3861 in the snoopy 50th anniversary 310.32.42.50.02.001
i did not find the word "moonwatch" on omega web page for this reference
https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/...-chronometer-chronograph-42-mm-31032425002001
so, because omega does not say a moonwatch, this 3861 is not a moonwatch
Absolutely. Manual winding is an incredibly distinctive feature of the watch that was chosen. Emotionally, it would be hard to imagine a Moonwatch Speedmaster that wasn't hand winding.
In the context of the overall conversation on this thread (e.g. the discussion about rotor motion in microgravity), I just think it's interesting to note that NASA didn't require a hand-winding watch. They were perfectly willing to consider an automatic or electric watch.
According to the statement of specifications I have seen, manual winding was not a requirement. See #6.
STATEMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS
1. Accuracy - Must not gain or lose more than 5 seconds over a 24 hour period. Desirable to have an accuracy equal to or better than 2 seconds per 24 hours.
2. Pressure Integrity - The chronometer [sic] must be immune to large variances in pressure to include a range from 50 feet of water positive pressure to a negative pressure of 10 millimeters of mercury.
3. Readability - All disks, bands, and figures must be readable in various lighting conditions. The chronograph must be readable under both "red" and "white" lighting conditions to or beyond a 5 foot candle illumination intensity. Either a black face with white figures and numerals or black on white is satisfactory. The chronograph should not cause glare at the high illumination levels. A stainless steel case with a satin finish is preferred.
4. The chronograph must have stop-start elapsed dials with
a. Seconds to 1 minute
b. Minutes to 30 minutes
c. Hours to 12 hours or greater.
5. The chronograph must be shockproof, waterproof, and antimagnetic. In addition, the face cover must be shatterproof.
6. The chronograph may be powered electrically, manually or the self-winding type; however, it must be capable of being manually wound and re-set.
7. Reliability - the Manufacturer must guarantee the watch to operate properly under normal conditions for at least one year time period. Performance data and specifications should be supplied by the manufacturer. Manufacturer guarantee and/or warranty should also be included.
I was a bit surprised by #2 TBH. Why such a minimal negative pressure? Apparently they weren't envisioning EVA.
Interesting😉
Quite frankly I had glossed over it🙁
They must have anticipated EVAs.
They did it in the Gemini program in 1965 and the goal was to always walk on the moon according to JFK since 62.
They may have considered it to be un-important because they were specing a Chronograph and by nature a Chronograph wouldn't likely have a structural issue like a Saturation diver's watch may have when de-compressing.
Maybe they wanted to simply ensure reliable timekeeping functionality across a wide range of atmospheric pressures which may have been inside the watch at any given time👎
Internal pressure drops fairly quickly in the initial stages an then slowly reaches an equibilrium(unless it's a catastrophic failure).
But as the very last of the pressure bleeds down it takes forever to reach an equilibrium.
That's what they found out when it came to remove the hatch on the LM. The last little bit of residual pressure inside made it difficult to dislodge.
the burning question: can the current Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch still be considered a Moonwatch? .
I would think it definitely excludes sapphire crystals, but also ceramic bezels - having heard that the core issue being shards of material in zero g.
That said, my mind next wonders about all the *other* watches that have been along for these rides, including on ISS - surely some of those watches have gone up with a non-plastic crystal? 👎 If so, perhaps the “shards are a no no” rumor is only that?
As mentioned before I don’t believe the small amount of glass was considered an issue - and that would be even less so for a modern Sapphire crystal. The crystal material was not part of the selection imho.
https://omegaforums.net/threads/can...idered-a-moonwatch.136239/page-3#post-1863456
Wirh apologies, I had missed your prior post and appreciate the shoulder-tap! Great stuff
I’ve been trying to remember which astronaut’s watch crystal was wrapped in scotch tape to either hold it together and/or try and protect it from debris during EVAs
But in the same vein, Cernan’s watch also seems to show the abuses the crystal can be subject to
All fair enough - and apologies my own tone in response, which was “overspray” from other canvasses
Returning then to the topic given your good point RE why care about a 2021 moonwatch
Me personally, I’m unclear how the newest Speedmaster hasn’t become extra-tangential to the adjective “moonwatch” (regardless if Omega ascribes the marketing noun to it).
To be fair, the “moonwatch” adjective seems to not anymore be so literal about only the moon missions proper, so much as to act as short hand for something more like “watch preferred and approved by NASA for manned space missions, with a history of same even going back to the moon missions.”
In that broader sense, for the newest caliber I’m not educated on it’s bona fides - has NASA deployed them to astronauts? Have any been to space? On an EVA? Has NASA even confirmed if it will do any of those thing?
Right.
Though, that’s not exactly the bona fides of most import.
I’d intended the “NASA” to be implied in the question.
Noted👍
However, they did stipulate that the movement had to be capable of being manually wound AND re-set.
As Digital watches hadn't been invented the second aspect of the criteria is a given, the first aspect was interesting to note in that they anticipated the real possibility of the auto wind component becoming US.
NASA knew what they needed and why they needed it whilst giving all contenders a reasonable chance.
After that, the tests spoke for themselves.
I wonder how a Rolex with a jewelled slipper bearing would've fared had the watch copped a smack and one or more of the jewelled bearings broke thus inhibiting the watches ability to self wind. Only for someone to find out later that their watch had stopped just as they were about to be counting off 14 seconds or so👎
I was a bit surprised by #2 TBH. Why such a minimal negative pressure? Apparently they weren't envisioning EVA.
There where Rolex watches (gmt) worn at the moon at the same exact time that did fine. Just fine.
There where Rolex watches (gmt) worn at the moon at the same exact time that did fine. Just fine.
also other brands.
it is ok to be a fan, but any of these watches could have counted 14 seconds. Specially since that particular watch never led the pressurized module.
I’m not belittling the pedigree of the moonwatch. But let’s not be blinded to history
