WTF is a 'Field Watch'?!
A lot of people would look at the pic above and say, yeah, that's a cool field watch. But I'm in a mood. So I'll have to disagree. In some ways, it excels in the category. But then falls down in others.
Maybe I'm hangry. No lunch today, super busy. (But not too busy to rant!) But it seems to me that the definition of a 'field watch' has become flexible to the point of uselessness. So it got me to thinking, what exactly is a 'field watch'?
I've been seeing examples posted today, and I have to ask myself, wait, is that what a field watch looks like? Is that the functionality and design it should have? It seems most times and these days, any simple 3 hander is called a field watch. Sure, it's simple, legible, prob built tough. But is that it? Is that all it takes to call it a field watch?
So I did some digging. And boy, I don't know. Do the requirements clarify or confuse further? Let's take a look.
We all know that field watches were originally called 'trench watches'. Yes, first used in WWI and then standard issue in WWII. March in a line, don't get your head blown off, blimy! So that set's the right context.
Here go the requirements:
None reflective cases. The cases of military watches are matte or bead-blasted. Shiny surfaces can reflect light and give away your position. So no way that this watch below would qualify.
Polished case and gold glitter? Not on your life! I know it has a compass but do you get lost in a trench?
A 24 Hour Track. This is not an absolute requirement, but it is certainly high functional. A soldier would use this to track time during a dirty hard mission. I would certainly demand one in my field watch! (Afternoon tea was 012 not 024!)
But not this one.
Or this one.
Simplicity of Design. That means no chronographs or day/date functions. But we still get this.
Precision. Field watches required an min accuracy of 30 sec per day. That blasted artillery fire again. Get ready to duck! But then why are we even considering a mechanical watch? It should instead be this. These are issued to the US Navy Seals.
The military was one of the first to adopt quartz movement. Cheaper and more accurate! Where do I sign?
Super Lume. It has to be bright! Easy to read even in the dark of night, when the darkness creeps into the soul of men. In that, the Luminox wins again! It's proprietary lighting tech uses micro gas light tubes good for 25 yrs. No need to expose to the sun.
Durability. This means dust and water resistance. The strap can't break after a few uses. The movement must keep working under the harshest conditions.
Let's be honest here. The modern 'field watch' looks like this.
Tough solar. None of this 36 hr power reserve. The war's going to last longer than that! Backlighting to read day or night. A strap that lasts forever. 31 time zones! Countdown timers 1 min to 24 hrs. And cheap! Don't forget military contracts. Only $129. With 30 day return if found deceased.
Ok, if people want to enjoy the charm of a mechanical field watch, I'm fine with that. We're all cosplaying as pilots, astronauts and 007.
But really,even for mechanical watches, what do you consider a 'field watch'? What are your requirements?
Son of a watchmaker. Artsy farsy dude.
I have to admit that the world inside my head is a very easy going, relaxed & uncomplicated place as far as watches are concerned.
I don't really assess what my next purchase is going to be on the basis of where it's classified by horologists. I never think "I really need a field watch, a chronograph, a diver etc", I'm incredibly superficial. My criteria is;
Does it look good?
Can I afford it?
Is it practically the same as other watches I have?
If I get a yes, yes, no in answers to these questions my brain says buy. The marketing blurb for one of my purchases says it's a Medic's Field Watch. It may well be but I just like the colours & strap 😀
You make a good point here, wtf is it with all the categories of watches & at the end of the day, does anyone really give a hoot other than those where the watch's functionality is integral to their job?
I have to admit that the world inside my head is a very easy going, relaxed & uncomplicated place as far as watches are concerned.
I don't really assess what my next purchase is going to be on the basis of where it's classified by horologists. I never think "I really need a field watch, a chronograph, a diver etc", I'm incredibly superficial. My criteria is;
Does it look good?
Can I afford it?
Is it practically the same as other watches I have?
If I get a yes, yes, no in answers to these questions my brain says buy. The marketing blurb for one of my purchases says it's a Medic's Field Watch. It may well be but I just like the colours & strap 😀
You make a good point here, wtf is it with all the categories of watches & at the end of the day, does anyone really give a hoot other than those where the watch's functionality is integral to their job?
Yeah, I'm not looking to be a gatekeeper here. We can all enjoy our watches in our own ways. I'm simply saying that we should be clear in our labeling so that our discussions can have more meaning and lead to less confusion. That's it. Salud!
There is not much difference between a field watch and a pilot watch. Fot that matter the only thing that sets them apart from dress watches is numbers instead of indicies. Put a strap compass on any watch and call it a field watch.
Yeah, I'm not looking to be a gatekeeper here. We can all enjoy our watches in our own ways. I'm simply saying that we should be clear in our labeling so that our discussions can have more meaning and lead to less confusion. That's it. Salud!
I agree. It's the over complication of these matters that's meant I keep things simple/stupid for my own benefit 😀
Any watch.
There is not much difference between a field watch and a pilot watch. Fot that matter the only thing that sets them apart from dress watches is numbers instead of indicies. Put a strap compass on any watch and call it a field watch.
Yes - and to muddy the water even more, you don’t even need a full complement of numbers, just 3-6-9 to be a field watch (see, Tudor Ranger, Rolex Explorer)!
I call this a field watch. It's accurate, easy to read, blends in with the fatigues. I agree with the OP, the criteria encompasses many many watches
To my thinking the ark by the Swiss watch company might be the perfect field watch. #berny #swcusa
I don’t know what a field watch is either, so I enjoy your post! 👏🏼👏🏼
There is not much difference between a field watch and a pilot watch. Fot that matter the only thing that sets them apart from dress watches is numbers instead of indicies. Put a strap compass on any watch and call it a field watch.
Well, there's also that pilots watches are much bigger than field watches. Rather like these.
I call this a field watch. It's accurate, easy to read, blends in with the fatigues. I agree with the OP, the criteria encompasses many many watches
To my thinking the ark by the Swiss watch company might be the perfect field watch. #berny #swcusa
I would still prefer 24 hr markers. It let's me cosplay better at military ;-).
Yes - and to muddy the water even more, you don’t even need a full complement of numbers, just 3-6-9 to be a field watch (see, Tudor Ranger, Rolex Explorer)!
I consider those more 'sports watches'.
Any watch.
Yup, that's exactly my point.
I understand the OP's points. I guess in light of collecting though, a "field watch" simply means, "field watch style," meaning some visual cues are present - enough that we know it's a field watch of sorts.
That's fine with me. But even in saying styling, that goes to function. The design of the dial, the case finishing, etc. So don't we still need to define 'field watch' so we can define field watch style?
I have never made a connection between the term field watch with a trench watch or military combat watch. I’ve always associated the term with hiking, camping, fishing, maybe some rock climbing. Outdoorsy stuff.
I think this is why the Explorer is considered the ultimate field watch. It’s just a simple, robust, comfortable watch to wear on a long walk that might last several days.
Very funny...well written ..😂🎯
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it.
I'm not a big fan of the typical "field watch" style but the Alpinist and Formex will forever be on my wishlist.
I have the vintage reissue, with the mountain peak hands, grey dial. Love that watch. I've yet to experience a formex but one day! They have such a stellar reputation.
Agreed.
I will back you up with this: a 1991 British Army issued CWC G10.
This ticks all the boxes, including easy to replace battery via the hatch.
The CWC G10 is the field watch, in operation for over 30 years across numerous campaigns, from the early 80s “Fatboys” in the Falklands, right through to the final issues in 2006 before the Pulsar G10 - end of argument.
Excellent watch, I'll have to pick one up one day!
Hi, in my opinion, those classification were intended for around the first world war, before it men even didn't wear a wrist watches, they were for women, the field watch needs to be robust and legible. The pilot watch need to be able to see time in a glance, some might not intended for wrist, they strap them on thigh, since needs both hands moving around. Submersible watch needs water resistant hence they were bulky. Apart from those main requirement the rest are not really important then, that is why some of them look like what we consider a dress watch of today for a field watch for example, Longines heritage military. Nowadays, since the progress in manufacturing, the specification of the watch could increase significantly without care of the case, unless for the extreme specs like the ploprof. So basicaly the categories become less and more for visual.
Hi, in my opinion, those classification were intended for around the first world war, before it men even didn't wear a wrist watches, they were for women, the field watch needs to be robust and legible. The pilot watch need to be able to see time in a glance, some might not intended for wrist, they strap them on thigh, since needs both hands moving around. Submersible watch needs water resistant hence they were bulky. Apart from those main requirement the rest are not really important then, that is why some of them look like what we consider a dress watch of today for a field watch for example, Longines heritage military. Nowadays, since the progress in manufacturing, the specification of the watch could increase significantly without care of the case, unless for the extreme specs like the ploprof. So basicaly the categories become less and more for visual.
Actually, the mil specs were a requirement into WW2 and into modern times. If you didn't meet those specs, your watch would be rejected. So there was a specific profile for a 'field watch'.
Love the Cosplay line ,, hehe because it is so so true
Yes - and to muddy the water even more, you don’t even need a full complement of numbers, just 3-6-9 to be a field watch (see, Tudor Ranger, Rolex Explorer)!
Tudor is brushed and matt black dial , the 1016 Explorer was a field watch the new Explorer is Cosplay 😂 either way no harm no foul and agree pretty much . @ckim4watches made some good points though about shiny , that’s a no no if your taking “ Field” as “Military “ not “ camping/ white water rafting whereas “ shiny” would be good if you’ve broken your leg without an “ EPRB” and need the rescue helicopters to spot you and your shiny busted arse :)
I am always on the fence when comes to field and pilot. I love the breakdown you have provided it helps. Below is an example of the confusion I face between these 2 . More likely my Timex is the true field but, there are day I like to wear my Addiesive . Both are easy to read, durable and reliable, lumes and Indiglo are great.The Addiesive has better water resistant. Timex more comfortable.
I am always on the fence when comes to field and pilot. I love the breakdown you have provided it helps. Below is an example of the confusion I face between these 2 . More likely my Timex is the true field but, there are day I like to wear my Addiesive . Both are easy to read, durable and reliable, lumes and Indiglo are great.The Addiesive has better water resistant. Timex more comfortable.
That Timex looks very close to this mil spec watch:
Produced by Hamilton under a contract with the US Gov. Of course your is better quality. The original mil spec was cheap and plastic.
Thanks 😊
Actually, the mil specs were a requirement into WW2 and into modern times. If you didn't meet those specs, your watch would be rejected. So there was a specific profile for a 'field watch'.
Yes, that is why the category or specification were made for the war purpose and initially they just procure those that made the requirement and there were no watches made specifically to the requirement when the requirement itself doesn't exist so does the terminology, necessity is a mother of inventions, unfortunately the necessity was war. But with modern tech, the watches are more to mimic the look, not necessary the requirement of the initial WW II when those terminology came with the requirement since we have surpass them. Back then the requirement or spec dictate the look. So if you want, you could have a field looking watch with the water resistant of a submersible and size of a pilot watch now, example the khaki field auto is 44mm is larger than the typical field watch back the and 100m water resist when even in 60s diver only around 150m, and 44mm is a closer to 50mm-ish flieger teritory. I guess, enjoy what you like the looks or size with less spec constraint as before.
In current years, a G-shock or a Protrek is the perfect field watch if you are marching into a battle. I would say even an F91 would be more functional 😅
The Alpinist was never marketed as a field watch, it was purpose-built for mountaineers and explorers but has fallen into the field watch category in the last few years. And apparently, the term "field" includes all sorts of land activities these days. I go for hikes at times which I consider the only field activity right now in my life where I always end up wearing the G-shock on both occasions and not my Alpinist. Maybe next time the Alpinist will join.
In current years, a G-shock or a Protrek is the perfect field watch if you are marching into a battle. I would say even an F91 would be more functional 😅
The Alpinist was never marketed as a field watch, it was purpose-built for mountaineers and explorers but has fallen into the field watch category in the last few years. And apparently, the term "field" includes all sorts of land activities these days. I go for hikes at times which I consider the only field activity right now in my life where I always end up wearing the G-shock on both occasions and not my Alpinist. Maybe next time the Alpinist will join.
Agreed, the G Shock is my idea of a military issue field watch. It's notable that the G Shock is the most worn by military and law enforcement all over the world.
A field watch is a boring as fuk watch... 😂 😂
I was in an Army unit for a long time, 20 years and for a good part of it this was my field watch.
It has an indiglo type backlight that illuminates the dial, quartz accurate to a couple of seconds a month, like 2 and survived in the tropical environments and the desert. Great little "field" watch.