I recently heard that the Omega Speedmaster was manual wound for space instead of automatic because in space, an automatic watch would not continuously wind due to gravity. On the surface that sounds like a plausible explanation.

However, Gus Grissom and John Young wore the first officially qualified Speedmasters on Gemini 3 on March 23, 1965 (Wikipedia) and the first auto chronograph did not get introduced until 1969 (On the Dash). So to me, the real reason the Omega Speedmaster was manual wound for space was not b/c of gravity but because of the fact that automatic chronos did not exist at all.

What are your thoughts - was the Speedmaster manual for nasa b/c automatics wouldn't work in space or because the tech didn't exist?

 

https://omegaforums.net/threads/hor...luential-automatic-wristwatch-calibers.76549/

 

I guess the Seiko 6139 worked in space. Or maybe he had to wind it manually.

 

There is anecdotal evidence they had concerns about power reserve and winding in space or they felt the added weight of the rotor would be a strain during launch and it’s high G and vibrations.

Or if you read a more official version of the story released last year. The auto vs manual wind was never part of the testing and the Speedy beat out other watches.

http://www.twentytwoten.com/1574/nasa-testing-regime-omega-speedmaster-moonwatch/

https://monochrome-watches.com/excl...ences-how-omega-speedmaster-became-moonwatch/

Follow up watches in the Alaska series made for nasa had some automatic watches but for various reasons the Speedy Pro is still the only EVA certified NASA watch. The 861 was certified last in 78 under the Alaska III Project for the shuttle. You can google more info.

 

Well played! As soon as I typed it, that question crossed my mind, but I was too lazy to research it, and I don't own one.

 

Exactly - which is why I think no matter what, the Speedmaster had to have been manual for that reason alone.

 

Considering the reqs document required it to be a Chrono then yes. As no auto Chrono existed at that point.

 

Same reason they chose hesalite over sapphire.

 

Interesting point.

 

Automatic watches do not wind by gravity, but by motion.

 

Not if you took physics in high school...

 

Yes, very interesting since sapphire crystals did exist since the 1930's and started to see more prolific use in the mid 60's into the 80's when they became the most popular option.

 

I get the conversation going by asking a question like this:

"Imagine you brought a bowling ball with you to the International Space Station. Then, you let it float freely in front of you. Then, while barefooted, you kick the bowling ball as hard as you can. Will that hurt your foot?"

 

Not if the bowling ball is made of Jello™.

 

Well, if my years of government service and dealing with purchasing requirements have taught me anything, it's that some budget analyst would have gotten ahold of the spec sheets in the contract and said "hang on, this 'automatic' function costs $100 more per watch but only saves an astronaut 30 seconds a day? That's $12,000/hrx2080 working hours in a year...Hey, I just saved us $24,576,000 in labor if we stick to winding!!!!"

 

Before you know it, we're going to be talking about jets with frictionless wheels taking off from treadmills.

 

So the members over on WUS, the ones I've been calling twats for over a decade were right all along. Nasa did choose hesalite over sapphire for safety reasons. Who'd have thought?

 

That's a fakkin brilliant idea! We could use tug boats as aircraft carriers instead of building those big basstedd things the size of a small town???

 

While they're mostly still twats, they were correct about that fact. Sapphire shattered quicker than Hesalite at low temperatures.