3 Minute Marks on Pilot’s Chronographs: (Partially) Debunking Myths and (Some) Dead Reckoning

SkunkPrince · Nov 3, 2021

cvalue13
According to the The Association de Sauvegarde de l'Oeuf Mayonnaise (ASOM), the perfect time for boiling an egg is 8 minutes and 40 seconds, not a second more or less - and they have a chronograph for that:

“Positioning the hand directly on the egg located between 8 and 9 minutes on the Egg Master track will count eight minutes and 40 seconds, the perfect cooking time for oeuf mayonnaise. The quartz-powered timer beeps every minute as the finish time approaches, and speeds up in the final moments, ensuring that the cook is well positioned to retrieve their egg from the pot of boiling water. On the dial, you'll find ASOM's crest – a plate of eggs – along with the organization's motto, which translates to "Time flies, eggs are forever."”

That has nothing to do with eating soft-boiled eggs. Which people still do,

JimInOz · Nov 3, 2021

SkunkPrince
That has nothing to do with eating soft-boiled eggs. Which people still do,

Of course, it's for exotic French eggs 😉.

This is the correct timing for proper soft boiled eggs that you can dip your soldiers in:

Bring at least one litre of lightly salted water to a rolling boil.
Prick the base of four eggs with an egg pricker to stop shells cracking.
Lower the eggs into the water and start your chronograph.
Remove the eggs after four minutes and forty five seconds.
Place in pre-warmed china egg cups.
Slice off the tops and enjoy.

blufinz52 · Nov 3, 2021

When I was stationed in the UK (East Anglia) in the early '70's, I made quite a few calls to my family in the US. I can remember the charge (always collect 😀 for the 1st three minutes, but never felt the need to time it, as a voice would let us know that the time was almost up. We either said our goodbyes, or stayed on for extra time and cost for my parents. A 3-minute chronograph doesn't make sense to me ref. to long-distance calls.

DirtyDozen12 · Nov 3, 2021

cvalue13
The Longines Avigation Big Eye in my OP has some interesting backstory, to your point. Apparently the vintage piece it was brought to Longines as an unknown to their museum, and prompted the reproduction - retaining the “Big Eye” totalizer with 3 minute demarcations.

I know the backstory. I even handled the vintage piece in Basel with Longines. It was immediately obvious to me, and another collector there, that the watch was not manufactured by Longines.

cvalue13
That said, on a quick search I could find other Longines examples with the 3/6/9 dial (avoiding for present purposes any chance of redial discussion):

The next Longines you posted has a refinished dial. You will be hard pressed to find an original dial with such markings.

cvalue13
However, in an interesting twist to your question I also found perhaps a Longines mate to the earlier-posted Patek (both posted below)

I am familiar with this watch and agree that it is in the same vein as the Patek dial. I also agree that these dials were probably intended to be useful for long distance calls.

cvalue13
If anything, I see this Patek and Longines as further evidence against the notion that long distance rates were related to other chronographs having successive 3/6/9 minute demarcations. For long distance calls, all that was heloful was a three minute demarcation, with subsequent minute indexes thereafter - as shown in the Patek/Longines examples.

I see what you are saying here, but I am reminded of our discussion about the use of "IIII" instead of "IV" on dials with Roman numerals. Maybe the 6 and 9 markings were, at least partially, an aesthetic convention. To my eyes, having just one emphasized marking at 3 minutes looks awkward. This might begin to explain why certain manufacturers such as Longines and Patek Philippe decided not to utilize such markings. It became a choice between a somewhat useful but unattractive marking at 3 minutes, a conventional but largely useless trio of markings at 3/6/9, and no emphasized markings, which looked the best and certainly did not prevent the measurement of events in 3 minute increments. I do not know that I believe this but it seems to be a possibility.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

Since I reference it in the OP, I thought I’d link to a few discussions elsewhere and highlight a few entries that bias my own view

This one from WUS

Elsewhere, I found references that Jeff Kingston, the not watch collector, author, historian, and both pilot and pilot instructor also maintains this view:

I’ve attempted to reach out to Jeff Kingston but have not yet connected.

Still, he has strong views on a chronograph as relates to pilots, as seen in this interview of Kingston in WatchTime:

Separately, I thought I’d share some other interesting variations or considerations found along the way;

First, as mentioned/intended, I do not think these marks were meant only for pilots, but instead that the same reason the marks were useful to non-pilots (divisions of 60) made them particularly useful for pilots. Regarding utility to non-pilots, here’s a rather interesting example!

Next, we’ve talked about 30 and 15 minute totalizers with the markings, so I thought I’d add a few examples of 45 minute totalizers with the markings (including up to 12-minute)

Next, some (what I believe to be) early stop watches with a totalizer displayed only in 3 minute increments

Also, an interesting later Co-Pilot with both the expected 15 minute totalizer with 3 minute demarcations (the standard for this Co-Pilot), but additionally adding colored 5 minute yachting indications

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

http://rdept.cgaux.org/documents/Navigation Best Practices 5.1.pdf

DirtyDozen12
I know the backstory. I even handled the vintage piece in Basel with Longines. It was immediately obvious to me, and another collector there, that the watch was not manufactured by Longines.

Regarding all of your expert Longines intel, thank you.

I’m curious to confirm: are you then saying that the 2017 reissue was a reissue of a non-Longines watch!? Incredible!

DirtyDozen12
I see what you are saying here, but I am reminded of our discussion about the use of "IIII" instead of "IV" on dials with Roman numerals. Maybe the 6 and 9 markings were, at least partially, an aesthetic convention.

This I very much take onboard as a possibility, and I appreciate this very insightful addition.

Similarly, it could also be that 15 or 30 minute totalizers displayed in 3-minute (rather than 5-minute) increments were a purely aesthetic decision for which we’re (I’m?) scrambling for justification, post hoc.

We’re that true, though, I think it would be fair to say that the aesthetic decision stumbled into an actual utility.

One thing that I think is being passed over at times over is that as an independent and irrefutable fact that, based on the textbooks, presentations, etc., in navigation whole number divisions of 60 (3, 6, 9, 15, etc.) are widely utilized (because they provide quick, convenient, conversions) whereas increments of 5 minutes are not (because they do not).

Now, this independent fact can separately be argued as to whether it is the reason watch manufacturers made decisions about watch design (versus, perhaps, an accidental aesthetic choice).

But (and this is not directed toward you, @DirtyDozen12 ), it should be separately laid to rest that - independent of the question of watch design - the increments of 3, 6, 9, 15, etc., are widely utilized increments of time in performing various navigation calculations.

I thought the few things I linked in the OP, plus a charitable reading of my non-journalistic forum post, might be enough to permit at least the benefit of the doubt.

but to the extent not, just some examples in addition to the ones linked in the OP:

from the US Coast Guard Auxiliary website:

From a Coast Guard primer titled “Surface Guide to Operational Navigation”, describing the 3/6 minute rules as integral to the basics of, in essence, a Nautical Slide Rule and course-plotting:

From the Coast Guard’s Internal “Navigation Crew Training Manual”:

The Blog of a cartographer:

From a document titled “MENTAL MATHEMATICS FOR
MARITIME WARFARE OFFICERS, PILOTS & AVIATION WARFARE OFFICERS” made by the Royal Australian Navy;

From the US Navy Flight Manual, utilizing the 6 minute rule in calculating head/tail/cross wind effects on achieved fixes:

Here’s a Royal Navy pilot student about to take his/her “Flight Aptitude Test” to hopefully score in to be a pilot, asking a test question answered by a moderator of the Royal Navy’s internal forums:

From the book “Marine Navigation: Piloting” by Richard Hobbs (2012)

The list may truly go on, and anyone still wanting to discuss the validity of this separate matter of navigational history should I think be putting this thread off course of the more interesting (and extant) questions - such as the degree of either correlation or causation with this navigational history and the history of chronograph dial/movement designs.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

Caliber561
40s Omega 321s, back when they were called the Cal 27 CHRO, as well as early Oyster Chronographs do exhibit those 3-minute marks. They seem to have all but disappeared by the end of the 50s though.

Sleeping on this overnight, at least with respect to Omega, I thought it worth noting that many Omega chronographs transitioned into having central sweep minute totalizers - such as those based on the cal.1040 (and it’s derivatives).

Presumably a (intended/purported) reason for a shift to central sweep 60-minute totalizers (often with giant, orange, airplane-shaped pointers) was to increase legibility for all minute increments?

Just a thought, and otherwise to note that Omega’s chronographs seem to trend toward rarely using minute totalizers in sub-dials (other than the most obvious exception 😁)

Foo2rama · Nov 3, 2021

15 minute totalizers are easier to read hence thier use.

the 3 minute markers are clearly for long distance calls that where very expensive and billed in 3 minute intervals. I’m not sure why this is being argued. It has no th info to do with pay phone calls at all. It was so that when on a long distance call you had an alert as to when to get off the line so that you did not go into the next 3 minute billing interval.

3 minute markers on a 15 minute totalizer is asthetic.

DirtyDozen12 · Nov 3, 2021

cvalue13
I’m curious to confirm: are you then saying that the 2017 reissue was a reissue of a non-Longines watch!? Incredible!

Yes, and there have been subsequent reissues (plural!) of watches with refinished dials.

cvalue13
But (and this is not directed toward you, @DirtyDozen12 ), it should be separately laid to rest that - independent of the question of watch design - the increments of 3, 6, 9, 15, etc., are widely utilized increments of time in performing various navigation calculations.

Based on my admittedly cursory reading of the evidence provided, I agree.

cvalue13
Now, this independent fact can separately be argued as to whether it is the reason watch manufacturers made decisions about watch design (versus, perhaps, an accidental aesthetic choice).

At this point, I am inclined to think that a combination of factors (e.g. utility for calculations, utility for long distance calls, aesthetic considerations) are behind the ubiquity and absence of such markings on chronograph dials.

Caliber561 · Nov 3, 2021

cvalue13
Sleeping on this overnight, at least with respect to Omega, I thought it worth noting that many Omega chronographs transitioned into having central sweep minute totalizers - such as those based on the cal.1040 (and it’s derivatives).

Presumably a (intended/purported) reason for a shift to central sweep 60-minute totalizers (often with giant, orange, airplane-shaped pointers) was to increase legibility for all minute increments?

Just a thought, and otherwise to note that Omega’s chronographs seem to trend toward rarely using minute totalizers in sub-dials (other than the most obvious exception 😁)

Well pretty much all of Omega's chronographs in the 60s (dress 320s, Seamaster 321s, and the you-know-whats) didn't have the three-minute divisions, so there is a gap where they go unaccounted for. Not sure why this is the case, but I personally do like the aesthetic of a cleaner subdial.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

Caliber561
and the you-know-whats) didn't have the three-minute divisions

At least with the Speedmaster, I’d think it simply that it’s intended use-case in the auto-racing segment meant that the tachymetre alone was sufficient. In that auto-racing segment of chronographs, I can think of none that I view as having been target-marketed to the auto-racing context with the 3/6/9 demarcations. Instead, the track racing context perhaps lent itself perfectly for timing events that transpired in fewer than 60 seconds, on the tachy.

While multiple conclusions of causation/correlation can be drawn from this, several of which you just mentioned, one is worth drawing out: if it’s true that chronographs target-marketed to the auto-racing segment consistently lacked 3/6/9 minute demarcations seen in chronographs marketed to other contexts, we’re auto-racers particularly known for disliking long-distance calling? 😎

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

Foo2rama
the 3 minute markers are clearly for long distance calls that where very expensive and billed in 3 minute intervals. I’m not sure why this is being argued.

its being “discussed” because no one can provide any evidence that long distance calls were billed in successive 3-minute blocks.

instead, all evidence I’ve found is that long distance calls were charged at an initial 3 minute minimum, but thereafter were charged per minute

accordingly, chronograph demarcations in successive multiples of 3 would have no apparent utility (beyond the initial 3 minute mark)

in any event, I’m not so much arguing it as inviting anyone whatsoever to please provide any proof of long distance calls being charged in successive 3-minute increments, beyond “I was there, I [miss]remember”

Until there’s some such proof to that effect, and that also counter-balances the contrary evidence that phone calls were charged in a different way, I can only assume people are perhaps just parroting what they were told by someone else uninformed.

Again, I would very happily love any coherent explanation of these markings, but the long distance call hypothesis seems the stuff of urban legend.

DirtyDozen12 · Nov 3, 2021

Just for fun, a couple more well-known pilot's chronographs that did not have the emphasized markings.

https://shop.hodinkee.com/products/1960s-military-zenith-cairelli?variant=20394728452

https://shop.hodinkee.com/products/...raph-reference-1550-sg-3h?variant=42551959375

https://shop.hodinkee.com/products/...-the-swedish-air-force?variant=13520304209995

Edit: I added the Lemania.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

In North America, where Bell/ATT had a regulated monopoly, and elsewhere, long distance calls were almost certainly not charged in successive 3 minute blocks (so as to make quick sense of the 3/6/9 demarcations)

In addition to the earlier contrary evidence provided, I find also the following from a book on the history of certain US governmental divisions, the following
relevant to 1953:

Strangely, a 1924 mathematics textbook contains the following problem set (note also the similarly-structured telegraph rates):

While a bit too late for full applicability, here from a 1975 advertisement from Ma Bell describe that any 3 minute structure at that time was only for the initial minimum, and charged in single minute increments thereafter

Also from 1975, a U.S. military pamphlet regarding being stationed in Italy and making calls back to the U.S.:

Here, from 1943 FCC considering proposed rate structures for government ship-to-shore long distance rates being proposed for bud/adoption:

From a 1925 book titled “The Business Man’s English”, instructing how long distance calls are made, discussed (in English), and example rates:

From a 1954 Congressional report regarding the various economic status conditions of the Virgin Islands:

A 1949 paper by the U.S. Department of Commerce describing Venezuela’s publicaly run long distance services:

The same 1949 paper describing South Africa’s long distance infrastructure and rate structure (noting here, for the first time, we see a restricted maximum of 6 minutes):

Same, this time for Guatemala:

Same but for 1960 Turkey

Many, many, more of these country reports exist for various years and countries, and of the dozens I’ve surveyed not one deviates from a 3-minute minimum followed by 1 minute incremental thereafter.

I’ll end with a 1943 Congressional record, discussing the then-U.S.-wide regulated monopoly’s announced plans to change its national long distance rate approach (due to and avoiding a Congressional investigation), keeping same the “initial 3-minutes” but reducing the “each additional minute” overtime charge in half:

So, I mentioned only briefly in my OP that I could find no evidence of successive 3-minute rate structures at any time or anywhere, but instead only evidence that almost unifirmally long distance rates throughout the 20th century were structured instead on an initial 3-minute minimum followed by per minute increments.

That suggestion was met with various anecdotal dismissals, or assertions without accompanying information.

So, I’ve offered what may be not just more but enough non-anecdotal information to I hope require a rather concerted explanation to the contrary before we should take as true that, instead, long distance calls were charged in some other way here in the US or in any other part of the world.

None of this is to say that it is impossible we’re missing some great, hidden, nuance in rate structures of the 1920s-1970s … but instead to say I only see evidence to believe people are mistaken to suggest it is somehow obvious that distance calls were charged successive in 3-minute blocks.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

Now, confounding to all the information above regarding actual long distance rate structures, I’ve separately chased down this book, first published in 1956, revised in 1977, and here citing a 2018 e-publishing

In a section of the book broadly describing chronograph features of various sorts, among dozens of other figures, are the two the following submissions:

It’s worth noting that there is no other discussion of this assertion in the book, nor is any explanation given for how these marks might be used (when the rest of the chapter goes into great detail regarding the use of any number of other dial features), nor any backup for the assertion provided.

Subject to these caveats, it is the only contemporary mention of this concept I have seen or seen produced by anyone else.

For me, it brings to mind two main possibilities:

First, the author is himself merely parroting an myth also told to him (especially, perhaps, if these notes were added in some later addition?), or

Second, there is some unobvious (to us) way these marks were useful in tracking telephone calls (given how they were rate structured), which utility was either (A) unobvious even to the author (given the rather curious lack of description of the “function” where other functions are neatly explained), or (B) so obvious to the author that he thought it needed no further explanation (in which case, joke’s on us)

SkunkPrince · Nov 3, 2021

I think US telephone practice is a red herring. More important is Switzerland and the rest of Europe. Now that information would be useful, I think.

MoclovFlop · Nov 3, 2021

Just to add to the confusion/my own curiosity. What is the deal then with the Benrus Sky Chiefs 4 minute increments? Another watch "for pilots" but why 4 minutes?

Screen Shot 2021-11-03 at 5.18.20 PM.png

DirtyDozen12 · Nov 3, 2021

cvalue13
Subject to these caveats, it is the only contemporary mention of this concept I have seen or seen produced by anyone else.

Check this out: https://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=2732891&rid=0

SkunkPrince · Nov 3, 2021

MoclovFlop
Just to add to the confusion/my own curiosity. What is the deal then with the Benrus Sky Chiefs 4 minute increments? Another watch "for pilots" but why 4 minutes?

Eggs! 4-minute intervals were also popular for some egg cooking if you were doing more than two.

cvalue13 · Nov 3, 2021

DirtyDozen12
Check this out: https://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=2732891&rid=0

Thanks for turning me on to this; I was able to order a vintage copy of this to arrive in the next several days. It’s a 17 page pamphlet, spiral-bound.

Meanwhile, I was able to find quite a lot for present purposes:

Notably, the book I referenced just above appears to have drawn figures derived from these photos, see these side by side:

Accordingly, while the book’s publishing is purported from 1946 and this pamphlet from 1951, there appears to be some sort of cross-pollination.

And, unlike the book, this pamphlet spells out in sentence form the successive 3-minute time block concept as relating to the 3/6/9 demarcations. Still, my same caveats wrt the book I would tend to also apply to this pamphlet - until several other pieces fall into place.

Perhaps as someone suggested we need to look to Swiss/Europe call structures? I’ve come across only European call structures that follow the (can we call it?) US convention. I’ll try and find Swiss information? 😒😲😬👎

But I’ll admit to being dubious that manufacturers randomly plastered watch dials marketed to (seemingly) all international markets with demarcations that would be relevant to only the manufacturer’s home area code.

This mystery is really quite the treat!

3 Minute Marks on Pilot’s Chronographs: (Partially) Debunking Myths and (Some) Dead Reckoning

SkunkPrince

JimInOz

blufinz52

DirtyDozen12

cvalue13

cvalue13

cvalue13

Foo2rama

DirtyDozen12

Caliber561

cvalue13

cvalue13

DirtyDozen12

cvalue13

cvalue13

SkunkPrince

MoclovFlop

DirtyDozen12

SkunkPrince

cvalue13

Similar threads

Parts 1, 2 & 3: Visiting NY with wife + 100 minute speed watch tourism on 5th and Madison