Sapphire Sandwich..the old question that still goes unanswered. Let's settle it.

[-JP]

Sorry veterans who are tired of this question. This has been posted many times before on forums but I feel like the question have never been quite answered. The threads I read in the past always get sidetracked people always get overly defensive, yet nobody seems to know the answer....or responses like "who cares?'
Well, I care. This is a discussion for watch enthusiast. Sure, most who buy the Speedy Sapphire won't care but if your a WIS, you may care, if its not true, I don't think its cool to continue to print it on their case backs. The watch is already fantastic, I'm a fan as many others are on this forum. No need to make it sound better then it already is.

SO...this is a new watchforum, new members, new year and new thread. Why does Omega insist on still using "The First and Only Watch Worn on the Moon?"

I think we can all agree its not the only watch worn on the moon? Please correct me if I'm wrong as I would really like to know but I do know the story of other astronauts who wore different watches. Am I reading into it wrong? Do they mean only certified watch worn on the moon perhaps? If so, this is no longer the case or is it? I know a particular G Shock and Timex models are approved for flight but maybe not approved to be exposed to the vacuum of space.

I should know this stuff but I don't...as I said forums I read (and I read a lot to find the answer) always get sidetracked...
So maybe we can finally settle this once and for all.

[FuzzyB]

Have any other watches been worn on the surface of the moon? The list of people who have actually walked on the moon's surface is a rather small number and it's been quite some time since that feat was achieved.

I know many other watches have been worn in space, but I am not familiar with the watches that made it to the moon itself.

I don't really have much of an opinion on the engraving itself. There may be a more accurate way to say it, but I find it no more offensive than a superlative chronometer. At least Omega put it on the back instead of the dial.

[-JP]

"The Speedmaster Professional remains one of several watches qualified by NASA for spaceflight and is still the only one so qualified for EVA.^[3] The Speedmaster line also includes other models, including analog-digital and automatic mechanical watches."

So apparently its still the only one qualified for outside the space craft...I don't know how I overlooked this wikepedia. It does however say "Therefore, while the Speedmaster was the first watch wornon the moon, it is not the only one, as Omega often claims on its watches and in marketing materials."

Kind of contradicts, still confused by their use of the words but maybe the other watches aren't recognized as they are not officially approved.
From my research this seems to be the best answer.

[tribe125]

Other watches have been worn on the moon. Omega amended the wording on steel case backs, so I don't know why it would still appear on sapphire case backs.

Can they have had so many sapphire case backs in stock? Do the words just fill the spaces nicely? I'm not sure if there's ever been an answer.

[wschofield3]

Check this out if you have not already seen it...

http://www.chronomaddox.com/moonmovement.html

[rfortson]

It's just wrong. There were other watches worn on the moon, namely a Bulova prototype that Dave Scott wore. He originally reported it as a Waltham in the Apollo transcripts after the flight, but years later corrected himself. Actually the watch just went up for sale recently. I believe Jack Swigert wore his Rolex on Apollo 13, but of course they didn't land on the moon.

I figure the inscription is just a little over-zealous promotion by Omega, followed by a reluctance to change it for some reason.

[Raza]

I think the solution here is to just buy the Hesalite crystal model.

[skywatch]

Check this out if you have not already seen it...

http://www.chronomaddox.com/moonmovement.html

Gotta give that article some credit. It's so thorough that it's kinda boring.
Hard to get really opinionated after spending a half hour reading all that.
So, yeah, there was a Waltham, probably.

[mlcor]

At least I can rest easy knowing my FOIS isn't making any dubious claims.

[Der Amf]

It's so thorough that it's kinda boring.
Hard to get really opinionated after spending a half hour reading all that.

From this feel tempted to extrapolate the conclusion that someone's being angrily opinionated is indicative of their not being thoroughly equipped with the facts