Probable Fake? Numbers Don't Add Up!

Hey Everyone,
My name's Martin and I'm from Sydney, Aust. I'm a complete newbie to the Forum and indeed to Pocket Watches, although I seem to have acquired a number over the years! But I'll start for now with just this one ...
I am doing some preliminary research into an 'Omega' pocket watch from my partner's side of the family ... Supposedly belonging to her great-great grandfather (but he died in 1858, so that number doesn't work!)
I think it's called a half-hunter?
As you can (hopefully) see in the photographs, the omega symbol on the dial is poorly proportioned and the only other identifier I can see without removing the movement (not sure I want to try that without advice) is a better-formed omega symbol stamped into the balance cock (please just correct any of my errors in parts naming?).
I can find no serial number (or any marks) under the balance or on any bridge.
The only case numbers I can see are identically stamped into inside face of both inner and outer rear lids, but it has only six digits - 245453 - and a floating 9 (or is it a 6?) in a different typeface. So none of those numbers seem to tally with anything I've yet read either.
There are a good half-dozen inscriptions by various repairers over the years, but that's it!
Any suggestions, advice, recommendations, queries, clarifications most welcome please? I throw this willingly to the hive-mind! My sincere thanks in advance.

The pocket watch folks are a weird tiny subculture, even here 😉 Maybe change your thread title to get the right eyes on your question.

and welcome to the forum 👍

“Stunted” works 😁

https://omegaforums.net/threads/the-omega-pocket-watch-thread.122246/

Well I see nothing wrong.

For comparison, see this early 17 lignes, same "A" quality, from my donnor box. The wheels positions seems rather similar:



The OP pallets bridge is different but correct for early 13-20 lignes as shown in the period spares catalog (speres 7107 and 9107) :


We would need to see the serial under the dial to know the production period.

Wow!
Massive thanks to JimInOz for all the info. And to DaveK and TexOmega for giving me a laugh to start the day. Plus another shout to DaveK for the Pocket Watch Thread for we 'stunted' folk. As I alluded to earlier, my partner and I have now dug out two other pocket watches we've inherited (one each) that I hope to get on here (there?) in good time. One is a 'half hunter'(?) in an 18 carat gold case from Thomas Smith & Sons in Edinburgh (haven't yet managed to open inner rear lid to see movement) and the other a 'lepine'(? - thanks JimInOz) marked on the dial and movement as 'The Farringdon "C", Reg'd' in a Sterling Silver case by FP, seemingly of Birmingham in 1886 if I'm reading the hallmarks correctly.
But I digress. Back to the Omega (which IS an Omega!)
Firstly, I misunderstood my partner. It was in fact her grandfather's (1869-1949) watch, so those numbers do make sense after all.
And yes, his parents arrived in Sydney in 1833/38, so it was quite possibly locally cased, so those numbers also could work.
Please tell me if you think it wise for a competent but totally inexperienced (and perhaps ill equipped) 'weird' and 'stunted' person like me to try accessing the movement number under the dial, or if I leave it to a pro?
Thanks again for your welcomes and enthusiastic embrace of my ignorant queries.
(Oh yeah ... BTW ... Can you tell I'm also a semi-technophobe/luddite with no experience on forums what-so-ever!) Argh!

Watchmaker to look under a dial. Never you.

Yeah, many thanks SkunkPrince ... That's what I thought and what everyone's telling me!
I'm reading Montaigne at the moment and I'm not going to fall into the trap he mentions ...
'Nothing is so firmly believed as what is least known.'

Weird & Wonderful

Absolutely