Reply With QuoteI’m drawn to the Aerospace version - did they have that in stock perchance as I’m going through Heathrow next week
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hi all
I didn't realize that Breitling were doing a RAF 100 collaboration until I was in WoS in LHR T3 yesterday.!
If you are interested they have #49 of the 100 Avenger II GMT
More details here:
http://www.watchpro.com/breitlings-b...ited-editions/
Thanks
deano
I’m drawn to the Aerospace version - did they have that in stock perchance as I’m going through Heathrow next week
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm a bit underwhelmed to be honest, I was expecting something more than just slapping on the RAF insignia - even the old Citizen Blue Angels SEs feel more special than this lot. And I thought they said that from now on, the in-house chronos would have contrasting dials to set them apart from ETA-based ones. And they haven't done away with the wings and anchor on these, either - this is really making me wonder how tight of a ship Kern is actually running ...
I suspect these have been in the works longer than Kern has been at Breitling, hence the “older” design cues. I feel Bremont put a lot more effort into their RAF centenary model.Originally Posted by lasz
Dave
The Royal Flying Corp seems to have been written out of the history,I’ve not heard one mention.
Speaking from a biased opinion, this is a thoroughly poor effort. Bremont put's Breitling to shame when it comes to military and special projects.
Who buys these watches? Serious question.
Thats because it was renamed the RAF in 1918 hence its the centenary of the RAF.
Obviously,but the RFC is part of the story I expect many people don’t know of them.
Bet even less have heard of the Royal Naval Air Service
Centenary of the foundation of the RFC was celebrated in 2012 but very low key as they only existed for just under 6 years and obviously there weren’t any members still alive.
While I vastly prefer Breitling as a brand, I cannot but agree as far as effort is concened. However, Bremont's problem is that they have no taste, their trick of building original bits of whatever they're celebrating into the watch itself is as tacky as it gets, and it annoys me how they're imbuing all these watches with history to which they have zero claim, and setting them up as future classics and collectables. At least with the Breitling offerings, half-arsed as they are, you feel like strapping them on and wearing them like a normal watch ... which they - thankfully - are.
Pretty dull offering IMO. Take a Breitling and slap on the RAF crest? Boring.
Although I dislike Bremont equally, at least with some of their designs (such as the Chinook) models, they actually try to incorporate the tacky dial print addition into the dial.
Not a fan of Breitling really and these make them even less appealing, the crest in the sub dial on the Navitimer is shocking.
It’s a risk putting a crest on a dial as imo tends to look a bit Franklin Mint “now you can celebrate the 100th whatever anniversary”
A play with colour , maybe even adaption of Breitling branding ? But the caseback is where the interesting stuff could have happened inlaid RAD roundels. Obviously haven’t seen the caseback to see what they have done if anything.
Not usually a fan of Breitling but I like that one.
I also like the fact it’s a bit understated the way they’ve done it.
What claim do Breitling have to aviation history? All they've done is exist for a longer period?
Even if it were only that, it still matters - in the current state of the watch market, and really branding in general, where heritage is everything, it helps having stuck around for as long as Breitling have done. And I struggle to think of a brand that would be more closely associated with (post-WW2) aviation than Breitling.
By that logic no new brands should have a right to exist. Sorry but I don't agree. Bremont have filled a huge gap with the military that Breitling would not cater to, and Bremont listen to what their military customers want.
Aviation history and breitling.?
Nothing at all.
The watches in various designs have and were favoured by pilots for many years.
Breitling tend to be marmite to many.
I am a fan as I like the larger watch.
Heuer for racing.Rolex for diving.
Breitling for flying.omega for landing on the moon.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
You're right in a way, this is where my logic ultimately leads ... and I admit that brand heritage does influence my buying choices. And I consider Bremont to be a very clever brand, and as far as I can gather, they're very serious about the level of quality of their products and the technology they employ. But I do think they often get ahead of themselves in their claims to history, which I found disrespecftul and cynical in the context of their own ostensible hyper-deferent attitude towards various historical events, triumphs of exceptional individuals etc.
Seiko for diving, going by numbers and availability
IWC for flying,going by history and class
Breitling lost the plot when they hiked RRP higher than Rolex sports models and opened Boutiques that felt like walking into M&M World...
The RFC centenary was celebrated in 2012, just very very quietly. I happened to visit the RAF museum that year and read about it.
Dave
Looks fine from here🙂Breitling lost the plot when they hiked RRP higher than Rolex sports models and opened Boutiques that felt like walking into M&M World...
The watch looks like they've stuck on a sticker 5 seconds before it went into production.
Pathetic effort. And I was so hoping for something utterly brilliant and appropriate.
This was the only version they had at T3, you may want to ring up to see if T5 has any different versions.
Thanks
deano
Travolta will feel right at home with those uniforms, reminiscent as they are of Scientology's Sea Org and their fake nautical get ups ...Breitling lost the plot when they hiked RRP higher than Rolex sports models and opened Boutiques that felt like walking into M&M World...
Posting Permissions
