Please consider donating to help offset our high running costs.
No this is not an issued watch. The dial was refinished for WWW specs but the watch itself is not.
Maybe Omega but absolutely not military-- and as such, a fake.
I'm interested to know how you can be so adamant about that? There are many Commonwealth countries whose militaries would have sought supply of watches over the years. Suppliers may have reached into their existing inventory or made watches to meet acquisition specifications, and some of these might have been one-offs and not formally documented by the manufacturer.
I'm interested to know how you can be so adamant about that? There are many Commonwealth countries whose militaries would have sought supply of watches over the years. Suppliers may have reached into their existing inventory or made watches to meet acquisition specifications, and some of these might have been one-offs and not formally documented by the manufacturer.
I'm interested to know how you can be so adamant about that?
There is a MoD specification for the watches they procured. The dial layout for the watch in the picture is for a WWW (ref 2444). An excellent reference for this is Z. Wesolowski's book "The Concise Guide to Military Timepieces 1880-1990". In it you can find examples of what the watch should look like. The watch in OP's picture is wrong. One easy example you can look for yourself online is how the watch should be marked on the case back. You will find that the watch in the picture is not marked correctly. There are several additional issues.
Because like some others here I have spent hours, months and now years examining and studying military watches and their markings-- and if you're not prepared to hear an answer from people who have, don't ask the question-- just go and spend the years doing your homework yourself.
I was not challenging your knowledge, but merely asking a question. I'm willing to hear any and every answer, but equally, you should be willing to clarify a claim.