Everyone has their opinion, I think the textured grey dial and black outer ring looked particularly rich and attractive, complimented by the gold elements and bezel. Some think it is garish, or too dressy, and some just don't like gold. Omega could never design a watch that would satisfy all customers, the world just doesn't work that way whether it is a man made or natural object. Some like, some don't.

Even if Omega made an exact replica of the moon era Speedmaster down to dial, case, hands, bracelet, box and 321 movement and charged $9,650 there would still be people carping about it, how it is too expensive or that Omega should have done something different. You can't satisfy everyone.

 

The time Omega put on it is when Armstrong started surface examination (02:56:48 GMT):

"CDR started surface examination and description, assessed mobility and described effects of LM descent engine."

https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_11i_Timeline.htm

 

Should've put it down as 03:15:16 GMT and "FIrst Watch on the Moon" as that's when Buzz got on the surface.

 

This. 105.012s and 145.012s are still readily available, so a replica would not have made much sense. It would've been a safe option, but with not particularly much added value to the Speedmaster line. And any new interpretation is going to be polarizing - just look at Snoopy or ST2... The way I see it, there are so many LEs to choose from - so if I don't like one, I just wait and see whatever else comes our way.

 

Yes, I know that. 02:56:48 GMT was established and discussed on the previous page. Sorry but my layman's interpretation of the plaque would indicate they are saying the First Step on the Moon occurred at 02:56:48 GMT. Is doesn't read Armstrong began surface examination at 02:56:48 GMT.

That said, my contact has told me that the intent is the time of the first step and that indeed the time is incorrect.

EDIT - Fully discussed on page 12

 

You said: "Lastly packaging, at this moment I think I'm out there alone on this but I think the use of 02:59:48 GMT as the time the first step on the Moon occurred is incorrect"

I wasn't sure about the "59" so I posted the pic of the Omega box to show it's 56 on that. It was a typographical error on your part. I was trying to be polite about it. But yes, the time NASA states is the time on the moon is a few seconds earlier than on the box.

 

I see that and that was a typing error.

 

Yep, all true statements but NO LE Speedmaster to date commemorates the biggest and most significant anniversary event of the space program. Some say 50 years is just a number, but mankind puts a significant importance on anniversaries of 50 years due to the human lifespan. High school, college, wedding, chronological age......50 years, the Golden Anniversary, is always a significant event and marked and celebrated accordingly. Few people are around at 75 year anniversaries, none at 100. There will be more LE's in the future, sure, but the 55th or 60th Apollo 11 anniversary won't have much significance. Obviously how the watch looks is important, but it being tied to the 50th Anniversary could be argued to be just as important.

 

I got that covered

 

You could get pedantic and say the instant the contact light came on marked the time the first watch was on the moon's surface, albeit in the LM. Why is the moment when Armstrong or Aldrin touched his boot to the ground any more important than when the LM touched the moon's surface?

 

True, but then the box time would really be off. Buzz made that call at 20:17:40 GMT on 20 July 1969.

 

I know, but is Omega celebrating the first walk on the surface by Armstrong, or when the first Omega walked on the surface on Aldrin's wrist? As it is it's muddled. Omega could have prevented all of this if the plaque would have said "Omega, first watch on the moon, 20:17:40 GMT, 20 July 1969". Clear and accurate, but then it would have lost the July 21 date that everyone knows. Of course they could have put both dates but that would probably be too confusing to the public. I would think these sorts of things would have been discussed at Omega HQs when the project was moving along, but maybe they didn't pay enough attention to the timeline or what they were trying to convey. In the scheme of things it is not a disaster, but a little muddled in the details.

 

Judging by the exact time they are citing on the box it would be neither of the above.

I’m not trying to be difficult I’m simply pointing out that if the time they are citing is inferring the first step it is incorrect according to the official time provided by NASA. I’ve been told it is incorrect which means the first step time was Omega’s intent and they made a mistake.

Sorry, it is not muddled. These historic events are documented to the second. If Omega wants to cite a specific event, and the first step is, they should use the corresponding specific time. Simple as that.

For all they got right with this watch how they got this wrong is just surprising to me.

 

I'm with you all the way, the time is incorrect, especially with Armstrong's famous saying on the back of the watch. The timing of his first words do not match the time on the box, Omega should have at least had those two times line up. Now that it has been pointed out repeatedly does Omega realize the screw up and change the plaque, or will they just say, 'close enough for marketing purposes?'. I would guess the latter.

 

i like this idea, fits better with the legacy

 

But then it wouldn't match up with the image on the subdial. Buzz is still hangin' in mid-air and not on the surface. More confusion!

 

Has anyone that bought the Apollo 17 Cernan tribute watch received new boxes correcting the “manking” misspelling yet? I’d go with the latter too.

Hopefully if boxes have not been produced Omega will take the opportunity to correct them. Honestly, who knows. I’m a dick when it comes to these little details. In the end I’ll probably be the only one bothered by it and I’m not even a buyer.

 

I have although the box with the wrong spelling. I wrote too Omega but I got no response.

 

Yes - received a replacement box several months ago

 

These exact second threads are getting tedious. Has anyone actually sent these opinions to Omega to get their response?