# A Different Certina...



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

What do you think?


----------



## thorpey69 (Feb 8, 2006)

looks like it would be uncomfortable to wear


----------



## Regal325 (Aug 5, 2005)

> looks like it would be uncomfortable to wear


Jeez....not much chance of an adult response to this then?


----------



## thorpey69 (Feb 8, 2006)

Regal325 said:


> > looks like it would be uncomfortable to wear
> 
> 
> Jeez....not much chance of an adult response to this then?


return to home page read title ....RLT WATCH FORUMS...


----------



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

> return to home page read title ....RLT WATCH FORUMS


Oh dear , Oh dear.......

To all the readers and especially the Moderators.......

I am so, so sorry that I posted this thread.........If I had thought that it would so have upset a Newbie...I would never have posted it.

Thorpey69.......you are obviously far more experienced on this Forum than I am.

I regret humbly that I upset your sensitivities and I sit back and look forward to mocking some of your posts.

Sorry all,

Roger


----------



## Regal325 (Aug 5, 2005)

Roger,

Just ignore him...he obviously has nothing positive to contribute.

I for one would rather see your postings whatever the timepiece, than read something as pointless an negative as thorpey69,s offerings .

Carry on, just ignore it...he might get to 30 postings one day...if he doe4s, lets hope they have more substance than the above...but I doubt it.

Ken


----------



## thorpey69 (Feb 8, 2006)

Regal325 said:


> Roger,
> 
> Just ignore him...he obviously has nothing positive to contribute.
> 
> ...


jeez guys lighten up,it was only a harmless bit of banter,im a jovial chap who likes to enjoy life,i intended no offence.relax dont get upset i wasnt mocking you.


----------



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

> jeez guys lighten up,it was only a harmless bit of banter,im a jovial chap who likes to enjoy life,i intended no offence.relax dont get upset i wasnt mocking you.


Fair enough....lets leave it there then....

BUT.....it IS a watch....its a Deck Watch.

end of banter.

Roger


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Ok, Ill try to bring things back on track, Roger, Im surprised that a quartz deck clock is in a box like that, I thought that deck clocks of old were in these cases ( possibly on gimbles?) to keep them in a stable environvent to preserve accuracy for navigation purposes?

Do quartz clocks need to be kept this way too?

Or am I talking out of my posterior









PS while I think it looks OK, my own preference is for quartz clocks not to try to look like a 'classical' mecanical, I dont know why but It doesnt look right when a old fasioned looking peice tick tocks with a quartz action....

PPS What about that LED chronometer seen elsewhere recently? Wow !!!! That was a beauty..... ;-)


----------



## thorpey69 (Feb 8, 2006)

Roger said:


> > jeez guys lighten up,it was only a harmless bit of banter,im a jovial chap who likes to enjoy life,i intended no offence.relax dont get upset i wasnt mocking you.
> 
> 
> Fair enough....lets leave it there then....
> ...


fair enough,in all seriousness what would have been the purpose of this piece?


----------



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

> I thought that deck clocks of old were in these cases ( possibly on gimbles?) to keep them in a stable environvent to preserve accuracy?


Jase,

The ships chronometer(s) were nearly always gimballed for the reasons you state.

They were kept in a fixed position, as close to the centre line as possible, as this is where movement is/was least.

They were never moved.

A deck watch was set to the ships chronometer and then carried to the Bridge, or whereever the time was needed, thus no need to gimball.



> what would have been the purpose of this piece?


Information, discussion and possibly interest....obvious I would have though...surely the basis for any forum?


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

OK thats interesting, a ship would then have a static master chronometer and also a number of portable 'deck clocks' ...

Diddnt know that...

Cheers


----------



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

> a ship would then have a static master chronometer and also a number of portable 'deck clocks'


Jase,

Depending on the "status" of the Vessel, it was common to have more that one main chronometer....could have any number of deck watches.

Incidentally, Poljot still make a nice deck watch....I recently traded one to our Host

Roger


----------



## thorpey69 (Feb 8, 2006)

Roger said:


> > I thought that deck clocks of old were in these cases ( possibly on gimbles?) to keep them in a stable environvent to preserve accuracy?
> 
> 
> Jase,
> ...


----------



## Roger (May 17, 2003)

> the question was in reference to the deckwatch not your writing


See my first answer. again if you deleted it.

.......Information, discussion and possible interest


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

Roger,

It looks like a nice clock and the case looks well made.

I have a love of things made of mahogany wood, is it made of that?

I have a mantle peice, it's made of mahogany. I rescued it twentyfive odd years ago and installed it in place of the tilled fire suround that came with my old house. Yes, it has a chimney.









I reckon the mahogany fireplace is made of a very thick veneer but not solid. What a shame.









I have a thick veneer but I won't put up with pointless bickering, for those that need to know.

Let's keep things sensible, gentlemen.


----------



## Regal325 (Aug 5, 2005)

> but I won't put up with pointless bickering, for those that need to know


I feel that there may be a slight injustice in this........and Roger will probably not thank me for this........but I have known him for quite a while and, via the Forum, have traded, bought and sold a few watches with him.

He is most certainly not someone who "pointlessly bickers"....he was, IMHO, just responding to a series of inane, childish and pointless responses to, what seemed to me to be a fairly interesting post.

To me, this speaks volumes of the responder rather than the poster.

I, for one, hope he doesnt stop posting over this as it is good to see an original post, rather than a diet of "ooh, I like that" type of response.

Just my (fairly newbie) humble opinion.

Ken


----------



## raketakat (Sep 24, 2003)

Roger said:


> A deck watch was set to the ships chronometer and then carried to.... whereever the time was needed


I can't get this "wherever the time was needed" phrase out of my head.

Damn you Roger 







.


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

Regal325 said:


> > but I won't put up with pointless bickering, for those that need to know
> 
> 
> I feel that there may be a slight injustice in this........and Roger will probably not thank me for this........but I have known him for quite a while and, via the Forum, have traded, bought and sold a few watches with him.
> ...


I've never known Roger to be anything other than honest and fair. I have never done him an injustice as far as I know and have no intention of doing so.

I recently saw a valued member of another forum leave because the moderators didn't intervene in a minor argument that grew into something it shouldn't have. Should that happen on our forum? I don't think so, we are too grown up to allow that aren't we?


----------

