Evening all,

I'm looking through all the watches for sale while I wait for paint to dry and I found something that I like the look of but really can't nail down. There's just this one photo:


I'm guessing it's second world war era, though the case carries no markings. My first thought was that it's a 30t2 but the seller sys it's an automatic (doesn't know if it's a bumper). The case is really odd .... it's got to be military? Lugs are fixed and sort of underneath the case, but not quite (does that make sense?). It looks like it was designed to be worn on a NATO style strap.

Don't let me down, folks ... one of you have seen these before.

 

I think these are called "Flying Saucer"

 

Got it ... and now I have some reference photos to go on. Thanks.

 

But Flying Saucers are not automatic - they are powered either by 26.5 or 30 T2

So maybe the seller made a wrong description...

 

Well, folks .... She's in my pocket now. Yor comments are welcome. Photos are in no particular order:

 

@Tire-comedon

 

As I suspected it was no automatic as you cited the seller in your original post...

it is a flying saucer with calibre 26.5 which is the more common variant than that with cal. 30 T2

Unfortunately it has a re-done dial

 

Just back home after spending the day running around.

So, here's where I'm at: I read everything I could find last night. I genuinely lost sleep (and was happy to be tired) at the thought of finding a rarity like this, misdescribed, in a lot with another watch. I understand it's a partial re-dial. I think that the hands are correct; that the logo on the dial is also correct (it's in the right position in relation to the minute track) but I was confident in saying that it was reprinted if only because of the hash at the 12 on the subdial and the way the marks sit inside the rim. The concentric circles in the subdial are clearly visible, though.

I found the following images from the 1938 catalogue on the MWR website:



Posted with these were the following words:
when I posted the three images from the 1937 Italian catalog I certainly did not pretend to be exhaustive. I'm not sure that other dial designs than the ones in this catalog should be automatically disqualified, we know that there were then many dial variations and not all of them were pictured in the catalogs. The ones pictured there were the ones available at the Italian exclusive distributor for 1937, but other designs may have been available elsewhere and/or for other years. In addition, the same model was still present in the 1940 catalog of the same Italian distributor, showing the cadrante 20, but under reference 728. Moreover it is on the calibre 30mm page, but I think it was still a 26.5 inside (this just to say that those catalogs are sometimes approximative).

When I looked up the poster, the screen name was very similar to our own @Tire-comedon who's already been tagged into the thread.

So, where I'm at and what I'm struggling with is that I accept that the dial has been redone ... but how bad is it? I've rolled the dice on this one. I've paid for it. I'm genuinely happy at whatever the consensus because, frankly, I think this was cheap. I don't know how many members here have experience of this watch. Personally, before last night I've seen two photographs. I had a finite period of time to decide and I went for it.

 

It is a flying saucer (ref CK 2013)as MacOmega said, with redone dial. I had seen the auction but didn't bid. Was the other Pocket Watch nice?

 

Yes, one of my posts on MWR...

 

The pocket watch is a JLC GSTP in good working order .... with the hands mounted upside down. That tickled me.

 

It might be helpful to know that before sealed cases, whether waterprof or dustproof, dials deteriorated rapidly and were often refinished as a matter of course.

So the fact that your ancient watch has a refinished dial is by no means a slam on you.

Tom

 

Hi guys,

just found this beauty of my father’s uncle. Is this dial not original? How is possible that we have the same redone dial?

Please let me know if you found out some news,
Regards.

 

My example has been with a well known watchmaker almost since I bought it ... I really must chase that up. Really nice to see a dial very similar to my example and I look forward to hearing any input from others here as much as you do.

@Tire-comedon ?

 

refinished dial as well. looks like hand painted ...... the feet on the Omega symbol have different highs ???? or is that the photo angle? pls. take a pics. straight from above. kind regards. achim

 

Hi Watchyouwant,

thanks for replying. Here a pics straight from above. The symbol seems to have different dimensions

regards.

 

I think we're being too critical here and missing the wood for the trees. Yes, both dials have been repainted but to have two dials in the same model, from the same time means that it is highly likely that there is a fourth dial type in addition to the three accepted. This 4th dial type having applied 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 numerals and painted primary with a painted logo.

This is the type of thing I love to see, especially when it's one of my watches! It's at least the second Omega I've found that wasn't known to exist.

 

Hi guys,

just talked with an old watchmaker about my Omega. He told me that the dial has never beer replaced or repainted so it is probably the original one (just the Omega symbol is so strange, maybe repainted). I’m going to check with another watchmaker here in Rome.
Do you have any advice?

Regards.

 

I think we can be quite certain both examples here have been repainted. On my example, the sub dial is definitely incorrect as the markers do not line up with the hand; and, Omega always had the track to the edge of the dial. Looking at the logo and cardinal numbers, if they're not original then they seem a good attempt at reprinting to me. On your example, the subdial is better and more like what one would expect to see but the numbers and logo are, sorry to say, quite horrible.

 

I suspect both were intended to be lumed originally but were printed instead, with those applied numerals.