I believe the lister's perception of "has seen considerable use" is far different from mine. And Jack, if that piece was carried in "Vietnam, and probably Laos and Cambodia", it was predominately at 10,000 feet in a flight suit or flight bag.

Personally, I would like to see this knife go to somebody that will appreciate it. A close friend with a stellar history in exploration just auctioned some of his property after seeing another recently deceased friend's property dispersed haphazardly by his heirs. When I asked him why he didn't give a particularly important piece to his son he said "Because he never showed any interest in it while I'm still here, so why should he care when I'm dead?"

I just bought two new shotguns and an Alaska Skinner, so I am a little light in the discretionary funds department, but I would buy it if I had the scratch.

Believe it or not, I have a pretty good idea of what a knife carried in the field in Vietnam looks like. But I also know many Randalls were “carried” in a duffle bag, or spent their tour hanging on a "for emergency" web-belt in an office on a support base … but they too were still "carried" in Vietnam (just not in "the field").

But I don’t usually just post fact-less or thoughtless opinions. I suggest you reread the obit I took the trouble to search and post... perhaps it will help someone understand the condition of the knife. By the way... he was not a pilot...but if he had been... well ... do you know the casualty rate among pilots in Vietnam?

“...On retirement from the Air force he joined the United States Agency for International Development and served four years as Chief of Civilian Health Facilities in South Vietnam. In 1971 he moved his family to Vientiane, Laos where he was assigned as the Hospital Administration Advisor to the Kingdom of Laos. He also worked as an advisor and consultant in Cambodia...”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bid is over $3,000 with 6 days to go. I wonder what this knife is going to bring?

As do I



We are in agreement then, and this Astro is one of those that spent the majority of time in a duffle bag or desk drawer. I am only pointing this out because if this gentleman humped this thing on his web gear for four years, it would look substantially different than it does, but you already know that as you so clearly avowed you "have a pretty good idea of what a knife carried in the field in Vietnam looks like".



?



Don't need to reread it, thanks. Yes, I do know the casualty rate of pilots of different duty and branch of service in Viet Nam, but I am unclear what that has to do with the condition of this Astro. To help me understand, perhaps you could expound on the correlation between the two.

Gentlemen, with respect, we are talking about a knife formerly owned by a man who served his country in three wars and in the dawn of American space exploration. Then, upon retirement, he continued to serve overseas in US AID. There is probably more to his story that we do not know.

Personally, I don't care if the knife was carried through Laos and Cambodia in a golf bag. IMHO, this discussion about the definition of "carried" is going in a direction that ignores the owner's lifetime of service and the unique history of this knife. I believe it is unnecessary.

Exactly my original point (see below). I don't know the reason for the subsequent gratuitous rock throwing, nor who the rocks were aimed at (me? pilots? USAF? Lt. Col Salvo? or his service in Vietnam-SEAsia? model 17 knives?). Knowing what some AID people did in addition to their "day" job, I also wonder if the obit tells the whole story.





Regards

With all due respect, who is throwing gratuitous rocks Jack? Let's compare ......






I merely presented a case for the excellent condition of the knife and sheath, which one would presume precludes it from any real hard use or exposure to the elements by an Air Force veteran, hence my 10,000 ft statement. Yet I am attacked as you state I am posting "fact-less or thoughtless opinions". Wow. On top of that, you question my reading comprehension.

Lastly, you inexplicably throw the casualty rates of "pilots" in Viet Nam into the equation, and I am still trying to wrap my head around that one.

I have to agree with Jacknola that the way that I read the officers work history, I see "Case Officer" written all over it. In simple terms you don't wind up in certain jobs from 1966 (after 'retirement') and then go into jobs like the man had without 'special assistance'.

The man was in special places with special jobs his whole career.

That being said, carrying a "NASA knife" (which he would know was special),in combat, seems a bit out of character.

Tom V.

Sir, we are not in agreement.

In my opinion, the knife shows evidence of being fairly heavily used. It has been repeatedly sharpened on both top and main edge. Despite being stainless, it is heavily scratched, scarred, the handle stained and discolored with a piece broken off. The sheath is stained and shiny on the back from frequent wear. It is faded on the front, and discolored wherever grimy fingers repeatedly touched it, such as on the stone flap and end of the keeper strap. The stone is worn and used with lots of metal imbedded.




It's ok if you want to put your references to me in “quotes” implying you doubt my veracity about Vietnam. But, in my view you took an implied shot at the USAF and Lt. Col. Salvo, saying that this supposedly pristine knife (yeah.. right) probably wasn't carried in Vietnam-Laos-Cambodia except “flying at 10,000 ft.”

That indicates to me you originally did not read the obit, which identified USAF Lt. Col. Salvo as a medical person, not a pilot. Furthermore, you seem to imply he did not actually carry his knife, it was not frequently on his hip on the ground, and probably wasn't even in SE Asia except passing over at high altitude. I have no idea why you felt it necessary to doubt Lt. Col. Salvo’s life history as reflected in this artifact. But to me, you certainly managed to do it.

More objectionable was the apparent assumption that USAF pilot’s knifes (if he had been a pilot) were in a desk or barracks or flying at 10,000 ft. Perhaps you never saw an A-1 Able Dog Skyraider down on the tree tops dropping nape, while taking heavy ground fire? And you may not know about the 10 hour flying days, soaked in sweat, etc, some of those combat pilots put into their job… presumably while wearing a Randall. But it happened, and their Randall’s showed wear tear, sweat staining, and sharpening marks, etc.

If I have misinterpreted your comments, then I plead guilty to being overly sensitive to off-hand remarks about Vietnam, Vietnam Veterans, and Vietnam service.

Regards

First, the knife is not stainless.

Second, sharpening does in and of itself does not constitute use, particularly if it is sharpening done incorrectly. Doesn't appear that is the case here, but wanted to get that in the conversation. The knife does exhibit moderate use/handling, but nothing to indicate "being fairly heavily used". I base this on examining more "carried" pieces than I can count. And yes, it remains in excellent condition for a "carried" piece.

Third, the sheath exhibits evidence of light to moderate carry, with much of the nape on the reverse still as when it was made. It definitely does not show heavy use.

Fourth, I do not see where the handle has a piece broken off. Can you point it out?



I quote you Jack because that is what you have said. No other reason. You should refrain from making more out of this than it is, and it has not been personal on my part, you are the only one that threw "gratuitous rocks". I will again quote you :



I assure you, there is nothing fact-less or thoughtless in my opinion.



Again, you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. I did read it and gleaned that he may have done several things that involved flight time. I never said he was a pilot, only that he may have seen time in the air. Call me crazy, but logic being what it is, someone serving in the Air Force (at rank) might see an aircraft or two from the inside at altitude?



Objectionable? “10,000 ft” was a metaphor Jack, you don’t get that? Let’s think about his for a moment, and using the obit you reference, it does not seem Mr. Salvo was piloting “an A-1 Able Dog Skyraider down on the tree tops dropping nape, while taking heavy ground fire”. He also wasn’t enduring “10 hour flying days, soaked in sweat, etc, some of those combat pilots put into their job… presumably while wearing a Randall.” No, he was identified in the obit “as a medical person, not a pilot.” So Jack, the scenarios you have spelled out are invalid pertaining to Mr. Salvo. That does not in any way minimize Mr. Salvo’s contribution and service to his country. Far from it. Nor does it preclude Mr. Salvo from spending many hours in the air in the capacity of his duty, all the while possibly carrying his Randall. What it does is make your argument moot.



You have grossly misrepresented my comments, you are overly sensitive, and it is insulting for you to insinuate that ANYTHING I have said constitutes “off-hand remarks about Vietnam, Vietnam Veterans, and Vietnam service. “

In the end, and what the whole debate for me has been about is the condition of the knife, and you apparently have a different view on the condition than me. That is ok. For you though, it appears the debate has been about something else.