I have not seen a military issue with thin lugs like this before is it a special military issue of not? Can someone help with the question
In reply to Can you spell out what is by Wayne Hanley
In reply to back case spells ORD. DEPT. U by jjb117
jjb thanks for the info. Individually, the dial, hands and case back look to me like issue parts. The case does not look like a MIL issue that I have ever seen or could find since your post. Looking at the picture of the front, the case appears to have a bezel attached to a mid-frame. An ord watch of 1943 vintage have a 2-piece case. If in fact it is a 3-piece case, can you seperate the bezel from the mid-frame? Very interesting case!
In reply to jjb thanks for the info. by Wayne Hanley
The mid frame area is what comes around to make up the lugs and the case area above and below the mid frame are recessed inward from the mid frame, but all is a one piece case only the back screws off. Hope that makes sense.
I will try to take a picture of the side view next week and post
Thanks for your comments JB
I've seen quite a few of these Watches in this exact configuration called just about everything including a frogmans Watch but there is no documentation that I am aware of to show it was ever Military issue. They may very well have been.
The Military sub Dialed 10AK would be non Hacking Wayne and 15 Jewels, this one is listed as having 17?
In reply to I've seen quite a few of by FifthAvenueRes…
When I first saw this post my first inclination was to declare it military issue as, like Fifth, I had seen them before. After some research into the military specs it seems that they were very specific on certain aspects of the case such as its size and two piece design. If it conforms to these specs there is a possibility that it is indeed military issue, but unless we can dig up some sort of specific documentation showing this specific case type we may have to forego giving it the official seal of approval for now.
Jay
In reply to When I first saw this post my by vintagebulova.com