The Watch Thread - Part 14

[gaoxing84]

Well, you're entitled to your views.

Of course everything has a purpose, even Gollum in LOTR and bwaysaikryptonitehascancerenglish in HWZ Watch Thread.

But I think there's no reason or logic to bring in all sorts of chemistry when up till now, there has been no real response to these 2 points I made earlier on:

1) External AR coating is not as hard as a naked sapphire crystal, no matter what you do today; therefore, people who do not fancy scratches on their watch crystals are fully vindicated in disliking them or removing them altogether.

2) External AR coating actually doesn't offer that much in the way of AR, largely because you can do a good job on internal AR anyways. The returns you get on adding an external AR coating do diminish, and for some, the utility gained is simply not worth the perceived flaws that come with it.

Maybe here's a third one. You say you need external AR coating for safety.

3) Can kindly share the situations in which you might need it? Is it because you are drinking your Hibiki and can't be bothered to flick your wrist before your drink spills out? Is it because you're in Mission Impossible irl and are tied up, and need to time your escape before the bomb goes off?

And maybe a fourth, before I rest my case.

4) Who the hell buys a watch with specifications that they need? Are you saying that a non-diver should never get a diver watch, and complain about having a hardened mineral crystal even though a flooded watch underwater is less preferable to a scratched watch underwater? Are you saying that a person who never travels should never get a GMT? If not, why are you begrudging people who buy things with features that they don't need (like a Hibiki or any form of alcohol, I guess)?

Word.

That bringing hibiki in damn act atas. Hahahaha
***** cannot stand.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

Lolololoooool.

OK. Still wondering why you so butt hurt when it's a personal preference?

And what's the use of a external AR? I need to know from our in-house professor.
3rd time I am raising my hands to ask that question
So I can be enlightened.

To prevent spurious reflections that may affect sensitive photo-detectors, either during calibration or equipment testing. When visible low power lasers are being used, although wearing a watch isn't recommended, a watch with double AR coatings reduces the chance of accidental exposure of laser to the eye.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

Well, you're entitled to your views.

...

2) External AR coating actually doesn't offer that much in the way of AR, largely because you can do a good job on internal AR anyways. The returns you get on adding an external AR coating do diminish, and for some, the utility gained is simply not worth the perceived flaws that come with it.

Maybe here's a third one. You say you need external AR coating for safety.

3) Can kindly share the situations in which you might need it? Is it because you are drinking your Hibiki and can't be bothered to flick your wrist before your drink spills out? Is it because you're in Mission Impossible irl and are tied up, and need to time your escape before the bomb goes off?

And maybe a fourth, before I rest my case.

4) Who the hell buys a watch with specifications that they need? Are you saying that a non-diver should never get a diver watch, and complain about having a hardened mineral crystal even though a flooded watch underwater is less preferable to a scratched watch underwater? Are you saying that a person who never travels should never get a GMT? If not, why are you begrudging people who buy things with features that they don't need (like a Hibiki or any form of alcohol, I guess)?

For the omitted points, you're right.

For point 2, that's patently false. You can't just coat one side to get to a similar performance to a double-coated AR crystal. For a typical air-glass interface, at near zero incidence, you get about 4% reflectance (for both polarizations). With two interfaces, the front and the rear, you get about 8% of reflectance for a broadband light source. A really effective coating on one side cuts your reflectance to 4%, but that's the best you can get.

Point 3 has been addressed above.

For point 4, I'm referring to non-divers who complain about features of a diving watch... you're not getting my point, are you? Pilots watches may come with double-AR coating to reduce glint in the cockpit, as during stressful situations, a pilot may be confused by glint caused by his own watch (vs glint caused by another aircraft). This is the reason for their AR coating (hence, you see them on some Sinn and IWC). Now, if you get them and complain about the AR coating...

 

[gaoxing84]

To prevent spurious reflections that may affect sensitive photo-detectors, either during calibration or equipment testing. When visible low power lasers are being used, although wearing a watch isn't recommended, a watch with double AR coatings reduces the chance of accidental exposure of laser to the eye.

LOLOLOL.



then don't wear a damn watch when handling these equipment.
LOL

do so much, return like fk. hahaha

but then again, says who? any real world cases that wearing a watch when using such equipment will ***** blind someone?
so if i use a green laser and ******* my watch, the reflection from my non AR-ed watches will blind me and i will become daredevil?
sick bruh

LOLOL dude you just made my night while i sip my tiger beer

 

[gaoxing84]

For the omitted points, you're right.

For point 2, that's patently false. You can't just coat one side to get to a similar performance to a double-coated AR crystal. For a typical air-glass interface, at near zero incidence, you get about 4% reflectance (for both polarizations). With two interfaces, the front and the rear, you get about 8% of reflectance for a broadband light source. A really effective coating on one side cuts your reflectance to 4%, but that's the best you can get.

Point 3 has been addressed above.

For point 4, I'm referring to non-divers who complain about features of a diving watch... you're not getting my point, are you? Pilots watches may come with double-AR coating to reduce glint in the cockpit, as during stressful situations, a pilot may be confused by glint caused by his own watch (vs glint caused by another aircraft). This is the reason for their AR coating (hence, you see them on some Sinn and IWC). Now, if you get them and complain about the AR coating...

wear a gshock?

better chances *******-ing another aircraft.

 

[cyrenic]

For the omitted points, you're right.

For point 2, that's patently false. You can't just coat one side to get to a similar performance to a double-coated AR crystal. For a typical air-glass interface, at near zero incidence, you get about 4% reflectance (for both polarizations). With two interfaces, the front and the rear, you get about 8% of reflectance for a broadband light source. A really effective coating on one side cuts your reflectance to 4%, but that's the best you can get.

Point 3 has been addressed above.

For point 4, I'm referring to non-divers who complain about features of a diving watch... you're not getting my point, are you? Pilots watches may come with double-AR coating to reduce glint in the cockpit, as during stressful situations, a pilot may be confused by glint caused by his own watch (vs glint caused by another aircraft). This is the reason for their AR coating (hence, you see them on some Sinn and IWC). Now, if you get them and complain about the AR coating...

2) I didn't say that 2 AR coatings WEREN'T better than 1. I said that the amount of utility gained for most people (given that you can actually turn your wrist to eliminate the remaining reflections quite easily) is limited, and that includes pilots.

3) Erm, so apparently when you want minimal reflectance in what situation again? Nice dodging the question, bro.

4) And you're a pilot that works with NASA or something... Okayyyyy. I guess all pilots, including those that fly for third world countries, wear Sinns and other watches with double AR coating. Amount of incidents caused by watch glint? Wonder how many leh.

 

[gaoxing84]

1 more question

why NASA never make moonwatch to have double AR?

is it plexiglass or rather hesalite no need AR?

what if the sun reflect the light to the astronaut eyes, the astronaut might think is a extra-terrestrial being bio-ing him from afar?
or is it because the infinity stones glint too strong?

need answers from NASA NOW!

are they hiding something? is that THANOS?

or is it because dark side of the moon? scare got transformer come out? but dark side ma, no light, cannot reflect from megatron metal body.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

LOLOLOL.



then don't wear a damn watch when handling these equipment.
LOL

do so much, return like fk. hahaha

but then again, says who? any real world cases that wearing a watch when using such equipment will ***** blind someone?
so if i use a green laser and ******* my watch, the reflection from my non AR-ed watches will blind me and i will become daredevil?
sick bruh

LOLOL dude you just made my night while i sip my tiger beer

You should really leave these things to professionals. Specular surfaces are always dangerous in a place with lasers, especially for unmounted and untreated surfaces.

 

[gaoxing84]

2) I didn't say that 2 AR coatings WEREN'T better than 1. I said that the amount of utility gained for most people (given that you can actually turn your wrist to eliminate the remaining reflections quite easily) is limited, and that includes pilots.

3) Erm, so apparently when you want minimal reflectance in what situation again? Nice dodging the question, bro.

4) And you're a pilot that works with NASA or something... Okayyyyy. I guess all pilots, including those that fly for third world countries, wear Sinns and other watches with double AR coating. Amount of incidents caused by watch glint? Wonder how many leh.

eh he is the pilot for NASA space mission. he also engineers AR for watch company.
that's why can sip hibiki cause he rich yo

 

[gaoxing84]

You should really leave these things to professionals. Specular surfaces are always dangerous in a place with lasers, especially for unmounted and untreated surfaces.

then why risk it all and wear a damn watch?

omg you're good at this. so handling laser equipment need wear safety goggles? can prevent laser from ******* on my watch and to my eyes?

who's clone is this?

i better start coating all my stuff.
incase got laser ******* my eyes.

later come back then play with you

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

I couldn't agree more.

You'll be glad to know that there are definitely members here who appreciate your insights. The sharing on AR was particularly enlightening, and I thank you for that.

I'm very willing to share what I know, to people who are receptive.

Cheers!

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

then why risk it all and wear a damn watch?

omg you're good at this. so handling laser equipment need wear safety goggles? can prevent laser from ******* on my watch and to my eyes?

who's clone is this?

i better start coating all my stuff.
incase got laser ******* my eyes.

later come back then play with you

Because we're humans and sometimes we forget to remove our watches before entering the lab. Having AR (on both sides) is there to mitigate the risk when working with safer lasers. Of course, when the risk is significant, when you're working with class 3 or 4 lasers, you remove your watch.

The primary reason, however, is to reduce spurious reflections when there are sensitive photodetectors around (and are in operation).

 

[gaoxing84]

Because we're humans and sometimes we forget to remove our watches before entering the lab. Having AR (on both sides) is there to mitigate the risk when working with safer lasers. Of course, when the risk is significant, when you're working with class 3 or 4 lasers, you remove your watch.

so class 1 and 2, maybe humans can forget to remove

class 3 and 4, ***** powerful, humans suddenly can remember to remove?

makes no sense. no need smoke already la. your case is a joke.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

so class 1 and 2, maybe humans can forget to remove

class 3 and 4, ***** powerful, humans suddenly can remember to remove?

makes no sense. no need smoke already la. your case is a joke.

...because there are two different operating procedures, and different safety procedures when working with different classes of lasers.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

2) I didn't say that 2 AR coatings WEREN'T better than 1. I said that the amount of utility gained for most people (given that you can actually turn your wrist to eliminate the remaining reflections quite easily) is limited, and that includes pilots.

3) Erm, so apparently when you want minimal reflectance in what situation again? Nice dodging the question, bro.

4) And you're a pilot that works with NASA or something... Okayyyyy. I guess all pilots, including those that fly for third world countries, wear Sinns and other watches with double AR coating. Amount of incidents caused by watch glint? Wonder how many leh.

In risk mitigation, you don't wait until an incident/near-miss has occurred before thinking about corrective measures.

If one layer of AR coating is "good enough" and cheaper, why do you think Sinn (picking Sinn because of their relative affordability) wants to add them to their watches, and not milking the advantages of their AR? It would have been simpler to go with the flow and have AR on the underside of the crystal, no?

 

[cyrenic]

In risk mitigation, you don't wait until an incident/near-miss has occurred before thinking about corrective measures.

If one layer of AR coating is "good enough" and cheaper, why do you think Sinn (picking Sinn because of their relative affordability) wants to add them to their watches, and not milking the advantages of their AR? It would have been simpler to go with the flow and have AR on the underside of the crystal, no?

Loads of high end watches don't have double AR coating.. So?

Loads of low end watches too. Is it next time when I go fly aeroplane I must ask to see the pilot "eh atypicalsingaporean on HWZ say you must wear double AR coating else you mistake your watch for another plane". I think I banned from Changi Airport for life sio. Pls don't sabo.

Didn't know watch glint now become laser in the cockpit..

 

[addictzz]

that depends.

are you average or not?

if you know enough to buy GS, means you have a deeper understanding of watches, kind of.

average. among people who know a bit more about watch, but not so deep as to understanding all the history and background and all the jargons. Moreover sometime watch is like a piece of art. What worths $100K for 1 person, might worth $1K to others. There is subjectivity involved among all the objectivity (tech, materials, complication). In the end, it's to each other preference.

 

[atypicalsingaporean]

Loads of high end watches don't have double AR coating.. So?

Loads of low end watches too. Is it next time when I go fly aeroplane I must ask to see the pilot "eh atypicalsingaporean on HWZ say you must wear double AR coating else you mistake your watch for another plane". I think I banned from Changi Airport for life sio. Pls don't sabo.

Didn't know watch glint now become laser in the cockpit..

Glint in the cockpit is the main reason why manufacturers have doubly-coated AR crystals. And the main point of this glint thing is affecting combat pilots, not your airline pilots. Take this any way you wish, it's up to you to believe or not.

The lasers part is for a select group of engineers and scientists who work on low-power lasers. Two separate issues.

Also, do you know what's the reason why CAAS banned the shining of lasers at aircraft?

 

[messi7]

Wah lau, all this arguments over AR

This thread is filled with too much egos man

 

[rboyboy]

No external AR kym?