I was just reading yesterday's "A Week On The Wrist" on Hodinkee about the FOIS Speedmaster. http://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-omega-speedmaster-first-omega-in-space A thought crossed my mind (a thought that has probably been discussed in length in many places, but a thought I can't find anywhere on Google). Given that the positioning of the dots on the tachy scale is absolutely fixed by their function, and that the positioning of the indicating numbers (e.g. 90) is left entirely to the discretion of the designer, why do we collectively refer to dot over ninety (DON) rather than ninety under dot (NUD) ?
Interested to see the thoughts on this, as I have wondered similarly. I wouldn't say either is wrong, as they both imply the relative location of the two features. As with so many things, it just started being used and..kept going. Somewhat related humor: I had a dream last night that a friend was checking out my 105.012, and started fingernail picking at the bezel in this EXACT location. Good thing it was a dream, because my vociferous reaction would have left me rather embarrassed in real life...
I also think this might represent a cultural misappropriation by English speakers. The watch is from a French/German speaking area. Why are we not using these languages to describe the watch..... ? And just in case anyone is unsure.....
Another reason could be that NUD translates to FART in Hebrew. I think this would be a problem for the Israeli space program. "Hey Chaim is that your Speedmaster?" "No, mine is the one with the FART on it"