I do not think that word "camouflage" means what you think it means

(From "Samson" number 1, 1940.)

22 Responses to I do not think that word "camouflage" means what you think it means

  1. Sutter_Kaine says:

    When did Crazy Quilt buy a boat?

  2. Trekkie says:

    My gosh, captain! It’s all green and brown! We can’t possibly hope to spot against the blue sea!

  3. Niall Mor says:

    That camouflage job looks FABULOUS!!!!

  4. Myro says:

    The original Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamboat was not much of a success, prompting Andrew Lloyd Webber back to rewrite the musical.

  5. Gero says:

    I like the Titanic-esque smokestakes, too. Because you see those on warships all the time…

  6. Frankie says:

    What? I don’t see anything there. Is the transport disguised as the cloud?

  7. punkjay says:

    Welcome to the USS LSD.

  8. EnderX says:

    Now, now, Jeff, behave. I’m sure that if you dropped that ship into the middle of a forest, you’d have a hard time finding it.

    Apart from the sudden gigantic clearing, at least.

  9. Dan says:

    @Gero, no joke. Nothing says stealth more than giant black clouds of smoke billowing out.

  10. cavalier says:

    OK, I’m going to rain on the parade.

    It’s called Dazzle Camouflage and it was actually used in World War I and II. The idea wasn’t to hide the ship but to make it difficult for observers to tell exactly what kind of ship it was, which way is was headed, etc. By WWII technology had made it obsolete.

    And yes, it really was that crazy looking.


  11. ams says:

    There is even a pic of a warship with smoke stacks.
    Cavilier, you didn’t rain on the parade, you washed it out!

  12. captperv says:

    the 40’s was a rough time for everyone . . .

  13. William A. Peterson says:

    It’s not a Warship, it’s a Transport, guys… And, back then, YES, they DID have smokestacks, AND ‘Dazzle’ camouflage! Though the latter was usually in Black and White…

  14. X-stacy says:

    The navy should start painting ships in dazzle camo again (the black and white angular kind from the photos, I mean), just for fun. We would have the prettiest fleet on earth, and what could be more intimidating than that?

  15. Trekkie says:

    @X_Stacy: “Oh no! We can’t possibly fire at those ships, they’re just too pretty!”

  16. knight1192a says:

    Actually, this was what it meant, in WWI. They used all kinds of crazy multi-colored camo schemes for ships and planes then that they didn’t use in WWII.

  17. Sean From Edwards says:

    Also Dazzle camo made it harder to judge range, thereby protecting ships from early torpedoes which had timers for their warheads. It usually made the ship look alot closer then it was and many a torpedo would strike and bounce off the hull as a result. Ah the days before contact fuses.

  18. Niall Mor says:

    Cavalier, thanks for letting us know about “Dazzle” camouflage. Who says reading this blog isn’t educational?

  19. Fuzztone says:

    Dazzle Ships weren’t painted in black and white. Quite the opposite, in fact. The black and white bit has more to do with the film they used to take the photos.

    Here are some drawings of the time.


    Not sure about the name of that first ship, though.

  20. EnderX says:

    To all those arguing about Dazzle Camouflage:

    First, thank you for the informative exhibition of history. I mean that seriously – new information is always fun.

    Second, compare your images against the ship above, then compare other military camouflage patterns against it. While the color shifts tend to support your theory, the fact the ship looks as though it was dropped from a great height, then glued back together again, tends to argue in favor of the theory that this is, in fact, supposed to be ‘normal’ military camouflage instead of Dazzle camouflage patterns.

  21. TOOL says:

    Boat what boat?

  22. Oquies says:

    Doesn’t mater what type of camouflage it is I am just wondering why some one in camouflage is waving their flag around.