Pic and brief description here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_...7269/html/1.stm

Doesn't that red soil throw you for a bit...........?

Brian

Nice picture. I have heard the auction story before, but it has always puzzled me. Who sold it? What exactly was sold? - hardware, rights to images, the name? On what basis did the seller claim a right to sell it? I would really like to know the story behind this.

Phil

Very nice pic. That of course is a terrestrial test version, basic 9 wheel chassis (note the 9th odometer wheel in stowed position on left), without the "bath tub" instrument module or solar panel lid. The soil color reminds me of the Marsokhods that the Soviets once talked about..

Kenny

More importantly, who bought it? I have a bridge on Venus I'd like to sell them.

Oh no you don't... they tried that before, bought London Bridge in error when they thought they were buying the iconic Tower Bridge, and set it up at Havasu Lake in Arizona. Won't fall for that again.

To answer Phil, I believe they bought the actual vehicle. So we now have things on the moon owned by just 3 parties to my knowledge, the US and Russian/Soviet governments, and this Lunokhod owner, whoever he/she be. It will doubtless be retrievable in the far future, and certainly a sellable antique.

I suppose we should add a few personal mementoes left by Apollo astronauts, such as Charlie Duke's now-shrivelled family photo, which in theory may still be the property of the astros and descendants.

I would be surprised that the Soviet (or Russian) government would have given the thing up for sale. I think there's something fishy about this story.

Phil

I've listened through a long Usenet argument about the legal ownership status of man-made items left on the Moon. The gist, as I recall it, is that you can make a good case for the equipment having been abandoned, and therefore it would legal for a third party to salvage it. If the two governments (and one putative private owner) intend to make a case for ownership at some future time, I think it's incumbent upon them to make such declarations at the time of apparent abandonment.

I believe the rule is that the equipment still belongs to the respective original owners until/unless a legal attempt at salvage is made, however.

Of course, this all has to do with legal matters (international ones, at that) and so I could be completely wrong... But I believe the above is what a few lawyers came up with in that overly-long Usenet discussion.

-the other Doug

Is there any other sort


Doug

Wikipedia has an article regarding the Lunokhod program, and towards the bottom, a discussion regarding the auction if anyone is interested.....:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod

Brian

Other Doug's comment gave me a brilliant idea (I get them a lot):

The people who bought the Lunokhods have also abandoned them. Well, they've clearly made no effort to salvage them, which counts as abandonment to me. So I'm going public with my claim to them - right here and now. After all, I've mapped the Lunokhod routes and landing sites in more detail than anyone outside the original science teams. Yup, they belong to me now. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!

Just a minute while I add this to my CV...

Phil

Phil,

If you are correct about Viking 2's position then I think that also counts as a significant factor so you should put in a claim for that too.

JoeM