and a worthy subject as well.
Re. the observatory chronometer competitions - I don't share your view on this, and I'd be curious to see the data you seem to have found.
In 1968 - to my knowledge the Geneva chronometer competitions were already gone - i.e. there wasn't any to my knowledge.
Furthermore, the Geneva observatory competition to my knowledge was only open for Geneva based companies - that's the reason Omega, Longines and others (originally not based in Geneva) opened special branches in Geneva in order to take part. Only very few special contests (than called international) were open to others (not from Geneva). I'm not sure this was still the case in 1966/67 but I will see to find some ref. for this.
In 1968 also Neuchatel had already closed the competitions - but other than Geneva testing in order to revceive a bulletin was continued.
So, Im really curious where Seiko got this results in 1968....
It's certainly true that Seiko entered the competitions with increasing success - but it's also true, IMO, that the upcoming Quartz technologie was already in sight - as the true "terminator" for mechanical precision timekeeping. Seiko played a major role in that field, but to say their success in the competitions (with mechanical chronometers) was likely a reason to stop the cmpetitions - IMO, thats highly unlikely.
I know it's often repeated - but IMO, the likely reason is that it's such a "nice" story.
That it's "...often repeated by industry people..." , well, to me that's a good reason to be even more carefull
I also don't think it's correct to say the COSC replaced the observatory trials....it's a completely different thing IMO.
It aso should be noted that the time testing and the competitions at the observatories are two different matters - the normal time testing was a service for manufacturers. Certain customers (like customers for marine chronometers for example) required a bulletin de marche
of the observatory. The competitions, wer competitions...
In case of Neuchatel the testing, other than the competitions, continued untill mid 70ties.
BTW, if I'm not mistaken, besides the mechanical going train, the spring drive has a fly wheel only - that's one moving part and in my book, that's not "a lot"
A mechanical movement would have at least 3 instead - not counting the hairspring....
Best regards
Suitbert