The Shuttlecraft Galileo

As far as verification goes, you guys have to consider that most people dont have the level of scrutiny that we do. She is probably just your average Jane(way) who bought a cool piece for $3000 back in the day. It happens more then you know.

Now fast forward a couple of decades and its in pieces in a shed. I think her pics are legit. Like I said earlier, most people wouldnt take super hi res pics with a grey scale meter and newspaper. Believe me, whoever actually does buy this will be armed with proper reference material before any $$ changes hands.

Someone mentioned that she wanted $100,000 for it?? If so, she is in orbit. Only a Ferengi would pass up an offer for a tenth of that.
 
It doesn't matter who long people have been around, all of the stuff I've seen from those guys is plain awful. They only reason they have been able to recruit is they pay. We are talking about movie people here, it doesn't matter what they did in the past. Most are just as broke as the rest of us, so they will grab whatever they can get.

Just a reminder: we are the Hugo Award-nominated freakshow and the Nebula Award-nominated freakshow. And we are indeed an acquired taste; we are not everyone's cup of tea.
 
I believe it is legit. The cell phone camera pictures seem to show enough tells that the parts are Galileo-esque in shape. Since those lower parts are unique, the rest of the structure can be built from the ground up as there is enough provinence to still call it the TOS shuttlecraft.

Besides, I've seen aircraft restorers practically remake whole WW2 warbirds and call them "restored" even when all they had to work with was part of a nearly completely trashed main wing spar and airframe.

If Doug and Mike really are serious about getting this, the transport of it from Ohio to California should be interesting in and of itself (although in this folded down state, it would be a little easier to transport than it was as a built set piece).

You know, with this project, plus some possible movement on perhaps convincing the Smithsonian to restore the 11 foot Enterprise model (to get rid of the Ed Mirecki weathering job), combined with some pretty cool Trek related model projects, all we would need now to pull of a hat trick of Trek would be if somebody were to finally come forward and reveal the whereabouts of the 33" studio model that Gene Roddenberry once owned (the one that has been MIA for almost three decades now).
 
I know a quality resto wouldn't be cheap.
But it's not an aircraft, there is no engine, there was no interior to speak of.

The door mechanism and step the only moving parts?

I wonder what the major costs are going to be?


I hope no attempt at interior other then what we saw on screen is attempted which
was almost nothing at all and only what could be glimpsed through the door.
The interior set never would have fit in there anyways as most of us know and they go for as filmed as the goal.
 
As I recall from "Way to Eden", there was at least the skylight mesh and maybe some glimpses of a panel, but that is all. I must admit, when they debuted the exterior piece in "The Galileo Seven" they did a fine job of cutting from the interior set to the exterior piece in multiple shots. The work was pretty effective. Somewhere in my collection I still have the photo-novel of that story from the 1970s (I use it as my primary shuttlecraft reference). For those that don't know what a photo novel is, picture scenes from a movie or TV show laid out like a comic book with the word balloons and you get the general idea.

One thing that would be nice to see if it still exists (or if it can be re-created) would be the opening circuit panels in back near the aft landing strut. They were featured rather prominently in a couple episodes (and the Trek pyro guys had fun making the circuits smoke). ;)
 
That was AFTER the first restoration.

As you see it is ALREADY on a trailer in this video.

It was not on a trailer when sold by Roger Heisman.
 
I'll be following this thread with interest. I had written off any last scrap of the Galileo as destroyed based on past RPF research. But like the great white whale, it keeps reappearing.

The owner/seller does desperately need to take some better photos, though the ones provided don't look fake to me (other objects visible seem to put the shuttlecraft parts in the right size range).
 
"Money talks and BSS walks." Verification is needed -clear and plain.

Only a fool would use a phone cam to get HD pics? I say it's a Con-Game!

This is a SCAM to get anyone (Most likely a Devoted Trek Fan) with the cash to come get it and get scammed. That's the real deal here folks!

$100,000 Oh for God Sake, she most be from Mars!

Please explain why no Local or State news on this? I would think every media would be on this like bees to honey. No TV spot? No newspaper article? Sorry, I call it like I see it. If it was the real thing it would have more NEWS on it.
 
I'm pretty sure it's not a scam. Just by looking at the bad photos it is obvious that it is the Galileo not to mention several high-profile people are in negotiations with the owners attorney to obtain it and restore it. If it is a scam it hast to be the stupidest scam in history.
 
I think it's going to be Sci-Fiction until it is verified. Who are the high-profile people in negotiations with the owners attorney to obtain it and restore it?? All I see is bad photos and again --> No Press? Why?

Maybe, but I just can't believe it until the high-profile people come out and say they really got the Galileo to the News Media or EXTRA! lol...sorry.
 
Last edited:
They are known to a few, and that's exactly what will happen an announcement will be made if and when they have aquired it



I think it's going to be Sci-Fiction until it is verified. Who are the high-profile people in negotiations with the owners attorney to obtain it and restore it?? All I see is bad photos and again --> No Press? Why?

Maybe, but I just can't believe it until the high-profile people come out and say they really got the Galileo to the News Media or EXTRA! lol...sorry.
 
This thread is more than 11 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top