY longitude and we're leaving it there but it's still ours", but I find "we don't know where it is and we aren't actively looking to find it, but if you find it it's ours", especially given the Law of Finds.
leeoniya 15y ago
First James Cameron chills in Challenger Deep for 8 hrs solo, now this? What a week! Maybe James can use his new toy to go down there and hook up the tow cables to bring the engines up!
ChuckMcM 15y ago
There is an interesting sub-text here which should probably get more attention. Jeff Bezos funded this effort. Let that sink in for a moment. When the CIA wanted to get a peak at a Soviet Era sub that sank to 17,000' they paid Howard Hughes to build the Glomar Explorer [1] to go retrieve it. It was a mammoth undertaking which required the financial assistance of a nation state to make it work. In 1982 when Forbes first started listing the 400 richest people they had 13 billionaires and 75 million made the list [2], which is about 167 million in inflation adjusted dollars [3], and the current lists #400 is is $1.05B so a bit over 6x larger even after inflation is considered. The interesting bit for me is that the cost of 'getting things done' has not been going up in pace with the 'money people have' so wealth in the private sector is enabling individuals to do what used to take governments. Worse governments are horribly inefficient at doing things that individuals are efficient at (given their fiduciary responsibility to the tax payers) I talked with some folks at Scaled Composites a bit after their successful X-Prize bid. A common theme was that they could have been successful earlier if it had not been for the red tape put in their way by the government. (some estimated two years earlier but I think that was optimistic). And you look at the world concerns that arise when North Korea tests 'long range' rockets because building a rocket that can get a meaningful payload into orbit is 98% of the way to being able to drop something out of orbit pretty much anywhere you want. Its very different world, and I could imagine folks who would sign on for orbital 'work' or excursions knowing that 5 - 10% of them would end up dying horribly. Not something the government can generally tolerate but explorers can. The risk though is that you end up with a corporation that is has the capability of exploiting space and corporations don't generally sign treaties. That makes for interesting times indeed. [1] https://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm https://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_400 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_400 (hopefully it is accurate) [3] http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi [4] http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#p_40_s_arank_All%20industries_All%20states_All%20categories_ http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#p_40_s_arank_All%20industr...
- mcantelon 15y ago
  >The interesting bit for me is that the cost of 'getting things done' has not been going up in pace with the 'money people have' so wealth in the private sector is enabling individuals to do what used to take governments. Wealth has been concentrating as well. If the rich continually get richer, it makes sense that at some point their capabilities become comparable to nation states.
ck2 15y ago
This is a waste of time. It's a wealthy man's playtime. How about we kill the F35 and F22 planes entirely and make a Mars mission instead? We're going to be neck deep in drones in this country and around the world within a few years, expensive fighter jets are now worthless.
- dkokelley 15y ago
  Your beef seems to be more with expensive fighter programs than expensive salvage efforts. I don't see how this really relates to the discussion. Don't underestimate the power of icons. These are the rockets that put us on the moon, and a private citizen is planning on recovering them for posterity, using his own money. Hopefully future generations will be inspired to explore because of this wealthy man's efforts (or 'playtime', as you put it). This should be celebrated.
- Cushman 15y ago
  I know I say this a lot, but... a Mars mission would be a wealthy man's playtime, too.
Codhisattva 15y ago
Cute but silly really. If you want to see a genuine Saturn V rocket there is an actual one on display in the Apollo building at the Kennedy Space Center. It's open to the public and it's intact and it's amazing. I think Bezos is just pulling a publicity stunt here as he makes no mention at all of the artifacts and treasures on display to the public at the inspiring Kennedy Space Center.
- waterlesscloud 15y ago
  There's one on display in Huntsville too.
joeblau 15y ago
"tough stuff" -- I love Bezos' technical terminology.
tocomment 15y ago
He say it's us government property but aren't there maritime laws related to salvaging ships that say whomever does the salvage owns it?
snorkel 15y ago
Ain't it sad that we are reduced to fishing for our own space trash remind us of when we used to go to the moon?
_rj 15y ago
What if Jeff Bezos took that funding how much ever that he used to find the rockets and used that on education. There are many in different countries who doesn't even have basic education needs. I am not saying Jeff is the doing the wrong thing, he worked hard, he earned it, he might have or might be doing charity work, but the satisfaction you get just by thinking that you can help some kid get educated is more than finding rockets. Just my thoughts.
bootload 15y ago
"... NASA is one of the few institutions I know that can inspire five-year-olds. ..." Best quote.
mkopinsky 15y ago
Side note: How is it that the Atlantic, despite having excellent quality in their articles, manages to consistently attract crap in the comments section? This is almost youtube-eque... (Might need to expand my "hide comments from certain sites" greasemonkey script)
- ars 15y ago
  It's not just the Atlantic - it's every single site. The age of comments is just about finished, I expect more and more sites to remove them (unless the ad views are so high that it makes up for it). My theory is that the only (or the majority) people who have the time to post are those too stupid to have anything else better to do. And once the majority is stupid it becomes too toxic for anyone else to bother. Good forums (like this one) require very careful curating.

284 points by josephmosby 15y ago

I am glad that we have in this world at least a few rich people with uncontrollable curiosity. It seems like wealth is wasted on some.

siavosh 15y ago

Since I was a kid, space has always been a deep source of curiosity and wonder for me. With events like James Cameron's dive last week, Elon Musk's work, and this, it heartens me that private citizens are attempting rekindle the wonders they felt when they were younger for a new generation. All in reaction to the governments budget cuts and the limited ambitions of today's industry titans. The longer term solution maybe showing tax payers scientific/statistical evidence that these sorts of 'stunts' really do yield an impressive ROI. It's a tough thing to do, but might be our way back to places like Mars.

sopooneo 15y ago
How strange that this amazing dream, now rekindled, was originally born of cold war.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- ericd 15y ago
  It's not that strange, competition breeds ambition and innovation. It's in humans' fundamental nature to compete by out-innovating, which is one of the strongest arguments for free markets. Since the fall of the USSR, more competition has been inward focusing, between companies. Most companies tend to compete at a lower level than nation-states, which is why you don't see as many of these huge projects. I think if the US became openly competitive with China, you'd start to see some very large projects again.

grecy 15y ago

I like where he says "I imagine that NASA would decide to make it available to the Smithsonian for all to see." - creating enough publicity around it's eventual public display that NASA will have no choice but to do just that.

josephmosby 15y ago
It does make sense - the Apollo 11 command module is already on display in the Air and Space Museum, as is one of the Saturn 5 rockets.
- HCIdivision17 15y ago
  I remember as a kid going to Space Academy in Huntsville, AL. A camp counselor told us how the engines came to find a home at the Rocket Park of the Alabama Space and Rocket Center. NASA had placed the Saturn V on tour to show off this amazing machine - this particular rocket never went in space, but it was a _functional_ vehicle. The story goes that once the rocket was set up, the governor rallied for the rocket to be labeled a historical landmark. And since it really is an incredible chunk of American history, the motion passed. And, as it turns out, you can't move historical landmarks. Apparently NASA was furious, but played it cool. Or so a museum counselor told a band of 7th graders. More on this particular rocket: http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/butowsky4/space12.htm http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/butowsky4/sp...

ConnorWGarvey 15y ago

I like how Jeff Bezos talking about hiring a team that found the engines ends up with the headline, "Jeff Bezos Discovers ..."

mdonahoe 15y ago
Based on the title, I naively assumed it had more to do with his Blue Origin company. He paid for the effort, so I see nothing wrong with the title. "Jeff Bezos' team" is certainly more accurate.
johngalt 15y ago
And Steve Jobs never wrote a line of code for the iphone. So he didn't create it right?
- pavanky 15y ago
  He did not.

stcredzero 15y ago

This is what gets me about the moon-shot deniers. If NASA was motivated to save expense and risk, doesn't the act of launching the first stages of a bunch of Saturn rockets going to mostly squash any savings flat? Those things are huge, their launch was witnessed by many 10's of thousands, and their flight was tracked by the USSR and anyone else with the technical capability to do so. (Admittedly, the latter is probably only sporadic, but still an effective deterrent.) The second stages -- also huge, also tracked by the USSR and anyone else with the technical capability to do so. The third stages: the same. Even the command module+LEM: freaking conspicuous. And it's not as if you can send them up there, then fake the thing coming back -- you had to actually bring the freaking things back so the USSR and everyone else could track it then too. So, after going to all that trouble, exactly how much money is going to be saved? How much risk is going to be saved? If you're faking a flight to the moon, and your fake command module misses its burn and flies off into the void, you're going to have to fake the deaths or kill off those astronauts anyways. If anything, one has greatly increased the risks by engaging in a such a huge and technically challenging conspiracy. Kudos to Bezos for finding the engine!

mindslight 15y ago
Maybe most moon landing deniers are actually just a conspiracy of scientists hoping to goad NASA into doing it again.
driverdan 15y ago
You give moon landing denier kooks too much credit. They don't care about the evidence.
- conradfr 15y ago
  Yes, the problem is never asking questions, it's not accepting the answers.
nitrogen 15y ago
Wouldn't the mirrors left behind by various missions be the most convincing evidence of all?

Jun8 15y ago

"Though they've been on the ocean floor for a long time, the engines remain the property of NASA." Interesting, I thought Law of Finds stated that abandoned property belongs to the person who salvages it (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6896645.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6896645.stm), or maybe the engines were not abandoned?

swalsh 15y ago
Not a lawyer, but I would imagine the definition of abandoned has some sense of an indistinguishable owner. In the case of Apollo 11, the owner is quite clear. On the other hand, if you consider the law of "Finders Keepers, losers weepers" It is clearly Bezos to do what he wants.
- smackfu 15y ago
  Well, I don't see how it differs from a sunken ship, really.
  - _delirium 15y ago
    In that case, the owner of the ship typically is still the original owner, but there is a whole "law of salvage" that determines what payment, or share of the treasure if it's things like sunken gold, the finder should get.
    - omegant 15y ago
      I don't know if that is the case with state ships. Recently Spain has recovered a gold and silver treasure from the odissey company(they recovered it from a spanish sunked 1800s tall ship)
arjunnarayan 15y ago
I find it odd that it can be considered "not abandoned" when NASA didn't even _know_ where they were. I can understand if NASA said something of the sort "its at XX latitude and YY longitude and we're leaving it there but it's still ours", but I find "we don't know where it is and we aren't actively looking to find it, but if you find it it's ours", especially given the Law of Finds.

leeoniya 15y ago

First James Cameron chills in Challenger Deep for 8 hrs solo, now this? What a week! Maybe James can use his new toy to go down there and hook up the tow cables to bring the engines up!

ChuckMcM 15y ago

There is an interesting sub-text here which should probably get more attention. Jeff Bezos funded this effort. Let that sink in for a moment. When the CIA wanted to get a peak at a Soviet Era sub that sank to 17,000' they paid Howard Hughes to build the Glomar Explorer [1] to go retrieve it. It was a mammoth undertaking which required the financial assistance of a nation state to make it work. In 1982 when Forbes first started listing the 400 richest people they had 13 billionaires and 75 million made the list [2], which is about 167 million in inflation adjusted dollars [3], and the current lists #400 is is $1.05B so a bit over 6x larger even after inflation is considered. The interesting bit for me is that the cost of 'getting things done' has not been going up in pace with the 'money people have' so wealth in the private sector is enabling individuals to do what used to take governments. Worse governments are horribly inefficient at doing things that individuals are efficient at (given their fiduciary responsibility to the tax payers) I talked with some folks at Scaled Composites a bit after their successful X-Prize bid. A common theme was that they could have been successful earlier if it had not been for the red tape put in their way by the government. (some estimated two years earlier but I think that was optimistic). And you look at the world concerns that arise when North Korea tests 'long range' rockets because building a rocket that can get a meaningful payload into orbit is 98% of the way to being able to drop something out of orbit pretty much anywhere you want. Its very different world, and I could imagine folks who would sign on for orbital 'work' or excursions knowing that 5 - 10% of them would end up dying horribly. Not something the government can generally tolerate but explorers can. The risk though is that you end up with a corporation that is has the capability of exploiting space and corporations don't generally sign treaties. That makes for interesting times indeed. [1] https://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm https://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_400 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_400 (hopefully it is accurate) [3] http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi [4] http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#p_40_s_arank_All%20industries_All%20states_All%20categories_ http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#p_40_s_arank_All%20industr...

mcantelon 15y ago
>The interesting bit for me is that the cost of 'getting things done' has not been going up in pace with the 'money people have' so wealth in the private sector is enabling individuals to do what used to take governments. Wealth has been concentrating as well. If the rich continually get richer, it makes sense that at some point their capabilities become comparable to nation states.

ck2 15y ago

This is a waste of time. It's a wealthy man's playtime. How about we kill the F35 and F22 planes entirely and make a Mars mission instead? We're going to be neck deep in drones in this country and around the world within a few years, expensive fighter jets are now worthless.

dkokelley 15y ago
Your beef seems to be more with expensive fighter programs than expensive salvage efforts. I don't see how this really relates to the discussion. Don't underestimate the power of icons. These are the rockets that put us on the moon, and a private citizen is planning on recovering them for posterity, using his own money. Hopefully future generations will be inspired to explore because of this wealthy man's efforts (or 'playtime', as you put it). This should be celebrated.
Cushman 15y ago
I know I say this a lot, but... a Mars mission would be a wealthy man's playtime, too.

Codhisattva 15y ago

Cute but silly really. If you want to see a genuine Saturn V rocket there is an actual one on display in the Apollo building at the Kennedy Space Center. It's open to the public and it's intact and it's amazing. I think Bezos is just pulling a publicity stunt here as he makes no mention at all of the artifacts and treasures on display to the public at the inspiring Kennedy Space Center.

waterlesscloud 15y ago
There's one on display in Huntsville too.

joeblau 15y ago

"tough stuff" -- I love Bezos' technical terminology.

tocomment 15y ago

He say it's us government property but aren't there maritime laws related to salvaging ships that say whomever does the salvage owns it?

snorkel 15y ago

Ain't it sad that we are reduced to fishing for our own space trash remind us of when we used to go to the moon?

_rj 15y ago

What if Jeff Bezos took that funding how much ever that he used to find the rockets and used that on education. There are many in different countries who doesn't even have basic education needs. I am not saying Jeff is the doing the wrong thing, he worked hard, he earned it, he might have or might be doing charity work, but the satisfaction you get just by thinking that you can help some kid get educated is more than finding rockets. Just my thoughts.

bootload 15y ago

"... NASA is one of the few institutions I know that can inspire five-year-olds. ..." Best quote.

mkopinsky 15y ago

Side note: How is it that the Atlantic, despite having excellent quality in their articles, manages to consistently attract crap in the comments section? This is almost youtube-eque... (Might need to expand my "hide comments from certain sites" greasemonkey script)

ars 15y ago
It's not just the Atlantic - it's every single site. The age of comments is just about finished, I expect more and more sites to remove them (unless the ad views are so high that it makes up for it). My theory is that the only (or the majority) people who have the time to post are those too stupid to have anything else better to do. And once the majority is stupid it becomes too toxic for anyone else to bother. Good forums (like this one) require very careful curating.