WWI Ship Camouflage(twistedsifter.com)
twistedsifter.com
WWI Ship Camouflage
http://twistedsifter.com/2010/02/razzle-dazzle-camouflage/
8 comments
Interesting. Though what really stopped the U-Boats sinking all that ships was the humble convoy-system.
(And Tom Körner's excellent book "The Pleasure of Counting" has the math to back it up. He has a knack for explaining.)
(And Tom Körner's excellent book "The Pleasure of Counting" has the math to back it up. He has a knack for explaining.)
In case anyone else was intrigued by this comment, I found some brief details of why convoys work against U-Boats on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy#Analysis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy#Analysis
Thanks. That explains most of it. Tom Körner uses the subject to introduce some simple mathematics.
He also mentions the benefit of something invisible: In WWII the allies had to relearn the U-Boat lesson. Some people were arguing that the limited planes they have should be used to bomb more German sites, because they rarely spotted an U-Boat. However --- that was part of their effect: They forced the U-Boats to remain submerged for longer. (Those WWII-style U-Boats were essentially unchanged from WWI. Think of them as submergable normal ships, not as modern submarines. Their speed was severely reduced while submerged. The battery technology of the time was crappy and atom-powered submarines were a long way off. Surfaced they were somewhat faster than most merchant ships.)
Of course in WWII the breaking of the Enigma is closely related to the U-Boat war. And it's also in Tom Körner's book. With stories about Turing and Bletchley Park.
Edit: You can also tell an interesting story about Bayesian reasoning from the anecdote that when the aircraft crews reprogrammed the depth-charges to explode not where the U-Boat was most likely to be, but where the expected value of damage was maximized. And that meant closer to the surface: Most submerging U-Boats where already deeper by the time the charge hit, but those that weren't were mostly destroyed.
The end of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Atlantic_(1939%E2...) also has some things to say about convoys.
He also mentions the benefit of something invisible: In WWII the allies had to relearn the U-Boat lesson. Some people were arguing that the limited planes they have should be used to bomb more German sites, because they rarely spotted an U-Boat. However --- that was part of their effect: They forced the U-Boats to remain submerged for longer. (Those WWII-style U-Boats were essentially unchanged from WWI. Think of them as submergable normal ships, not as modern submarines. Their speed was severely reduced while submerged. The battery technology of the time was crappy and atom-powered submarines were a long way off. Surfaced they were somewhat faster than most merchant ships.)
Of course in WWII the breaking of the Enigma is closely related to the U-Boat war. And it's also in Tom Körner's book. With stories about Turing and Bletchley Park.
Edit: You can also tell an interesting story about Bayesian reasoning from the anecdote that when the aircraft crews reprogrammed the depth-charges to explode not where the U-Boat was most likely to be, but where the expected value of damage was maximized. And that meant closer to the surface: Most submerging U-Boats where already deeper by the time the charge hit, but those that weren't were mostly destroyed.
The end of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Atlantic_(1939%E2...) also has some things to say about convoys.
The Rhode Island School of Design has a library of Dazzle ship designs.
It's pretty neat
http://www.risd.edu/dazzle/
It's pretty neat
http://www.risd.edu/dazzle/
On the subject of anti-submarine naval warfare, I would strongly recommend "Three Corvettes" by Nicholas Monsarrat.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-Corvettes-Nicholas-Monsarrat/d...
From WW2 rather than WW1 - but I don't think the North Atlantic had changed much.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-Corvettes-Nicholas-Monsarrat/d...
From WW2 rather than WW1 - but I don't think the North Atlantic had changed much.
The depth of knowledge on HN will never cease to amaze me.
More on this from Tate Etc. magazine: http://www.tate.org.uk/tateetc/issue4/camouflage.htm
> As sonar and radar technology improved, the once effective dazzle camouflage was rendered obsolete.
If Silent Hunter III is at all reflective of reality, WWII U-boats didn't use either radar or sonar for torpedo targeting either, though unlike WWI boats they did have the benefit of an analogue targeting computer which took input from the periscopes and UZO ("U-boat targeting optic", the equivalent of a computer-linked periscope for surface attacks).
If Silent Hunter III is at all reflective of reality, WWII U-boats didn't use either radar or sonar for torpedo targeting either, though unlike WWI boats they did have the benefit of an analogue targeting computer which took input from the periscopes and UZO ("U-boat targeting optic", the equivalent of a computer-linked periscope for surface attacks).
They slowly started to have them, at the end of the war, but they weren't that popular: using the radar reveals the sub's position, nullifying its stealth advantage.
There were also acoustic torpedoes, and all subs had passive sonar (the one you can listen to, I'm sure it's in SH3). The XXI supposedly had an active sonar for torpedo targeting, but Germany had barely started making them at the end of the war, and again using it is like yelling your position.
There were also acoustic torpedoes, and all subs had passive sonar (the one you can listen to, I'm sure it's in SH3). The XXI supposedly had an active sonar for torpedo targeting, but Germany had barely started making them at the end of the war, and again using it is like yelling your position.
Awesome, but, it's WWI ship camouflage not WWII.
This article is indeed about WWI usage, but the US Navy used disruptive designs in WWII as well, for example see http://www.shipcamouflage.com/camouflage_database.htm
Woops, I fixed that. Thanks :)
More explanation and pictures at Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
(...including the fact that Austria still uses dazzle on speed trap booths to confuse motorists.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
(...including the fact that Austria still uses dazzle on speed trap booths to confuse motorists.)
"Dazzle's effectiveness is not certain. The British Admiralty concluded it had no effect on submarine attacks, but proved to be a morale boost for crews. It also increased the morale of people not involved in fighting; hundreds of wonderfully coloured ships in dock was nothing ever seen before or since."