Bulova 1950 Military Issue "A-17A"

8/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
1.7625
Variant: 
A-17A
Manufacture Year: 
1950
Movement Model: 
10 BNCH
Movement Jewels: 
17
Case Serial No.: 
14182
Case shape: 
Round
Additional Information: 

Bulova 'Type A17A' - Korean War Era U.S. Military issue.

Parkerized Steel Case measures 40mm lug to lug x 32mm wide non inclusive of the Crown while using Calipers.

Black Dial shows Luminous and White printed numerals. Hour and Minute Hands are Luminous filled and the sweep center Seconds Hand is unique with a Luminous Arrowhead tip.

A Steel dustshield and gasket appears between the Caseback and Movement.

10 sided Caseback is Parkerized, screws on and is stamped as shown.

Crown is Steel.

Hackset.

The A17A is shown on its original issue strap.

 

* 100% correct as found - from the estate of a retired U.S. Naval Officer.

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 3:08am

Will, Geoff isn't making any speculative claims though. I and I hope others, would simply like to know the actual age of this watch, as it would smash any theories of not only Bulova collectors, but the Military watch collection fraternity world-wide.

This watch, if the date is factual and not fictional, could be a very important piece of time-line information for all those people, and for it not to be backed with any pictures of the movement, date marks and any other EXTENSIVE information, not just "best guesses" leaves the "owner" in the line of fire for some pretty heavy derision, and rightly so.

I am not just trying to get on someones nerves here Will, I am looking for some genuine information, that after more than a year, and after so many requests for said information, I HAVE turned to "goading" as a last resort to acquire it, as nothing else in that time has prompted the poster of the watch to provide any.

I'm done with this, I just don't believe there is any information to back up the claims.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted November 25, 2012 - 3:29am

Club 5000Panel Member

It's the methods that I'm questioning, not the record.  LOL  With all the good discussion and information learned in this thread, why in the world would we delete it?  Even if Mark made it all up.....there's been good stuff covered.
...and surly we would not delete records for failing to provide confirmation.  Maybe we give less ticks, or vote to name it something different based on the lack of this important movement date question.  I just assume we don't know the date of the movement for sure.  It's a shame that we don't, and like you say, it's a very pivitol record that lots of folks spent lots of time on. ...and has implications on an important start date.....unless it was a movement swap with and earlier movement :)  Maybe Mark sold it, or never owned. I dont remember.  But I don't think it shoud be deleted, that's all I'm saying. 

OldTicker
Posted November 25, 2012 - 9:43am

"What's this thread come to."

It appears that this thread and subject watch has been exposed as a sham. We have big claims with no proof to back it up...we also have posts to this thread that have had the original content edited...so you tell me Will, What's this thread come to?

At best, the subject watch should be in the unknown category until the proof required is provided, for all we know, the spec Bulova case back could be the only thing Bulova because we can't see the dial, or movement to confirm that this is a 1950 Military Issue.

 

 

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 2:12am

 

I was wondering if someone else would pick up on that, as I was also wondering how the movement information is known, hence my "X-Ray vision" comment.

I do not think the watch is yours fifth, as the photos do not look like yours.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted November 25, 2012 - 3:38am

Club 5000Panel Member

I think I got it now.  It's just the important, pivital watch records, with great discussions and lots of new stuff learned in the process...those are the ones we should delete when we don't know the movement date for sure.  That makes much more sense....

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 6:38am

I don't know about this being an important, pivotal watch record, as this watch, in my opinion, has never been in the posession of the original poster.

Check page three-four of this thread for some real info....

 

 

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 8:09am

I agree that the thread should not be deleted, as it gives us so much important and interesting information, and some great documents and mil-spec sheets from the author no less.

Very interesting and informative, I learned quite a lot in this thread.

EDIT:- Check the revision date at the bottom of this revised edition of hq_sandman_ute's mil-spec sheet, July 3rd. 2011.

If, as the original poster of this watch claims, the revision was made because of information found on this site, why does it predate the first post in the thread by two months? Not one Military watch thread in the Mybulova.com database contains a reference to the mil-spec sheet below that pre-dates the revised edition, so the above claim is debunked.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted November 25, 2012 - 10:05am

Please refer to page 2 of this thread, post Dated October 5, 2011 by Mr Wayne Hanley.

"Fifth

As a point of reference in this list, in the left column, spec MIL-W-6433 dated 8 April 1960 indicates the first specification for the Type A-17 watch. Therefore, the first Type A-17 was not an issue item until after 8 April 1960 & manufactured by Walton.  Futherrmore, the first Bulova Type A-17 to be issued under MIL-W-6433A could not have been issued until after the specification date of 4 August 1960."

 

* Points of interest have been highlighted in BOLD, it is unclear to Me how the image used in the aforementioned post became changed from the original.

 

above is an image of the A-17A under fire which has been in the "original posters" possession since being retrieved from a retired and now deceased U.S. Naval Air Officers foot locker, who flew in Korea.

Please note: the root link to the image includes todays Date. 11 25 2012

OldTicker
Posted November 25, 2012 - 10:49am

Great! Now open'r up and provide the movement data requested...

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 10:49am

???

I think you'll have to explain what you mean, unless you are pointing out that the Spec-sheet included in the October 5th. 2011 post by Wayne has since been changed from the original to the July 3rd. 2011 revised spec sheet.

If you are pointing out Wayne Hanley's mistaken belief of the A-17 release dates, he did not know about the revised spec sheet, and since he is no longer a participating member, I see no reason for the above post, as usual it just confuses instead of enlightening.

As for the new picture, is this some kind of show-boating big lead up to a revelationary crop of new data and internal photo's, or is it just another big let down?

Whichever, you have been known to use PhotoShop before in your watch posts to trick members, I am referring to your 1944 Clipper, with the little photo of the big watch that some members thought was a ladies model next to the mans, (you have since removed it, after I pointed it out, several times), and I don't think you have any credibility left, after the many mistakes you have made in this thread alone.

EDIT:- The date in the root link, doesn't it only show the date the pic was posted, not when it was taken?