The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30 August 2024, 04:21 AM   #1
TheVision
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 487
Icon4 No hate..just curios..why did NASA decide to take the Omega Speedy over Rolex ?

Just watched "First Man" movie on Netflix last night and loved the history and the moon landing bit....tons of camera shots for the speedy as well.

Just curious..what made NASA choose the omega speedy as the moon watch over Rolex when all the popular models like daytona, Explorer, sub, gmt were readily available in 1960s? Was it the hand winding on the speedy that made more sense up in space?

I've owned several Omega in the past (smp old and current gen, planet ocean, Aquaterra) and love the brand ...I had to sell most of it to fund my sub date.

Cheers.
TheVision is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 04:23 AM   #2
Krash
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
 
Krash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Florida
Watch: Sub, DJ41, GMT
Posts: 8,260
I thought I read somewhere that Omega had better results but Rolex also passed the tests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Krash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 04:31 AM   #3
amphr1
2024 Pledge Member
 
amphr1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: El Cerrito, CA
Posts: 2,236
Because Rolex watch failed the NASA test. I can't recall exactly what failed tho.

Sent from my SM-S918U1 using Tapatalk
amphr1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:08 AM   #4
Calatrava r
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Watch: Rolex and Patek
Posts: 11,418
https://www.gearpatrol.com/watches/a...s-speedmaster/
Calatrava r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:10 AM   #5
Calatrava r
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Watch: Rolex and Patek
Posts: 11,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calatrava r View Post
Finally, on March 1, 1965, the results were in. The Rolex model stopped running on two occasions during the relative humidity test and failed one of the temperature tests. The Longines-Wittnauer also failed one of the temperature tests as well as the decompression test. Then, there was the Omega Speedmaster: It gained 21 minutes during the decompression test and lost 15 minutes during the acceleration tests. The luminous material on the dial was destroyed, but all in all, the Omega chronograph performed satisfactorily. It was unanimous — the Speedy won by a landslide. However, NASA suggested a few improvements and modifications: the addition of a 24-hour rotating bezel and luminous markings to the elapsed time dials.
Calatrava r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:11 AM   #6
testrak
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: SF
Posts: 32
Rolex – It stopped running on two occasions during the Relative Humidity Test and subsequently failed during High Temperature Test No. 1 when the sweep second hand warped and was binding against the other hands on the dial. No further tests were run with the Rolex chronographs
testrak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:17 AM   #7
gamingdoctor
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVision View Post
Just watched "First Man" movie on Netflix last night and loved the history and the moon landing bit....tons of camera shots for the speedy as well.

Just curious..what made NASA choose the omega speedy as the moon watch over Rolex when all the popular models like daytona, Explorer, sub, gmt were readily available in 1960s? Was it the hand winding on the speedy that made more sense up in space?

I've owned several Omega in the past (smp old and current gen, planet ocean, Aquaterra) and love the brand ...I had to sell most of it to fund my sub date.

Cheers.
Hand winding had nothing to do with it, that's a common misconception. Automatic watches work just fine in space.
gamingdoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:31 AM   #8
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,091
The Speedmaster caliber 321 passed all the tests.

A great read from Fratello.

https://www.fratellowatches.com/the-...-watches/#gref
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:33 AM   #9
996marty
"TRF" Member
 
996marty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Uk
Watch: RolexGMT/Tudor7928
Posts: 4,182
Some interesting information
996marty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:39 AM   #10
Kevin of Larchmont
2024 Pledge Member
 
Kevin of Larchmont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: The Ice House
Watch: Ingersoll Mickey
Posts: 3,393
I thought I read somewhere that the Hesalite was a benefit for Omega because it wouldn’t shatter and splinter with small pieces floating around in zero gravity. Can’t swear to that though.
Kevin of Larchmont is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:43 AM   #11
fskywalker
2024 Pledge Member
 
fskywalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Francisco
Location: San Juan, PR
Watch: Is Ticking !
Posts: 25,181
No hate..just curios..why did NASA decide to take the Omega Speedy over Rolex ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calatrava r View Post
It was unanimous — the Speedy won by a landslide.
A legend was born (and a milk cow for Omega :chuckle )


Quote:
Originally Posted by brandrea View Post
The Speedmaster caliber 321 passed all the tests.

A great read from Fratello.

https://www.fratellowatches.com/the-...-watches/#gref

Thanks for sharing Brian !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Francisco
♛ 16610 / 116264
Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 310.30.42.50.01.002 / 210.90.42.20.01.001
Zenith 02.480.405

2FA security enabled
fskywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:51 AM   #12
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by fskywalker View Post
A legend was born (and a milk cow for Omega :chuckle )





Thanks for sharing Brian !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



I also have the complete write up on this within the 321 box set.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 05:53 AM   #13
fskywalker
2024 Pledge Member
 
fskywalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Francisco
Location: San Juan, PR
Watch: Is Ticking !
Posts: 25,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandrea View Post


I also have the complete write up on this within the 321 box set.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



This thread needs pictures! Where’s that magnificent 321 Brian??

In the meantime here is my humble 3861





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Francisco
♛ 16610 / 116264
Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 310.30.42.50.01.002 / 210.90.42.20.01.001
Zenith 02.480.405

2FA security enabled
fskywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:06 AM   #14
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by fskywalker View Post


This thread needs pictures! Where’s that magnificent 321 Brian??

In the meantime here is my humble 3861





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Nothing humble about that my friend. Arguably has the “better” movement

I submit the 321





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:10 AM   #15
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamingdoctor View Post
Hand winding had nothing to do with it, that's a common misconception. Automatic watches work just fine in space.
Yes, and be that as it may.

NASA had stipulated as part of their key requirements/preconditions for contenders of the series of tests, that the watches simply had to have the capability of being manually wound.
That is an inescapable fact and one would imagine it was for a very important reason when one stops to think about it.
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:11 AM   #16
Tricolore66
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 1,139
All the watches had plastic crystals then. Rolex didn’t intrude the sapphire crystal until around 1988.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont View Post
I thought I read somewhere that the Hesalite was a benefit for Omega because it wouldn’t shatter and splinter with small pieces floating around in zero gravity. Can’t swear to that though.
Tricolore66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:14 AM   #17
Kevin of Larchmont
2024 Pledge Member
 
Kevin of Larchmont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: The Ice House
Watch: Ingersoll Mickey
Posts: 3,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricolore66 View Post
All the watches had plastic crystals then. Rolex didn’t intrude the sapphire crystal until around 1988.
Kevin of Larchmont is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:17 AM   #18
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont View Post
I thought I read somewhere that the Hesalite was a benefit for Omega because it wouldn’t shatter and splinter with small pieces floating around in zero gravity. Can’t swear to that though.
That's quite true.
There was one instance where a glass instrument cover broke and the crew spent hours going around vaccuming up every square inch of the interior of the craft to try to mitigate the risk of floating glass fragments ruining the party.
They apparently did take it most seriously when all things are taken into consideration.
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:19 AM   #19
johnsonsxusfrt
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2023
Location: USA
Posts: 375
for NASA these watches were to be used as backup timers should the onboard systems fail. So they tested multiple watches under various pressure and temperature to ensure they maintained function and kept good time. Speedmaster was the only one that passed.

Fun fact, Rolex put Cosmograph on the Daytona because they were certain they would be selected.
johnsonsxusfrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:20 AM   #20
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricolore66 View Post
All the watches had plastic crystals then. Rolex didn’t intrude the sapphire crystal until around 1988.
Not all watches mind you.
Keep in mind that watches had glass crystals before polymers/plastics were even thought of.
Take my Grandfather's pocket watch from 1911 for example
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:27 AM   #21
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsonsxusfrt View Post
Fun fact, Rolex put Cosmograph on the Daytona because they were certain they would be selected.
I never heard about that.
Interesting

I also imagine that the wrist watch was intended to be a key part of their basic kit for any EVA's.
As far as i know, it still is which is a key consideration and more importantly it has to be a mechanical watch of some description in that instance.
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:28 AM   #22
Sergio_UKR
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: NYC
Posts: 313
NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D
Sergio_UKR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:31 AM   #23
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandrea View Post


I also have the complete write up on this within the 321 box set.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You flexing on the Rolex forum again Brian?


When everybody knows that the real reason why NASA chose the Omega offering was simply because the 321 was the prettiest movement out of the whole bunch
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:32 AM   #24
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio_UKR View Post
NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:33 AM   #25
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt View Post
You flexing on the Rolex forum again Brian?


When everybody knows that the real reason why NASA chose the Omega offering was simply because the 321 was the prettiest movement out of the whole bunch

I apologize.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 06:50 AM   #26
fskywalker
2024 Pledge Member
 
fskywalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Francisco
Location: San Juan, PR
Watch: Is Ticking !
Posts: 25,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio_UKR View Post
NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Francisco
♛ 16610 / 116264
Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 310.30.42.50.01.002 / 210.90.42.20.01.001
Zenith 02.480.405

2FA security enabled
fskywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 07:43 AM   #27
fivedime
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Huntsville, AL
Watch: BB58 925, OP39, DD
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt View Post
Yes, and be that as it may.

NASA had stipulated as part of their key requirements/preconditions for contenders of the series of tests, that the watches simply had to have the capability of being manually wound.
That is an inescapable fact and one would imagine it was for a very important reason when one stops to think about it.
Auto-winding chronograph movements were in their infancy in the mid-60’s when the first selections took place (and in fact not commercially available until 1969). If there was indeed any concrete reason for specifying manual winding, that was likely it. More likely it was simply governmentese overstatement of the obvious. It has often been said that “nobody was sure if auto-winders would wind in microgravity,” but I tend to disbelieve that. It’s not like NASA didn’t have plenty of folks working for them with deep backgrounds in Physics who understood momentum was the underlying driver with the winding rotor, not gravity. Regardless, it wasn’t even a point of consideration at the time…
fivedime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 07:57 AM   #28
Marcjvr
"TRF" Member
 
Marcjvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Southeast
Watch: 214270
Posts: 2,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVision View Post
Just watched "First Man" movie on Netflix last night and loved the history and the moon landing bit....tons of camera shots for the speedy as well.

Just curious..what made NASA choose the omega speedy as the moon watch over Rolex when all the popular models like daytona, Explorer, sub, gmt were readily available in 1960s? Was it the hand winding on the speedy that made more sense up in space?

I've owned several Omega in the past (smp old and current gen, planet ocean, Aquaterra) and love the brand ...I had to sell most of it to fund my sub date.

Cheers.

__________________
Never place your happiness on something you have or can physically acquire
Marcjvr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 07:59 AM   #29
ArtNouveau
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: NWA, USA
Watch: BLRO/Daytona/OP41s
Posts: 5,387
My tiny link to the NASA saga is that I bought my first two Rolex from Corrigans Jewelers in Houston. NASA bought their test subjects anonymously from the local AD to avoid any ringers being thrown out by the manufacturers. That local chain has been gone for decades now.
ArtNouveau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 August 2024, 08:31 AM   #30
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by fivedime View Post
Auto-winding chronograph movements were in their infancy in the mid-60’s when the first selections took place (and in fact not commercially available until 1969). If there was indeed any concrete reason for specifying manual winding, that was likely it. More likely it was simply governmentese overstatement of the obvious. It has often been said that “nobody was sure if auto-winders would wind in microgravity,” but I tend to disbelieve that. It’s not like NASA didn’t have plenty of folks working for them with deep backgrounds in Physics who understood momentum was the underlying driver with the winding rotor, not gravity. Regardless, it wasn’t even a point of consideration at the time…
One word.
"Redundancy" my friend.

It was and remains a risky endeavour and having manual winders is the epidimy of having back up if one is sporting an Automatic.
Especially when the chips are down.

Keep in mind we currently live in a horoligical world that's awash with the ubiquitous bi-directional Auto winders.
It wasn't always the case and as you note. Autos weren't common.
But certainly not excluded from the selection process.
Also there was a requirement driven by the Astronauts, to formalise a standard for the timpieces to be used because a number of different (personal) watches were being worn.
Astronauts were already using Speedies, and as a result they were familiar with them as a useful tool and they were a bit of a favourite as far as i know.

The fact remains everything was done for good reason to maximise the possibilty of launching into space, sending a man to the moon, landing and walking on the moon and returning them safely to Earth.
The Speedy was the front runner and winner for all the right reasons.
I put it to you that it certainly would have been a consideration at the time because NASA stipulated that the movement had to have a manual winding capability.
It was indeed, fully factored in when all things are taken into consideration.

Besides.
The 321 movement was exceptionally easy on the eye just like the Corvette
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches

Asset Appeal

Wrist Aficionado


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.