An online database of camouflage used by
United State Naval Warships during WWII
|
|
|
The
Development of Naval Camouflage 1914 - 1945 By
Alan Raven (Article reprinted courtesy of Plastic Ship Modeler Magazine issue #97/2) the
colors and schemes that were applied on a widespread basis to the fleets in
early 1941. Briefly stated, the
tests produced the following conclusions: 1.)
#5 Navy Gray was of low visibility in overcast, hazy, or foggy weather, hut was
too light in bright weather or under searchlights. 2.)
Ocean Gray was of low visibility in bright weather. 3.)
Black was of lowest visibility in bright weather when viewed from the air, or at
night under searchlights. 4.)
Black was best for destroyers in view of their mission. 5.)
Dazzle camouflage on destroyers had more bad features than good ones. 6.)
Graded painting on light cruisers gave some deception worthy of further
consideration. It
was suggested that all naval surface ships should be painted a dark matte gray,
pole masts to be painted #5 Navy Gray. The
advantage of such a dark color (9% reflectance factor) was that it gave low
visibility from the air, day or night, and under searchlights. In daylight the
dark gray obscured details and interfered with course estimation. At moderate
speeds it obscured the waterline and interfered with ranging. The disadvantage
of using dark gray was that the vessel so painted would be moderately or highly
visible in daylight to a surface observer. As an anti-searchlight measure, the
best color was deemed to be black. Further
tests were recommended on destroyers using dark gray and dark blue, on cruisers
using dark gray and ocean gray, and a graded type: painting a 6" gun
cruiser to look like an 8" gun cruiser. Copies
of the report on the 1939 experiments were circulated in late January 1940 to
various interested parties and commands for their information and comments. Documentation
for developments in 1940 appears to have been lost or destroyed because the
question of surface ship camouflage does not arise again unti1 January 1941 when
a revised edition of Construction & Repair-4 1937 was published.
Known as Ships-2 1941, it laid out a series of instructions and
directions as to how ships might be painted generally with a view to promote low
visibility. Much of the information in Ships-2 was taken directly from the 1939
experiments. There
were nine types of camouflage listed, from which the Commanders of the Atlantic,
Pacific, and Asiatic Fleets could choose those that were best for their
operations. Each type was now
officially named a "measure". There
were nine measures and four new colors were introduced.
The four new colors were 5-L Light Gray, 5-0 Ocean Gray, 5-D Dark Gray,
and Black. Measures one through
nine were as follows: Measure
1 - Overall 5-D Dark Gray, masts and tops to he 5-L Light Gray Measure
2 - Graded Type - Lower band to be 5-D Dark Gray, middle band to be 5-0 Ocean
Gray and topmost color to be 5-L Light Gray. Measure
3 - Light Gray type - overall 5-L Light Gray. Measure
4 - Overall Black - mast and tops to be 5-L Light Gray. Measure
5 - Painted bow wave - the outline of the bow wave to be painted white, the body
in dark gray or dark blue, to be used with Measures 1, 2, & 3. Measure
6 - To paint a 6" gun cruiser to simulate an 8" gun cruiser. Measure
7 - To paint a 6" gun cruiser to simulate a 4-stack destroyer. Measure
8 - To paint a 6" gun cruiser to simulate a 2-stack destroyer. Measure
9 - For submarines only - overall Black. The
new painting instructions from the Bureau of Ships did not actually reach the
commands until late February, then were followed in March by a directive to
perform experiments concerning different measures. The extensive range of camouflage measures and the orders to
perform tests at sea as to their value, laid the foundation for a confusing
series of changes that became increasingly complicated as the year progressed,
so much so that by years end, several new measures and colors had been tried and
accepted into use, while conversely, several were dropped. It
is not surprising that, because of their proximity to the combat zone in the
Atlantic, and later in the year with actual war level operations, the Atlantic
Fleet took the initiative in usage and experimentation of camouflage.
Admiral King, then in command, took a personal interest in the subject.
At the end of March 1941 Admiral King ordered Atlantic Fleet ships to be
painted as follows: A.
The Escort Force to be Measure 2. B.
The Support Force to he Measure 2. C.
Other forces to he Measure l. D.
For experimental purposes, ships of Destroyer Divisions 4 and 16 were to be
painted in Measures 1, 2, 3, and 4, one measure for each ship. E.
For experimental purposes the ships of Cruiser Division 2 to be painted in
Measures 1, 2, and 3, one measure for each ship. F.
For experimental purposes the battleship TEXAS to he painted in Modified Measure
2, using 5-D on the hull, 5-0 on superstructure 5-L above the level of the gun
turrets. The
above directive was to be completed by mid-April. Being closer to bulk stocks of
the new colors, the entire Atlantic Fleet was repainted by May.
It became immediately apparent that the new measures and colors were in
most cases unsuitable for Atlantic and North Atlantic operations.
As a concealment color for northern waters, 5-D Dark Gray was just about
the worst color that could have been chosen.
It is interesting to note that not a single pre-1940 experiment was
conducted in the North Atlantic. The
Measure 2 graded type gave a degree of concealment but its effectiveness was
reduced by the use of Dark Gray (a gray that was almost b black) in the design. There
was a secondary problem with the durability of the paints themselves. They were
subject to excessive flaking which was caused by being excessively matte, and
from being applied over the high gloss pre- war #5 Navy Gray, which did nothing
to promote adhesion. |