No hate..just curios..why did NASA decide to take the Omega Speedy over Rolex ?

[TheVision]

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.

[Krash]

I thought I read somewhere that Omega had better results but Rolex also passed the tests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amphr1]

Because Rolex watch failed the NASA test. I can't recall exactly what failed tho.

Sent from my SM-S918U1 using Tapatalk

[Calatrava r]

https://www.gearpatrol.com/watches/a...s-speedmaster/

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

https://www.gearpatrol.com/watches/a...s-speedmaster/

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.

[testrak]

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

[gamingdoctor]

Originally Posted by TheVision

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.

[brandrea]

The Speedmaster caliber 321 passed all the tests.

A great read from Fratello.

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

[996marty]

Some interesting information

[Kevin of Larchmont]

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.

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

It was unanimous — the Speedy won by a landslide.

A legend was born (and a milk cow for Omega :chuckle )

Originally Posted by brandrea

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

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by fskywalker

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

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by brandrea

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

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by fskywalker

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

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

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.

[Tricolore66]

All the watches had plastic crystals then. Rolex didn’t intrude the sapphire crystal until around 1988.

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

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]

Originally Posted by Tricolore66

All the watches had plastic crystals then. Rolex didn’t intrude the sapphire crystal until around 1988.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

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.

[johnsonsxusfrt]

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.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Tricolore66

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]

Originally Posted by johnsonsxusfrt

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.

[Sergio_UKR]

NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by brandrea

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]

Originally Posted by Sergio_UKR

NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Dirt

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

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by Sergio_UKR

NASA Couldn't wait 2-3 years for an allocation from Rolex AD. :D

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[fivedime]

Originally Posted by Dirt

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…

[Marcjvr]

Originally Posted by TheVision

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.

[ArtNouveau]

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.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by fivedime

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