@cvalue13 - thanks for this thread. Very good read and good contributions. Ref the comment above and having read everything today I think Navigation 0 might be an unfair score. The rule of 3 might apply to a number of things including navigation.
Thank you, and yes, I believe
@S.H. either misspoke or misunderstood the thrust of this research to date.
There appear to be at least two different “3” related phenomena going on. On one hand, are those watches perhaps like
@JimInOz and
@STANDY posted, which appear to be fairly standard (let’s call them) dress chronographs for the “everyman” with nothing more than 3/6/9 demarcations added to the minute totalizer. I’ve agreed and for some time now been collecting evidence (like my Heuer post above) that the most apparent explanation is the timing of long distance calls in certain European countries during a period when charges were totaled in successive 3 minute blocks (making them essentially vestigial markings in the U.S. and many other countries without that charge structure).
Separately, at the other end of the spectrum (if you will) there is a different category of watch, marketed to pilots or even made specifically in response to military requisition requests for pilots, where the manufacturers have gone quite further than merely adding 3/6/9 emphasis on otherwise standard dial designs. In this second category, manufacturers did things like:
-> change the movements to have 15 rather than 30 minute totalizers (making them more legible for short increments measurement)
-> create a “big eye” minute totalizer (again to make them more legible)
-> denote
only 3 minute increments on the minute totalizer (dispensing with the 5 minute marks altogether, and in effect again making the 3 minute increments more legible)
-> adding luminous hands to the minute totalizer
-> adding luminous plots to the 3-minute indices on the totalizer
There are some examples of these watches that have done all of the above, and for watches made for military pilot use only. I do
not believe that manufactures went this far in order to help pilots time telephone calls, much less at from their cockpits and at night (this the legibility improvements).
The above are presented as two separate categories, and many such examples of those categories can be found. But then also there are more muddled examples that might not nearly fit. But muddled examples should be no surprise to us heeled in vintage watch oddities, especially in the 50s-70s. Manufacturers were better or worse at execution, or sometimes simply experimenting in their marketing, or any number of reasons there are at times exceptions to rules.
But for either category of watch, I’m still personally irked by the relative lack of primary documentation or explanations around what are currently mere deductive inferences on everyone’s part, myself included.
It’s funny how there appears to be a strong tendency in some to say “it’s not for pilots
there’s no evidence for that, so it must be for phone calls” when there’s an equal amount of evidence for
that.
In truth, there’s quite a lot of
inference for both, but frustratingly little
primary evidence for either. Though, we’re in this thread starting to compile more than can be found anywhere else.