Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Only now did I appreciate large-scale camouflage

Discussion in 'Weapons & Technology in WWII' started by the_diego, Jan 25, 2017.

  1. the_diego

    the_diego Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2016
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    23
    there was an old thread entitled "the unit that hid factories" or something similar. it was about large-scale camo to hide large industrial facilities. well these are the best pictures i've seen so far. below is a boeing aircraft plant. see how in the last photo you notice the camo layer distinctly, and the facilities under it.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    TD-Tommy776, Otto and Mutley like this.
  2. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I've seen some pretty impressive ones from Germany as well. I seem to recall a "pasture" that looked incredibly real.
     
  3. the_diego

    the_diego Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2016
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    23
    looks like a serious fire hazard though.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  4. LRusso216

    LRusso216 Graybeard Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Messages:
    13,584
    Likes Received:
    2,178
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    [​IMG]






    Samohi AlumniAssociation saved to Santa Monica Past
    Douglas Aircraft Company plant, 3000 Ocean Park Blvd., Santa Monica, Calif. with camouflage designed by Edward Huntsman-Trout during World War II to conceal the manufacture of military aircraft.
     
  5. ResearcherAtLarge

    ResearcherAtLarge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    60
    The Navy called it passive defense and I've posted some of the instructions for it here. I haven't found as much on the Army side, but I have found and posted "Cantonment Area Camouflage."
     
  6. OhneGewehr

    OhneGewehr New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Messages:
    411
    Likes Received:
    28
    Location:
    Germany
    What was the benefit from hiding factorys in the USA? No Bomber could reach it.
     
  7. Mussolini

    Mussolini Gaming Guru WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2000
    Messages:
    5,732
    Likes Received:
    559
    Location:
    Festung Colorado
    I think it was more of the 'threat' early on in the US involvement than anything.

    There are plenty of cases where such camo did work. I believe I read that Cairo or somewhere in Egypt was camouflaged, with a 'fake' city set up elsewhere. It fooled the Germans and they bombed the desert where the fake camo was setup.
     
  8. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,906
    Likes Received:
    1,687
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    IIRC, there were two "fake" Ploesti sites nearby the real one. The Germans had constructed a "fake" Skoda Works not far from Pilsen(it worked...once).
     
  9. the_diego

    the_diego Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2016
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    23
    it was feared the japanese might reach washington from the aleutians.
     
  10. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,445
    Likes Received:
    357
    Location:
    London UK
    The British had hundreds of "starfish" sites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_site
     
  11. ResearcherAtLarge

    ResearcherAtLarge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    60
    Pearl Harbor demonstrates your statement is incorrect.
     
  12. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,052
    Likes Received:
    1,044
    No Axis bomber (in any kind of numbers) could reach it. It made people feel safe and kept them busy. the massive runway a short distance away would have been a dead give away.
     
  13. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,906
    Likes Received:
    1,687
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Well, the plants were within range of the Aichi D3A Val, and Nakajima B5N Kate.

    One of the main reasons Hanford was chosen as the site for an atomic facility was because it was more than 200 miles from the coast - beyond the expected range of carrier=based aircraft.

    As was said in the statement before yours

     
  14. Tricky Dicky

    Tricky Dicky Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2017
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    UK/France

Share This Page