Help support TMP


"Why was dazzle camouflage so sharply defined ?" Topic


9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Naval Gaming 1898-1929 Message Board


Areas of Interest

19th Century
World War One

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Phil Dunn's Sea Battle Games


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

15mm WWI British Rifle Platoon

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian adds an infantry platoon to his WWI Brits.


Featured Book Review


1,222 hits since 25 Jan 2015
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Winston Smith25 Jan 2015 11:52 a.m. PST

If the purpose is not " to not be seen" but pattern disruption, why were the edges so sharp?
It seems to me that making the edges hazy and ill defined might make optical range finding a bit more difficult.
Was this tried?

Fenwolk25 Jan 2015 12:09 p.m. PST

I always thought that the straight lines of the camo matched the straight lines of the ship. So in the end you can't tell which lines are real and which aren't. Not to hide.

Blutarski25 Jan 2015 12:28 p.m. PST

The intent of dazzle camouflage, as I have been given to understand it, was to cause an attacker to misjudge the inclination of the target ship, i.e. the angle between line of sight and target ship heading. This was essential for any attacking submarine, both for making its approach to an attack position and for setting up the actual torpedo shot.

B

DS615125 Jan 2015 12:38 p.m. PST

Correct.
Solid edge lines work for this, fuzzy edged lines do not.
No, no one ever tried it on a ship AFAIK, but since it obviously wouldn't work I see no reason for them to.

GarrisonMiniatures25 Jan 2015 1:15 p.m. PST

Wasn't one version an attempt to hide which way the ship was actually travelling? So the paintwork makes the front look like the back?

Sundance25 Jan 2015 1:16 p.m. PST

Dazzle camouflage wasn't intended to hide the ship – just break up the straight lines of the ship to confuse the enemy as to what kind of ship it is, what direction it is traveling, how fast it is traveling, how far away it is, etc.

Tom Bryant25 Jan 2015 2:23 p.m. PST

From what I've read you're all right. Many people make the mistake of thinking camouflage means to literally "hide" something. While concealment of an object is one of its functions, it can also be used to mislead an opponent as to the size, shape, direction or use of an object. It may be helpful to think of camouflage less as "stealth" or "invisibility" and more "hiding in plain sight".

With that all said, the point and purpose as has been pointed out above was not to necessarily hide the target ship, just to mislead enemy vessels into its size, shape, purpose or heading. This applied for both submarine and surface vessels and EVERYONE had a take on it. Some of the color schemes like pale greens and pinks could be horrible at night, add to this midnight blue or black schemes that were variously successful at night but stuck out like a sore thumb in broad daylight. However in dawn and dusk twilight these colors did render a degree of invisibility to a ship depending upon where it was in relation to the sun.

Ivan DBA25 Jan 2015 4:30 p.m. PST

Painting hazy lines probably would have been difficult too.

Mako1125 Jan 2015 5:01 p.m. PST

At a distance, in blue haze, they tend to blend in anyway.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.