This example is currently on eBay. It is an example of the Weems Type A-11 only with the non-typical caseback markings. Here are pictures of the watch...





Anyone else notice anything suspect with the caseback markings? What are the odds that the U.S.A.A.C. would engrave their markings OVER scratches on the caseback? Particularly look at the S. Again, I fully believe that this is a legitimate U.S. issued watch, I just have a problem with these markings. I think they were all recently added. The U.S.A.A.C. would not have abbreviated to U.S.A.C. and they would have certainly added if nothing else, at least a serial number, not just copied the same text from one watch to another.



In fact, if you look at any of the Longines issued watches from the 1930s to the 1940s, whether pocket or wrist, they tend to be the most completely marked watches that one can collect. Of course, if you want this to be a true variant, then you would be inclined to ignore the obvious. Why would someone fake these markings? Maybe it has something to do with asking $2000 for an issued Longines Weems. In other words, it adds value over an unmarked version.

This watch is currently being discussed on MWR. I don't think we should be "rewriting rule books" (whatever that means) based on two examples; one of which is clearly faked. Opinions?

Hi James,

wasnt on the Whitney a A-11 spec which has nothing to do with this watch ?

Neither it could be assumed that this civil watch was recycled into the military system and marked accordingly because of lack of A-11's as we know that many real A-11 were made at the time....

Nor that it is a typical style and type of engraving of the watches of the period....

On the other end we have multiple examples of watches that had been altered by ''fantasists'' who do not master the basics and the logics of military markings and they just monkey a marking to increase the value of a watch....

rgds

Hi Enzo,

I am sorry but I am not certain what you are trying to explain in your first sentence.

These watches along with the LeCoutre Weems Type A-11s were issued by the U.S.A.A.C. and are considered hacking watches. There is a misconception that hacking only means that the seconds hand must be stopped for it to be a hacking watch. This is incorrect as all hacking means is that you are able to syncronize a watch; whether it be a pocket or wrist, with a master timepiece. There are two means to do this. Originally, before the seconds setting movement, the hacking of a secondary timepiece was achieved by means of either a rotatable dial or rotatable bezel. Obviously, this Longines Weems Type A-11 used the bezel method to hack. I have original U.S.A.A.C. documentation to back up everything I write about the hacking. Once hacking was achieved by the stopping of the movement(balance), these watch became obsolete and no longer acquired even though Longines continued production through the 1940s.

I agree, the markings look nothing like any of the markings from that era. They actually look quite crude compared to others from that time and this watch give some evidence that the markings were applied at some point AFTER the watch had been worn, aquiring scratches and wear. How else can you explain the markings OVER the scratches? Of course, there are some that will see what they want to see and ignore the obvious. I have been collecting (specializing in US issued) military watches for over 20 years now and these markings just don't pass the smell test.

Just my observations based on years of collecting experience.

Best,

James

Hi James,

these small Weems that I have seen have mvmt s/n that stay in the range from 3 millions and across 4 millions which date in the Longines database around year 1922.

Nevermind generically the turnable bezel was recalled in the specs you refer to, it is that watch that cant be covered and stamped by a 20 years later A-11 spec.

rgds

Enzo

Sorry Enzo, I am still not comprehending you. Are you doubting the legitimacy of these watches as actual U.S.A.A.C. timepieces? If so, you shouldn't. I have official documentation that these watches were issued early 1940 to 1942, prior to the U.S. Army Air Corps becoming the U.S. Army Air Force.

I don't believe I refered to any specs previously. These early Weems Type A-11s were manufactured to an earlier specification than the much more common WWII Type A-11s. Still considered hack watches though.

Regards,

James

No problems James,

i will try to be more specific....
It is not the Weems being issued to USAAC in general I am talking about.....I refer to this particular watch which you raised doubts about....and yes I strongly doubt the whole watch and not just its markings...

This watch was made in 1922 aro.
Spec A-11 was issued many years later.


Where this watch has been meanwhile?

When it was marked that way and who did it?

Who bought it since new then?

How it entered the military logistics ?

how could it be marked with a spec which was released many years later?

rgds

Enzo

James,

this may help...



USAAC initiated in 1926 and ended 1941

In 1922 USAAC did not exist, how the bridge could be marked that way?



USAAF initiated in 1941 and ended 1947

In 1941 USAAF who was custodian of the specs should have marked the watch according to instructions given above.




and also : this watch has a mvmt number in line with its time....s/n 6,xxx,xxx


http://www001.upp.so-net.ne.jp/hr-endo2/weems.html



Additionally only Elgin, Waltham and Bulova produced watches under Spec A-11, even Hamilton never did.


rgds


Enzo

Watch Specs issued by US Entities

CUSTODIAN : USAAC
-----------------
55-1A Oct 7, 1936

General: 7 jewels, no markings


superceeded by


55-1B Oct 13,1940

General : 7 jewels, ORD.DEPT., O... + s/n marking(see table above ), etc.

superseeded by


CUSTODIAN USAAF
---------------

94-27834-A (type A-11), Nov 2, 1942

GENERAL : 15 jewels, etc

superseeded by

94-27834-B , Feb 22, 1943

GENERAL : AF+ s/n, multiple lines markings pattern.

(Incidentally USN used this spec as a general base for their BUSHIP w. watches)

The pattern of the markings on the above Weems was never used by US Gvmt Entities and doesnt follow any spec.

In my opinion the only genuine USAAC part (...upon closer visual inspection ) is the sweep secons bridge, all the rest is civil, reworked etc....

rgds

Enzo

I have read in the attch previous posts that the s/n are 5,93x,xxx and 5,95x,xxx and not 3,xxx,xxx as i read...

https://ihc185.infopop.cc/eve/f...0103944/m/2901075381

that moves on the manufacturing date to 1940 but it doesnt change at all the marking concerns i wrote above...

rgds

Sorry Enzo, your information does not apply to the Weems Type A-11 watch, the watches being discussed currently. The specification that you list 94-27834-A apply to the Type A-11 that utilized a seconds setting, or balance stopping movement. It is dated 1942. The Weems Type A-11 PRE-DATES this specification. It is specification 27834 and the watches made to this specification date to 1940 and 1941 typically. Please do not doubt the authenticity of the Weems Type A-11. I have documentation showing these as an issued watch and they are very real. I think you misunderstand my reason for this post. My reason for this post ONLY is that I have doubt in the particular markings as shown above not to the usual marked examples as below. The other specifications (55-1A and 55-1B) are unrelated to the Type A-11 and hacking watches and only confuse the issue. Watches with seven (7) jewels were never used as navigation instruments even as early as the early 1930. From the 1930s onward, aviators received some of the highest quality and watches, made with the latest innovations. Many tracing their origin back to Longines, Captain Philip Van Horn Weems (then LCD), and Charles Lindbergh. They were on the cutting edge of air navigation at the time and the U.S.A.A.C. and U.S.N. were the benefactors to their advanced research, with Weems pocket and wrist watch instruments.

You say... "The pattern of the markings on the above Weems was never used by US Gvmt Entities and doesnt follow any spec.

In my opinion the only genuine USAAC part (...upon closer visual inspection ) is the sweep secons bridge, all the rest is civil, reworked etc...."

I agree with your first sentence that the pattern above is not something that would have been used but to say the rest of the watch is not genuine is incorrect. The watch is original and genuine, only it has had the above markings recently engraved to give weight to it's military heritage. Originally it would have had the full set of markings as shown below. Why and how this came about I can only speculate. Here is how it should have been marked...



On the right is a 1940 issued Longines Weems Type A-11 and on the left is a rare 1941 non-Weems Longines Type A-11. The 1941 non-Weems Longines Type A-11 was made to specification 94-27834 which pre-dates the specification 94-27834A
and 94-27834B respectively, that you listed.

Hi James,

reason why applyied to your post is because you presented this watch and your doubts on the markings.

Doubts based on speculations and considerations.

No reference was made to official documents to explain why the marking could be dubious.

What I did was to list a number of spec documents which show that a marking as such was never contemplated in any of these listed specs.

I made it clear that I referred to the particular watch you posted.

According with the above authoritative and documented proofs I now read that you agree with me that

'' the pattern above is not something that would have been used ''

and I am pleased of your concurrence.

At this point I see less relevant whether we would agree about the '' military nature'' of this particular watch....

to me, this watch without its military original markings it is just nothing but that is my personal opinion.

But that is not within the scope of this post.

Instead I am sure readers would appreciate if you post spec 27834 so we could read it and have it ready for future reference, if you do not mind.

Meanwhile my best compliments for yr Longines posted which will be better appreciated if shown also on the other side.

rgds


Enzo

The documents you listed refer to the later Type A-11s while some of the others are not relevant to the discussion as they are not specifications for navigation hacking watches and as such only confuse the discussion.

Again, I have no doubt that the Longines Weems Type A-11 in discussion is in fact an issued watch. What I do have doubt about and have stated many times now are the bogus caseback markings. The serial number off the movement places it in the grouping of known issued Longines Weems Type A-11 watches along with the U.S.A.A.C. bridge engraving which precisely and accurately matches those as well. I have documented the movement serial numbers of 21 examples now and they all fall within a very narrow range so I have absolutely no doubt as to this watch's authenticity, bogus caseback markings not withstanding.

Sorry Enzo but some of my documents and researched data will remain private until my book is published. By the way, I do not have the specificaton 27834 but other government documents that mention the different types of hacking watches.

Kind regards,

James D.

I read the reasons of your reserves James.

On my part I do not have any and I am always open to share.

I think that we should postpone the closing of this discussion when your book will be published, I will be very happy to read it.

Meanwhile I recorded the reference you made to spec 27834 and I will look for it by myself.

If you do not mind pls post the front pics of these Longines.

rgds

Enzo

Search is your friend...

https://ihc185.infopop.cc/eve/f...511076202#6511076202