Community Stories

Speedmaster references with sapphire crystals and "flight qualified" casebacks

S
Posts
1
Likes
1
I'm curious if anyone knows of Speedmaster references that have sapphire front crystals and closed casebacks with the "flight qualified by Nasa..." text.

I know of only one such reference, the Moonwatch 50th Anniversary (ref 311.30.42.30.01.001), but I'd prefer a plain dial without the hippocampus. The sapphire + flight qualified configuration appeals to me, and I'd like to know if other references with this configuration exist. Thanks!
 
311.30.42.30.01.001.jpg
7enderbender
Posts
193
Likes
189
To me that wouldn’t make sense since a sapphire crystal doesn’t meet the specs for space flights.
 
padders
Posts
9,501
Likes
14,985
7enderbender 7enderbender
To me that wouldn’t make sense since a sapphire crystal doesn’t meet the specs for space flights.
And yet the X-33 (with sapphire crystal) soldiers on...

x33-02.jpg
 
7enderbender
Posts
193
Likes
189
Interesting. I’m sure there are people way more qualified to weigh in. What’s missing is the “for all missions” (which would include space walks, which a X33 or sapphire probably wouldn’t survive).
 
7enderbender
Posts
193
Likes
189
Gruesome Gruesome
What makes you think that, Ender?

what exactly? The difference in wording or the problem with sapphire in space? From what I recall part of the reason why the Speedmaster survived the testing is the plexi crystal which doesn’t shatter due to the extreme changes in temperature.
 
Blackdog
Posts
273
Likes
419
7enderbender 7enderbender
what exactly? The difference in wording or the problem with sapphire in space? From what I recall part of the reason why the Speedmaster survived the testing is the plexi crystal which doesn’t shatter due to the extreme changes in temperature.
The X33 won't survive direct exposure to space because the electronics will likely be fried by radiation and will not stand the temperature extremes anyway. That is why for space walks astronauts still wear the Speedy Pro (when they wear a watch at all).
The sapphire crystal has very little to do with the issue.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
17,523
Likes
26,477
7enderbender 7enderbender
To me that wouldn’t make sense since a sapphire crystal doesn’t meet the specs for space flights.
It doesn’t?

please show me the spec.

hint the lack of sapphire was not a factor in original adoption, and many qualified and flown watches are sapphire.

the Speedmaster is not the only qualified watch out there.
Edited:
 
Gruesome
Posts
275
Likes
198
Blackdog Blackdog
The X33 won't survive direct exposure to space because the electronics will likely be fried by radiation and will not stand the temperature extremes anyway. That is why for space walks astronauts still wear the Speedy Pro (when they wear a watch at all).
The sapphire crystal has very little to do with the issue.
Blackdog, these watches only have to withstand what humans can withstand. So the radiation levels are not that bad (solar storm at most, not accelerator or reactor level), and the temperature range is neither. Normal (silicon-based) circuits can withstand up to 150C junction (chip) temperature, corresponding to 70 to 80C case temperature. That's more than protein-based humans can tolerate.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
17,523
Likes
26,477
Gruesome Gruesome
Blackdog, these watches only have to withstand what humans can withstand. So the radiation levels are not that bad (solar storm at most, not accelerator or reactor level), and the temperature range is neither. Normal (silicon-based) circuits can withstand up to 150C junction (chip) temperature, corresponding to 70 to 80C case temperature. That's more than protein-based humans can tolerate.

@Blackdog is correct.

This is why electronic watches are not worn externally on spacewalks or on the moon.

The space suit protects from radiation that affects the human body and wrecks havoc on UN shielded electronics.

Also quartz movements have larger issues with temperature variation then mechanical due to the quartz oscillation.

your also not taking into account extreme cold on electronics which is worse then heat, and more common in vacuum.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,986
Gruesome Gruesome
Blackdog, these watches only have to withstand what humans can withstand.

Thats a weird thing to say.

Last I saw, humans wear a spacesuit when in space.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,986
Foo2rama Foo2rama
please show me the spec.

Not saying this supports the prior commenter’s assertion, but instead the “Statement of Specification” presumably in question:

“5. The chronograph must be shockproof, waterproof, and anti-magnetic. In addition, the face cover must be shatterproof.”

For me, it’s unclear what “shatterproof” meant even where hesalite is concerned.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
17,523
Likes
26,477
cvalue13 cvalue13
Not saying this supports the prior commenter’s assertion, but instead the “Statement of Specification” presumably in question:

“5. The chronograph must be shockproof, waterproof, and anti-magnetic. In addition, the face cover must be shatterproof.”

For me, it’s unclear what “shatterproof” meant even where hesalite is concerned.

I was thinking the last qualification round in 1978 or so. Then the list of about 8 more certified watches that included timex, Casio and Seiko that where flight qualified but not for space.
 
Evitzee
Posts
6,749
Likes
12,737
cvalue13 cvalue13
Not saying this supports the prior commenter’s assertion, but instead the “Statement of Specification” presumably in question:

“5. The chronograph must be shockproof, waterproof, and anti-magnetic. In addition, the face cover must be shatterproof.”

For me, it’s unclear what “shatterproof” meant even where hesalite is concerned.
"PROOF" is a term that has no meaning in the current ISO standards. Nothing is 'proof', like waterproof, shockproof or shatterproof, these are terms that aren't allowed now. It's all 'resistant'. So is a plastic (hesalite) crystal more shatter resistant than a sapphire crystal? Depends on your tolerances for how it is to be used. In the 60's a sapphire crystal may not have been considered a wise choice, in the 2020's, meh, acceptable.
Edited:
 
Gruesome
Posts
275
Likes
198
Cvalue, Foo2rama, a spacesuit does not protect against radiation. (It might protect against low energy alpha particles, but those are not what you worry about in space.)
Also, the NASA space specs put emphasis on the watch still running in adverse conditions, not (or to a much lesser degree) on accuracy.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
17,523
Likes
26,477
Gruesome Gruesome
Cvalue, Foo2rama, a spacesuit does not protect against radiation. (It might protect against low energy alpha particles, but those are not what you worry about in space.)
Also, the NASA space specs put emphasis on the watch still running in adverse conditions, not (or to a much lesser degree) on accuracy.
https://www.planetary.org/articles/0417-space-grade-electronics

NASA must be worried about nothing then. TLDR they want hardening to 300 krad. 1 krad is almost 100% fatal 200 rad, and typical microchips fail at 1 -20 krad. Yes we can discuss exposure over time vs acute exposure but there are high radiation levels outside a space suit if it is in the sun. Or if your in sunlight on the moon outside of the earths magnetosphere your looking at rad levels approx 1,000 times the level you experience on earth as your not protected by the earths magnetosphere like the ISS is.

https://nepp.nasa.gov/DocUploads/591D8C5B-C750-4462-B37E007D578B121D/MIL-PRF-38535.pdf
 
Gruesome
Posts
275
Likes
198
Humans have a 50% failure rate at 400 Rad. US rad workers are allowed 1.5 Rad per year. Don't worry about your watch when you are in outer space; worry about yourself.
 
Archer
Posts
27,315
Likes
69,672
cvalue13 cvalue13
Not saying this supports the prior commenter’s assertion, but instead the “Statement of Specification” presumably in question:

“5. The chronograph must be shockproof, waterproof, and anti-magnetic. In addition, the face cover must be shatterproof.”

For me, it’s unclear what “shatterproof” meant even where hesalite is concerned.

Acrylic crystals can break, but they do not shatter like sapphire (or mineral glass crystal) does.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,986
Gruesome Gruesome
Cvalue, Foo2rama, a spacesuit does not protect against radiation.

You wanted to talk about radiation.

I was instead responding to your far broader statement that “these watches only have to withstand what humans can withstand” by noting that humans are never not inside a “spaceship” (how I’ve astronauts characterize their EVA suits) whereas the watches are outside a spaceship.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,986
Archer Archer
Acrylic crystals can break, but they do not shatter like sapphire (or mineral glass crystal) does.

As I understand it, mineral/glass crystal is used in equipment found elsewhere in shuttles/stations (instrument panels, etc.).

Perhaps that intel is bad.

But if not, it’s made it unclear why the emphasis for watches. I suppose internal equipment aren’t subject to the possibility of a micrometeorite hit during EVA?
 
3 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

bigsom

Laco Type A Sorrento PVD with Sapphire Crystal

bigsom Private Watch Sales
bigsom
bigsom
Posts
0
Views
704
corn18

Laco Friedrichshafen Type B Dial Swiss Automatic Pilot Watch with Sapphire Crystal

corn18 Private Watch Sales
corn18
corn18
Posts
0
Views
2K
ashleysteadman

Omega Speedmaster Professional 3572.50 Moon Watch with Sapphire Display Case Back

ashleysteadman Private Watch Sales
ashleysteadman
ashleysteadman
Posts
1
Views
2K
Kringkily

Omega Speedmaster 3539.31 - Very Rare Marui Limited with Sapphire

Kringkily Watches For Sale
Kringkily
Kringkily
Posts
1
Views
6K