The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Looks like it's from 1967. Isn't that sort of late for a Navitimer dial instead of the Cosmonaut? I think the 24hr Navitimer with the 806 back came out in 1961 but not sure when the Cosmonaut dial was introduced.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/280873848430?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

I was under the impression that the 'pure' Navitimer dials (as opposed to both Cosmonaute and Navitimer) were all the earliest ones, so certainly 67 would be several years too late.

Cosmonaute was used on the dial already in 1962 when the watch was introduced, and whoever told you there was a 1961 ref. 806 24 hour Navitimer don’t know what he’s talking about.

I have seen 1967 ref. 806 AOPA Navitimers, so why not an 809 ? I have no reason to doubt the eBay piece.


/ Kurt B

Paul, I think Alan Trott is mistaken here, all other sources indicate the first Cosmonaute (built according to his idea and
specification, btw.) was delivered to Scott Carpenter "three weeks before the Aurora 7 flight", so that would make it
May 3rd. 1962 - or maybe two days earlier, for his birthday ?

Like I said, he don't know what he's talking about.


/ Kurt B

I haven't seen anything that said Carpenter had the first one, only that he "got his." Seems to me if the name Cosmonaute was registered in 1961 that production would probably have begun earlier than Carpenter's flight just as lead in time for development. Although I think the development wouldn't have taken all that long to change a gear or two and paint a dial.

Show me one ”1”, just one relaiable & complete Cosmonaute watch with a serial number that dates it to 1961, then I’ll reconsider my opinion.
Alan Trott snatched a picture from the internet when he made his history about the Cosmonaute, he believed what was written below the picture without doing any further research, is that serious history making ? ? ?

The watch.:
The dial is from 1964/65, it has the painted AOPA logo and not the applied one (as in 1962/63), I believe that the numbers and hands has been redone, but I obviously can’t say that for sure, the numbers don't look right to my eyes either, and where is the patina ? The sliderule is patinated and absolutely not original to the watch (why was it replaced ? ) as it has red arrow markers, they came as far as I know in 1966/67.
We have seen a few Navitimers and Cosmonautes over the years with wrong reference numbers, most of them on eBay, this one is just one more for the road.

See the real one below - 1963, compare numbers and AOPA logo, then you will understand what I mean.

/ Kurt B

agree w/ Kurt that the dial and hands seem to be relumed, numbers are "off" and not in line with the "well used" condition of
the watch, look at the amount of wear on crown and pushers.

I wouldn't have noticed all that Kurt:)