TIMElyBehaviour
·If I’m wrong just tell me to shut up
If I’m wrong just tell me to shut up
Probably just me but wasn’t IWC a big supplier to the German Luftwaffe?
Isn’t putting a big spitfire on the back of a German aviation watch bordering on being a tad distasteful?
Doing some light digging, I think you'll find a vast majority of major swiss watch maker supplied the German Military with watches during ww2 - including longines, iwc, JLC, Zenith, and many more. Practically every single german watch brand in existence today, if it was around during ww2, also supplied watches to the german military at that point.
Obviously other major suppliers of other goods like mercedes, VW, hugo boss, etc. also were big big suppliers to the german military during ww2.
I agree with you that it's very important to be sensitive to the atrocities committed during WW2, however maybe it's unrealistic to police every single connection - which is just my personal opinion with the spitfire plane. Should references to Fanta be considered distasteful because the Nazi's created it and profited from it, therefore it's sales technically used to fund the Nazi war effort?
If Fanta come out with a allied soldier on the label then yes I think so. Same with BMW, Siemens etc
It was just a point of view.
Ok off topic I’m happy to concede to bring the focus back on the watch. It is a handsome IWC.
I have liked aviation watches for quite some time. I do like the German UHR look but I do also like the new air king. Diverse much? Yep.
The thing is, the spitfire was and remains historically an incredible machine with an incredible legacy. Ethics aside the pilots of the German forces where outstanding pilots and there is no question that the German scientists and engineers where a fundamental part of the advancement of aviation and rocket science. To take a stand against it half a century later because of the side of the war they where in is just wrong.
Remember some of those Nazi scientists where responsible for the American space program. If you’re going to be fair then neglect the speedy history as well as the same guy that took us to the moon was Designing misiles for Hitler a few decades earlier
same for Nuclear scientists and same for so many things.
Engineering can be celebrated outside of ideology
So back to my previous question it was does anyone find this wrong and if I’m reading too much into it tell me to shut up. You have gone to the extreme here mate. It was a passing comment on a watch forum, not taking a stand 40+ years on.
I have tried to get back on track from what the OP was talking about as you can see above but you seem now fixated on the digressed topic.
sorry, maybe just reading too fast so it stuck to me and then I just went off on it. Don't read too much into it.
I do agree to the opinion. But design and colour wise, liking them especially on the Ltd one:
Any updates from Spitfire owners here? Was able to try it on along with the Mark XVIII Heritage Ti recently and liked it much better in the metal --liked the Heritage Titanium with the blued hands also, though the AD wasn't able to confirm which grade IWC uses, and it did feel a little light on the wrist compared to its steely brethren.
Very happy with my Spitfire. I did own the XVIII Heritage Titanium. Liked it very much although it always felt a little big on my wrist. The Spitfire, while only a millimetre smaller sits better on my wrist and it also has the new movement which the Heritage doesn't have. Also able to adjust time by leaving it overnight in different positions. Lying flat it gains a second, in the upright position it loses a second. Very rarely adjust the time with crown.