# Submarine markings **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 4, 2001, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322 "2001-10-04T03:11:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![aramis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e68b1a/32.png) [@aramis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aramis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/1 "2001-10-04T03:11:52Z")
I’ve noticed several times that the short mast rising from a US submarine’s conning tower has an unusual pattern painted on it, kinda like leopard spots. That pattern doesn’t look to me like it would be particularly good camouflage. Can anybody talk about its significance? ---
**Author:** ![postcards](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8e8cbc/32.png) [@postcards](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/postcards)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/2 "2001-10-04T03:15:22Z")
Not sure what you mean. Is it just a weird reflection of the wet parts in the sunlight? Can you link to an image? ---
**Author:** ![Cap\_n\_Crude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Cap\_n\_Crude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cap_n_Crude)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/3 "2001-10-04T03:15:26Z")
I’m no expert on this subject, but I’ll give it a whirl. You can see a similar pattern painted on some surface warships – the purpose isn’t exactly camouflage, but breaking up the outline of object. It can be harder to visually identify something if you can’t tell what shape it is, and the alternating light/dark patches, their shape and orientation do that rather nicely. Doesn’t do jack for your radar signature though. ---
**Author:** ![postcards](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8e8cbc/32.png) [@postcards](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/postcards)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/4 "2001-10-04T03:27:54Z")
Wgy would submarines need that type of camouflage? With a surface ship I can understand the need to alter the profile, but if a sub feels threatened by a nearby enemy ship, it can just submerge, no? ---
**Author:** ![postcards](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8e8cbc/32.png) [@postcards](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/postcards)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/5 "2001-10-04T03:29:13Z")
**Why** don’t I use Preview? ---
**Author:** ![aramis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e68b1a/32.png) [@aramis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aramis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/6 "2001-10-04T03:34:49Z")
Here’s a link to a picture [http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/submarines/losangeles/la-sing.jpg](http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/submarines/losangeles/la-sing.jpg) If it was a silhouette breaking technique, wouldn’t it be used on the entire above-water portion of the hull? ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/7 "2001-10-04T03:40:48Z")
I suspect there are times when just the towers are above the surface and this breaks it up visually. It certainly looks like camo to me, probably pretty effective on the open ocean. ---
**Author:** ![stuyguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@stuyguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stuyguy)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/8 "2001-10-04T03:46:30Z")
Ooo! Ooo! I have something to contribute here. The “silhouette breaking technique,” as you guys are calling it, has a name, and it’s not “camouflage.” It’s known as **dazzle**. I kid you not. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/9 "2001-10-04T04:19:46Z")
**Cap’n Crude** basically has it; the pattern makes it difficult to see where the object’s edges are. It breaks up the shape. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by postcards \*Why would submarines need that type of camouflage? With a surface ship I can understand the need to alter the profile, but if a sub feels threatened by a nearby enemy ship, it can just submerge, no? Modern nuclear submarines do not submerge when they feel “threatened.” If on patrol, they are already submerged. This also answers the question about why the “conning tower” (nowadays referred to as the “sail”) is not so camouflaged. If the sub is operating stealthily, and needed to raise any masts and/or antennas, it does not surface. It simply ascends to periscope depth and raises the needed mast or antenna. The rest of the boat remains submerged. Finally, the main _visual_ detection threat for a sub is not a surface vessel, but fast-approaching aircraft. ---
**Author:** ![CnoteChris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/278dde/32.png) [@CnoteChris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CnoteChris)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/10 "2001-10-04T04:58:56Z")
If I remember right, it originally started in WW=1 with the advent of planes as reconnaissance platforms. One of the odder uses of dazzle paint was with ships. Here are a couple pictures of what it looks like- [USS HAZARD (AM-240)](http://www.maritime.org/hnsa-hazard.htm) And… [RMS OLYMPIC](http://members.tripod.com/~lch4/olympic.html) And… [U.S.S. HORNET CVA-12](http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~drmiles/camouflage.html) Amazingly, from what I saw on a camouflage series on the tube a few years back, and some random conversations with older folks who would know, despite its odd look, it actually worked. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/11 "2001-10-04T13:23:12Z")
I was going to say what **robby** said, but he’s a submariner (hm, sounds like a watch) and I’m not. So I’ll just ask another question. I’ve heard that the hull number is painted over when a nuk goes out on patrol. When is it painted over, and does it really make a difference since the sail is submerged anyway? ---
**Author:** ![BF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@BF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BF)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/12 "2001-10-04T14:36:53Z")
Ex-submariner here, sub movements are classified. A casual observer can see that a sub is coming or going to port but not which boat. ---
**Author:** ![NotMrKnowItAll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6bbea6/32.png) [@NotMrKnowItAll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotMrKnowItAll)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/13 "2001-10-04T14:47:22Z")
Thank you for posting those links to Dazzle **CnoteChris**. Those images have been in my mind for years, but I never could conjure up where I had seen it before. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/14 "2001-10-04T15:15:07Z")
First, **robby** and **Cap’n Crude** are on the beam, IRT to mast fairings. It’s done with an epoxy paint that’s pretty awkward to deal with, and the process is not so simple as one might think, especially when you realize that the paint job has to be matte, and of uniform thickness, allowing the fairing to slide down the bearings without marring the paint job. It used to be, that by observing the pattern of the dazzle on a boat’s fairings, that you could tell where her sails were last worked-on, at least if you were a knowledgable insider. Fortunately, NAVSEA stomped that out, and enforced the standard design, eliminating one more source of intelligence information. As for the boat’s hull number, usually, it’s _never_ painted on. It’s marked in faint outline by weld beads, so that if it is to be painted on, it’s easy to get it right. Keeping the boat’s identity quiet is kinda important to submariners. Under normal circumstances, when a boat is at periscope depth, the fairwater (sail) is close enough to the surface that the large white numbers would be visible, and if you ever had a _need_ to surface, you’d stick out like a sore thumb, and tell anyone who could see you who you were, and what capabilities the US had in the area. ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-markings/85322/15 "2001-10-04T18:51:24Z")
in ref to the dazzle paint schemes: its very difficult to prevent the ship from being seen, so even after they were sighted by subs, the dazzle effect made it more difficult to get an accurate fix on direction of travel, speed, size of target yada yada yada