Which British tanks in SCC5 camouflage ?

[KRK4m]

According to @Mike Starmer during last weeks of fighting in Tunisia in 1943 the new camouflage standard has been introduced for the British AFV in MTO. The new base tone was to be SCC5 Light Mud with  SCC7 Dark Olive Green or SCC14 Charcoal in bold patterns. Lend-Lease vehicles should use used Light Mud over the US No.9 Olive Drab but applied according to the drawings.

Limiting my search to the tanks only I have found this scheme applied only to the Shermans. Thus my question is whether were there any Grants, Churchills or Matildas painted in this new scheme? In my opinion the "Monty" T-24539 Grant is presented by Amercom/de Agostini in SCC5+SCC7 https://www.flyingmule.com/products/AM-ACCS28-1

but Star Decals describe it as SCC11B Desert Pink+SCC7, while Tamiya and Mirage suggest SCC11B over the US Olive Drab.

What do you think about it?

Cheers

Michael

Edited May 2, 2020 by KRK4m

[JackG]

Monty possessed several Grants, so it's possible one of the later ones were finished in Light Mud.  T-24539 seems to be his first Grant:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/viewtopic.php?p=1544372#p1544372

 

Two other WD numbers (T.24732 and T.24027) are mentioned here:

http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m3grant/m3grant.html

 

The number of Grant tanks in Tunisia must have certainly dwindled as the campaign wore on?  For certain whenever possible,  these were being replaced with either the Sherman or British armour equipped with 6pdrs.

 

For Churchills difficult to say, but it doesn't seem that many, and even those few are not certain if it was paint or actual mud applied.

 

By the time of the Tunisian campaign, the Matilda had long been removed as a battle tank.  Some may have remained in the mine clearing role, or possibly CS?

 

regards,

Jack

[Kingsman]

This is Monty's final command tank, the one currently displayed in the IWM.  Photo taken in Italy in Sept 44.  He had it shipped to Italy and attached to the 8th Army HQ Defence Company.  It stayed in service right through to the end of the war, was displayed in Austria an then as gate guardian at 2 UK barracks before being restored and presented to IWM.  Not apparent from these photos, but it is a Grant II diesel.  While Grants were long out of service in MTO at that point, a Grant II was mechanically compatible with the M4A2 Sherman IIIs widely used in Italy so it could be maintained.

 

Anyway, enough with the history.  You can see that the tank is disruptively painted.  From the colour contrasts I would say Light Mud and SCC14.

[KRK4m]

15 hours ago, JackG said:

Monty possessed several Grants, so it's possible one of the later ones were finished in Light Mud.  T-24539 seems to be his first Grant:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/viewtopic.php?p=1544372#p1544372

 

Two other WD numbers (T.24732 and T.24027) are mentioned here: http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m3grant/m3grant.html

 

For Churchills difficult to say, but it doesn't seem that many, and even those few are not certain if it was paint or actual mud applied.

 

14 hours ago, Das Abteilung said:

This is Monty's final command tank, the one currently displayed in the IWM.  Photo taken in Italy in Sept 44.  He had it shipped to Italy and attached to the 8th Army HQ Defence Company.  It stayed in service right through to the end of the war, was displayed in Austria an then as gate guardian at 2 UK barracks before being restored and presented to IWM.  Not apparent from these photos, but it is a Grant II diesel.  While Grants were long out of service in MTO at that point, a Grant II was mechanically compatible with the M4A2 Sherman IIIs widely used in Italy so it could be maintained.

 

Anyway, enough with the history.  You can see that the tank is disruptively painted.  From the colour contrasts I would say Light Mud and SCC14.

Thank you, Gentlemen, for the interest and your quick answers. As the Grant kit I have is a radial-engined Mk.I variant I have to drop both these later Monty vehicles from my options list - pity 😢

It is said in various sources that T-24539 was used by him certainly in Lybia in December 1942, thus some months before the SCC5 was introduced. Then SCC11B over the original US Olive Drab looks the most probable option.

So let's go to the Churchill Mk.IV (cast turret variant). The most important question is what was the base colour? In 1942 perhaps SCC2, in 1943 maybe SCC7 and in 1944 probably SCC15.

There is a model by Dragon Armor #60503 captioned as the North Irish Horse specimen from Tunisia.

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10203927/20/2

It sports SCC2 overall, although I'm not sure whether these (not so small) dark areas could be considered as SCC1A? Or is it just some kind of weathering applied by Dragon Armor?

Two other Dragon kits of Mk.IV and NA75 (#7424 and 7507) feature the tanks fighting in Italy in 1944 and the base colour is described as "Dark Green".

The Tanks Encyclopedia https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/A22_Churchill_Tank.php

shows several profiles of the MTO Mk.IIIs and Mk.IVs - the base colour being (if my Eyeball 1.0 scanner is right) the SCC2 for the North Irish Horse specimen (same as the Dragon one) from Tunisia, SCC7 for the T67866 (also Tunisia 1943), SCC15 for the T68529 (from Italy 1944) and even SCC11B Desert Sand for three others - one mated with SCC14 (T319596), another with SCC7 (T311348) and the 3rd one with BS34 Dark Slate (as according to @Mike Starmer the SCC2 wasn't used for disruptive pattern over the SCC11A base colour).

On the other hand there are three other Dragon Churchill Mk.IIIs - namely the #7396, #60685 and #60687 that tend to show them as using SCC2 base colour with Light Stone BS61 disruptive pattern (or was it another way round?). Moreover in some books (e.g. Militaria profile #315) the same "zebra-striped" vehicle from No.145 RAC is captioned as the Mk.IV sporting SCC5 Mud over the SCC7 Dark Green. The question remains who's right?

Any help will be warmly appreciated

Cheers

Michael

 

[JackG]

I think the only definite is that all Churchills sent to north Africa sported their European paint schemes.  After that it's impossible to say who is correct at best guessing colours from b/w photos.

 

It's interesting that a period film of the Tunis victory parade, both Churchills and British Shermans are carrying a dark overall scheme and not the Light Mud w/dark disruptive as set out by the directive the month prior:

 

 

 

regards,

 

Jack

 

 

[Kingsman]

Some dark Humber a/c too, as well as camo. M4s would obviously be OD.  Churchill IVs would be SCC2, the production colour at the time. Probably the Humbers too.  The first Churchill IIIs in N Africa were in Khaki Green 3.  The colour change occurred during III production, so IIIs are seen in both colours.

 

Did anyone else notice the Australian Ford/M-H Dingo leading the armour? Not often seen.

 

Many of the vehicles on parade certainly did appear to be in Light Mud with a darker disruptor.  As for what tanks were in service in Tunisia, Churchills had replaced Valentines and Matildas in the Infantry role and Shermans had replaced pretty much everything else in the Cruiser role.  Stuarts were the most common recce tank.  There were probably a few Grant command tanks, valued for their interior space,  Some were modified with false glacis to resemble Shermans from a distance.

 

Mike S has researched this subject extensively for years and his material on what should have been the case can be taken as gospel.  Likewise he points out variations he has identified.  Analysing colour from monochrome images will always be difficult as they show only shade, and will always be guided by what the viewer expects to see: what should, on the balance of probability, be the case.  The video shows that there were at least some uncamouflaged OD and SCC2 tanks in Tunisia, while the orders said that all tanks should be disruptively painted with Light Mud over SCC2 or OD.  And this is probably also true for Italy, a subject previously discussed here.

 

But as is always the case, finding a photo (artwork in books, decal sets, websites etc not necessarily being error-free or trustworthy as it suffers all the same errors errors we are discussing) is always the best example to follow.  Interpretation takes us right back to where we started.

 

There is a discussion running over on Missing Lynx about colour photos of Churchills in Italy.  Even with colour adjustment software and people who understand the film stock colour shift variations, it still isn't entirely clear what color they are and the balance of probability comes into play again.  And we are all looking at different monitors with different graphics cards and different personal colour, contrast etc settings. So we're not necessarily all seeing the same thing anyway.

 

If this was easy it would be called football............................

[JackG]

Yes, one thing I didn't post over at the mentioned discussion at Missing Lynx is some digital paint samples in b/w as possibly simulated in Panchromatic film.   So here are few as presented as digital colour chips from the Sovereign Colourcoat paints:

 

 

... and software emulation in b/w Panchromatic film.  It's interesting how (in this particular case) SCC 2 and 5 are very close, while KG3 and SCC 7 are exact identical grey shades - so it's no wonder the difficulty interpreting colours from b/w images.

 

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by JackG

[KRK4m]

On 5/3/2020 at 9:39 PM, Das Abteilung said:

Churchill IVs would be SCC2, the production colour at the time. The first Churchill IIIs in N Africa were in Khaki Green 3.  The colour change occurred during III production, so IIIs are seen in both colours.

The most important info for me (I haven't found it earlier) is that Churchill IVs in Tunisia sported SCC2 as their base colour (not any kind of green/OD as some artists/authors suggest).

Another is that some (early) Mk.IIIs could even sported the G3 Khaki - a rarity for the North African theatre even in 1941/42, isn't it?

On 5/3/2020 at 9:39 PM, Das Abteilung said:

 The video shows that there were at least some uncamouflaged OD and SCC2 tanks in Tunisia, while the orders said that all tanks should be disruptively painted with Light Mud over SCC2 or OD. 

As it happens always during the war, the orders concerning repainting the vehicles have low priority, thus IMHO not "some"' but even "many" AFV in 1943 Tunisia were still uncamouflaged.

On 5/3/2020 at 9:39 PM, Das Abteilung said:

We're not necessarily all seeing the same thing anyway.

That's absolutely true. In Polish they say "the devil is in the details"...

Looking at the pictures from the May 1943 parade in Tunis I have found the pictures of the Churchill featuring the white 3 turret number on some triangle (there's also some white 24228 close to the hull MG).

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/british-tanks/churchill-a22/churchill-mk-iii-victory-parade-in-tunistunisia12-05-1943/

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/british-tanks/churchill-a22/churchill-tanks-tunisia-20-may-1943-2/

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C304907

Identical markings (sans the front hull serial) appear on the Dragon Armor #60503 model, so I had the THE proof for building and painting my model. But looking at the details I've found that the tank on the picture isn't the Mk.IV at all - the welded turret shows clearly that it's a Mk.III - so Dragon was wrong...

But wait a minute - here are some more photos from the same parade.

https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/uk/british-tanks/churchill-a22/churchill-tank-tunisia-20-may-1943/

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_Churchill_tank_and_other_vehicles_parade_through_Tunis,_8_May_1943._NA2880.jpg

This Churchill has the same white 3 on the triangle, but the turret is cast and the hull serial is 24256 (or 34256?). So Dragon was right. The question remains which of these two tanks really belonged to the North Irish Horses RTR and which one to the Leeds Rifles RTR? In other words: what was the colour of the triangle and its outline?

On 5/3/2020 at 9:39 PM, Das Abteilung said:

If this was easy it would be called football............................

That's the best opinion about football I've met in all my life👏

Cheers

Michael

Edited May 5, 2020 by KRK4m

[JackG]

I could be wrong, but the five digit serial located on the upper hull front could be the mobilization serial number.   Assigned for movement and control purposes, as well as a unique method of identifying a given unit.  Dick Taylor's Warpaint series Vol.4 provides some of these numbers, but of course none in the 24xxx range as exampled in the above photo link. 

 

Neither is North Irish Horse listed,  but there is series of photos captioned as being a captured Churchills from that unit:

https://imgur.com/t/north_africa/CKwuY

 

Anyhow, here is compiled list from the Warpaint book:

 

21st Tank Brigade
145th RAC - 29505
12th RTR   -  29971
48th RTR   - 16007

 

25th Tank Brigade
NORTH IRISH HORSE - 24229 (from photo)
51st RTR       - 22164
142nd RAC   - 29531

 

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by JackG

[KRK4m]

Mind that all these THREE Churchills feature the same "24229" on the hull front - both tanks stuck in the mud on the last photo (one of them has white "2" as turret number) and the one on the first photo (with white "1" on the turret, thus surely not the same vehicle)

Cheers

Michael

[JackG]

Yes, I think those parade photos you linked are from North Irish Horse.   At first glance it looks to be number 24228 on them, but the last digit is 9, just the tail is really long.

 

regards,

Jack

[KRK4m]

Maybe, but all these 24229s belonged to the C squadron.

So couldn't 24228 be allocated to A squadron? 

Perhaps there's somebody who knows 😀

Cheers

Michael

[JackG]

Well no, the number was assigned to the whole regiment, so each squadron would be identical.

[KRK4m]

OK, so does anybody know what unit was allocated 24256 (or 34256) mobilisation code?

And what should be the colours of the turret triangle and its surround?

My Dragon Churchill is awaiting decals 😢

Cheers

Michael

[JackG]

Hmm, I must be losing it - I don't see 24256 nor 34256 in the second set of parade photos you had linked, in fact I don't even see the last two digits,  so am I not looking at the same photo???

 

 

The number 3 within the triangle does not necessarily mean individual tank number, it could represent the troop number, in which case several tanks would have the same number.  I don't know their setup, but during the Dieppe raid, this was how the Calgary Regiment was organized:

 

 

As for colours of squadron markings, senior regiment would be red, second senior yellow, and junior would be blue.   North Irish Horse was the senior regiment in 25th Brigade, so they would have red markings.

 

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by JackG

[KRK4m]

2 hours ago, JackG said:

Hmm, I must be losing it - I don't see 24256 nor 34256 in the second set of parade photos you had linked, in fact I don't even see the last two digits,  so am I not looking at the same photo???

 

The number 3 within the triangle does not necessarily mean individual tank number, it could represent the troop number, in which case several tanks would have the same number.  I

 

You're not losing anything - it's just the case @Das Abteilung said above: ...we're not necessarily all seeing the same thing anyway. After close examination I must admit I also don't see last two digits - the "upper part of 5" can easily be the upper part of "2", "3", "6", "8" or "9" while the "upper part of 6" is just the sun reflection on the inner edge of left mudguard. Thus the code can be 24229 and the vehicle can belong to the North Irish Horse.

And if the number 3 within the red triangle is the troop number it means that there were three such Churchills within the regiment, differing only in WD serial and individual names - unfortunately both invisible (or censored) in all these photos.

Cheers

Michael

[JackG]

Looking at the pdf file of tank names, there are only 4 Churchills from North Irish Horse where all marking info is known:

http://mmpbooks.biz/mmp/tables/Vehicle_Names_V4.pdf

 

BALLYRASHANE    B Sqn C.O.                    Infantry A22, Mk IV Churchill Mk V      T173256

BANBRIDGE           B Sqn 1Tp                     Infantry A22, Mk IV Churchill Mk IV     T68139

CASTLEROBIN IV   C Sqn 4Tp Tp Leader    Infantry A22, Mk IV Churchill Mk IV     T172292

COOKSTOWN        C Sqn 1Tp                      Infantry A22, Mk IV Churchill Mk IV     T68782

 

 

regards,

Jack

 

[Mike Starmer]

The Light Mud colour is not identical to SCC.5, it is a locally produced colour based on SCC. 5 as MESCC. No.3.  These 23 MESCC colours were a separate range all for use in the Middle East for camouflage purposes.  Some of these had BS.381 equivalents or matches whilst others were matched or based on the BS.987 range.      None of those colours were named and so far no document has been found to correlate both sets of colours.  The 145 RAC Churchills with those rough stripes usually believed to be local mud may actually be daubed with Light Mud paint.  The photographs were taken at about the time it was introduced in theatre without access to instructions for application or drawings.  The new Shermans of  26th A.B. are finished in random fashion with this light colour as spots, streaks or patches over US Olive Drab.    It is noticeable that the Churchill in background of the parade are all one colour and very nicely finished, even the ends of the barrels are polished.  War notwithstanding, bullshit reigned.  The new Shermans are all shiny. probably oiled over Olive Drab.   

The new patterns were issued in April 1943.  These were for Shermans, Grants, Crusaders, Valentines, Priest and armoured cars (in the drawing an Otter) Carriers and several softskins.   Photographs I have show that the Valentines and Crusaders in this pattern were only used by units training in Egypt and Palestine as were Grants too but Grants used as Scorpions and command tanks in Italy did carry the pattern.  Stuarts are noticeably missing from the set of drawings but photographs show that early on they carried the cancelled 1942 pattern in new colours.  Those recce versions used by the South African armoured division in late 1943-44 carried a version of the Sherman pattern as did the Polish M10s in 1945.  This adaptation of scheme was specified in the MEGO.   This order also allowed that vehicles from USA or Canada in dark colours could have the appropriate pattern applied using Light Mud thus leaving Olive Drab or possibly  SCC.2 on Canadian vehicles as the disrupter.  Vehicles in dark colours from UK i.e. SCC.2/1A or SCC.14 need not be repainted.  

 Churchills were not deployed to Italy until late spring 1944  when they were all overall green, presumably new from UK in SCC.15.  They did not have disruptive patterning. 

The Grant named'Monty' is not in either of the prescribed patterns for the type.  It has probably been tarted up for a media session in the middle east colours, commonly done for publication, being obsolete anyway.

 

It is not commonly known among publishers and artwork artists for decal companies that two distinct disruptive pattern existed for Shermans, thus you will see combinations of both patterns plus some imaginative guesswork too.  There are a number of photographs of AFVs in some publications with misleading captions indicating use at or about the Alamein period which actually carry the 1943 pattern.

 

In fact the Italy campaign colours are something of a dog's breakfast.  Just recently Canadian orders for 1st Canadian Army Corps of June 1943 surfaced about a scheme for use in Sicily which I had never previously  heard of.   Now I am searching for images to verify its use.  

[KRK4m]

14 hours ago, Mike Starmer said:

The new patterns were issued in April 1943.  These were for Shermans, Grants, Crusaders, Valentines, Priest and armoured cars (in the drawing an Otter) Carriers and several softskins.   Photographs I have show that the Valentines and Crusaders in this pattern were only used by units training in Egypt and Palestine as were Grants too but Grants used as Scorpions and command tanks in Italy did carry the pattern. 

14 hours ago, Mike Starmer said:

It is not commonly known among publishers and artwork artists for decal companies that two distinct disruptive pattern existed for Shermans, thus you will see combinations of both patterns plus some imaginative guesswork too.  There are a number of photographs of AFVs in some publications with misleading captions indicating use at or about the Alamein period which actually carry the 1943 pattern.

Using RAF roundels (from June 1942 on) or US stars (from December the same year IIRC?) can be of some help, but if the picture shows only the sideview what are the crucial differences between the GO.1273 patterns (as used at Gazala), the GO.1650 (2nd battle of El Alamein) ones and the new ones introduced in April/May 1943? Do I recognize correctly the profiles listed below:

GO1273 - https://www.pinterest.de/pin/642114859350341559/

GO1650 - https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/tanks-a/69460/view/a15_crusader_mki_cruiser_tank_mk_vi/

post May 1943 -  https://www.pinterest.co.kr/pin/539517230352355097/

14 hours ago, Mike Starmer said:

The Grant named 'Monty' is not in either of the prescribed patterns for the type.  It has probably been tarted up for a media session in the middle east colours, commonly done for publication, being obsolete anyway.

But leaving the patterns aside and taking for granted that the darker colour is not any brown which combination could be the most accurate one: US Olive Drab + Portland Stone BS.64, Khaki Green G3 + Light Stone BS.61, Dark Slate BS.34 + Desert Pink Z.I., Charcoal SCC.14 +Light Mud or Dark Olive Green SCC.7 + Dark Stone BS.63?

Any oinions will be warmly welcome

Cheers

Michael

[Mike Starmer]

MEGO 1273 has nothing to do with painting of vehicles.  The order number is 1272  which requires all vehicles to be a single colour of Light Stone No.61.  Regional Commands may, with GHQ assent, apply one other suitable colour for their region.  The patterning type on the artwork Crusader is similar to a local unofficial brigade applied scheme like that of the 22nd Armd. Brig.  GHQ Cairo issued a  new MEGO No.1650 in December 1942 ratifying the October instructions for a new basic colour of Desert Pink with Dark Green disruptive patterning.  This order included a set of disruptive diagrams for particular types of AFVs and certain classes of other vehicles.  Small vehicles, rear echelon and ACVs need only be the new basic colour.  ACVs will continue to be disguised as heavy lorries.   

The Crusader artwork is close to drawing No. A/141/1 but misses the patterning on the rear of the turret and incomplete on the rear hull areas.  Post May 1943 Valentine artwork is pure guesswork, since Valentines were not used as gun tanks in Italy.    The drawing is loosely based  on images on those versions used in Tunisia by 8th Army.  The type of patterning is similar to the unofficial style used on Valentine IIs and IIIs of 23rd Armd. Brig. in mid 1942, well before the Alamein battle.

The Grant in question is in Italy in 1944 so forget any BS.381 colours.  It looks to me to be Light Mud and black, these being the common colours handy and in general use.

[KRK4m]

On 5/25/2020 at 9:07 PM, Mike Starmer said:

The patterning type on the artwork Crusader is similar to a local unofficial brigade applied scheme like that of the 22nd Armd. Brig.  GHQ Cairo issued a  new MEGO No.1650 in December 1942 ratifying the October instructions for a new basic colour of Desert Pink with Dark Green disruptive patterning.  This order included a set of disruptive diagrams for particular types of AFVs and certain classes of other vehicles. 

Which Crusader artwork do you mean? This  

or that            ?

On 5/25/2020 at 9:07 PM, Mike Starmer said:

The Crusader artwork is close to drawing No. A/141/1 but misses the patterning on the rear of the turret and incomplete on the rear hull areas.  Post May 1943 Valentine artwork is pure guesswork, since Valentines were not used as gun tanks in Italy. The drawing is loosely based on images of those versions used in Tunisia by 8th Army. The type of patterning is similar to the unofficial style used on Valentines of 23rd Armd. Brig. in mid 1942, well before the Alamein battle.

Which Crusader artwork do you mean? This  https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/tanks-a/69460/view/a15_crusader_mki_cruiser_tank_mk_vi/

   or that  http://www.scalecar.eu/models/atlas-ex04-cruiser-tank-mk6-crusader-3-6th-armoured-division-pichon-tunesien-1943-n357.html   ?

On 5/25/2020 at 9:07 PM, Mike Starmer said:

The Grant in question is in Italy in 1944 so forget any BS.381 colours.  It looks to me to be Light Mud and black, these being the common colours handy and in general use.

Do you mean the T.24539 Mk.I as portrayed by Tamiya and Mirage or one of the diesel-engined Mk.IIs (T.24027 or T.24732)?

The one I'm interested in is the Mk.I used by Monty at elAlamein 2nd battle, thus well before the Light Mud was introduced. Regrettably I don't have the kit of Mk.II in my stash ...

Unless this Mk.I T.24539 also survived until the summer of 1943 and was repainted in a new scheme using Light Mud

Cheers

Michael

[Mike Starmer]

The top artwork is similar to thatused by 22nd A.B. but lacks the white outer line.  WD numbers were not red, they were white or black.  The second artwork is very similar to the 1942 pattern but the stripe rising from the dark lower area should slope back to meet the dark area on the turret.  The mantlet is OK but the dark patch only comes round to the side of the turret asa short blob.  The turret undercuts should be gloss white to counterthe shadow area.   The fuel tank would not have disruptive colour, these were only used for ferrying purposes and fitted to any tank that required one.  Monty did not use a Grant at Alamein.  The images of him in one were specially created for the media and press coverage  by his aide-de-camp.  You cannot command a battle from the inside of a tank.  He worked from his caravans and HQ vehicle group with radio and telphone links to his corps commanders and RAF & R.N. liason officers.

/view/a15_crusader_mki_cruiser_tank_mk_vi/  shows the 1942 pattern, ignore the fuel tank.  The Mk,I version did not carry this pattern, by late 1942 these were withdrawn as scrap or in training areas.

http://www.scalecar.eu/models/atlas-ex04-cruiser-tank-mk6-crusader-3-6th-armoured-division-pichon-tunesien-1943-n357.html ?  There are images of Crusader III similar to this but I doubt the upper suface spots.  The roundel was not used by 1st Army in 1942-43, another case of jumping to conclusions here.

[JamesP]

I am wanting to paint a Humber MkII in light mud and black and found this article after also checking Starmers guide for Humbrol mixes. I thought someone might find the following useful.
 

 Hu 187 was deleted last year and so having spent the most ever on a tin of paint it seems I needn’t have bothered as 187 Dark Stone is very similar to 72 Khaki Drill! The Khaki is a shade darker and browner but they could be twins! The Starmer mix is 187+34+31 ie White and Slate Grey in a 8:1:1 ratio. I did a quick test. The bottom row is neat 187 and 72 to then both used in the mix. The top row is a 4:1:1 ratio mix (and in the pallete). I think this ratio with the Khaki is very close to the Starmer mix. 

Khaki Drill is readily available and I can see why at least Dark Stone was dropped.

 

[PeteH1969]

This may be a dumb question to some but what is SCC an acronym for please?

 

Pete

[Paul Lucas]

@PeteH1969, 'SCC' is an acronym for

Standard Camouflage Colour.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Paul Lucas
To add tag.