Gadgets

The illusory reality of WWI dazzle camouflage, re-examined

Published

12 hours ago

March 21, 2025

Photograph of HMS Tuberose aka RMS Mauretania enters New York harbour in full dazzle, carrying returning troops after the end of the Great War. Dated 1918. (Photo by: Photo12/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Allied navies during World War I began using dazzling, cubist-inspired “dazzle” paint jobs on ships to confuse German U-boats crews and prevent accurate targeting with torpedoes. While it was believed that these geometric designs helped in naval battles, new research suggests that the “horizon effect” may have played a bigger role in throwing off submarine gunners. The effectiveness of dazzle camouflage has been reevaluated in a recent study by Aston University researchers published in the journal i-Perception, which updated methods to modern scientific standards and found that the original study may have overestimated the effectiveness of dazzle camouflage.

The study challenges the notion that the unconventional camouflage patterns were solely responsible for distorting perceptions of ship movement and direction. It suggests that U-boat gunners viewing ships from a distance may have been influenced by an optical illusion that made the vessels appear as if they were moving along the horizon, regardless of whether they were “dazzled” or not.

The origins of dazzle camouflage date back to 1917, when English artist Norman Wilkinson proposed the use of zig-zag and checkered patterns in response to German U-boat attacks. The designs aimed to distort the appearance of ships when viewed through a periscope, making it difficult for submarines to target them accurately. While the dazzle approach was unique and effective, other impractical ideas such as mirrors, cloud-like paint, and foliage-covered ships had been considered prior to its implementation.

Despite its adoption by British and American vessels during the war, dazzle camouflage was implemented based on assumption rather than solid evidence. Limited empirical research from the time measured its effectiveness, with one of the only quantitative studies conducted in 1919 by MIT student Leo Blodgett. However, a reevaluation of this study by Aston University researchers found flaws in the control group, leading to doubts about the original findings.

The enhanced methods revealed optical illusions occurring with and without dazzle paint on ships.

“We conducted our own experiment using images from his thesis and compared results between the original dazzle camouflage versions and versions without camouflage,” Strong explained. “Our experiment was successful, showing that both types of ships exhibited the horizon effect, but dazzle paint added an extra twist.”

If Blodgett’s initial findings were accurate, the researchers anticipated that the front of the ship would consistently appear to twist away from its actual direction. However, they discovered instances where the observer perceived the ship’s bow twisting back around as it moved away. This illusion was likely attributed to the “horizon effect,” where a ship appears to travel along the horizon regardless of its true course. The researchers also observed that ships traveling up to 25 degrees relative to the horizon would still appear to be moving alongside it from the observer’s perspective.

“The significant discovery here is that these effects, in similar proportions, were evident in participants knowledgeable about camouflage deception, including a lieutenant in a European navy,” stated Tim Meese, a co-author of the paper from Aston University.

While these findings are revealing, they do not negate the effectiveness of dazzle camouflage entirely. As reported by Smithsonian in 2016, merchant ships adorned with dazzle patterns during the war received lower insurance premiums. Some ship captains also noted higher crew morale on ships with dazzle patterns compared to those without. Even if the actual illusory impact of dazzle was minimal, people believed in its effectiveness.

In essence, the placebo effect should not be underestimated, even during wartime. Please provide an alternative version.