Army Cans Tank-Like M10 Booker Armored Vehicle After 2 Years
I did not know that this could not be air-dropped when that was one of the core requirements and the Army let it go forward anyway.
No wonder SecDef Hegseth is about to go medieval on a bunch of Generals and Admirals, seems like there are a whole lot of incompetents wearing stars these days.
Even setting aside the rapidly shifting and modernizing nature of 2025+ warfare necessitating some changes in thinking on the future of armored vehicles, when the initial goal is an airdroppable light armored vehicle, and the end result is as big and heavy as many Main Battle Tanks, that alone makes it clear that they lost the plot (again).
See the Bradley development debacle. (And cue up "The Pentagon Wars".)
May 13, 2025, 02:16 PM
rock185
Interesting. We had a tank 50+ years ago that might have been what the Booker was supposed to be. It was the M551, approx. 17 tons, with a 152MM gun. But it is old, and the military and their defense contactors want "New and Improved"/$$$$$$$$$;-)
NRA Life
May 13, 2025, 02:22 PM
OcCurt
While it may not be air droppable I wonder if this might not be of some use to the USMC. It was the weight and size of the M1 that was used as justification to getting rid of the tank battalions, saying they were too hard to get ashore in a contested amphibious landing.
With the Booker being substantially lighter but still packing much heavier firepower than either the LAV or new ACV maybe the Marines might find a use for them in the heavy support roles the M1 once filled.
Just a thought.
May 13, 2025, 02:28 PM
4MUL8R
Who gets the 80 units already procured? Maybe we can donate them to an ally?
------- Trying to simplify my life...
May 13, 2025, 02:59 PM
229DAK
quote:
Originally posted by OcCurt: While it may not be air droppable I wonder if this might not be of some use to the USMC. It was the weight and size of the M1 that was used as justification to getting rid of the tank battalions, saying they were too hard to get ashore in a contested amphibious landing.
With the Booker being substantially lighter but still packing much heavier firepower than either the LAV or new ACV maybe the Marines might find a use for them in the heavy support roles the M1 once filled.
The program was reviewed by the Joint Requirements Oversight Counsel (JROC). A senior Marine Corps representative (usually the assistant commandant) attended. They had a chance to be part of the program.
_________________________________________________________________________ “A man’s treatment of a dog is no indication of the man’s nature, but his treatment of a cat is. It is the crucial test. None but the humane treat a cat well.” -- Mark Twain, 1902
May 13, 2025, 03:14 PM
RogueJSK
quote:
Originally posted by 4MUL8R: Who gets the 80 units already procured? Maybe we can donate them to an ally?
I've seen five options floated:
A) Continue in limited use by a few select units. (They're not air-droppable. But they are still air-landable.)
B) Repurpose them as training vehicles or research/development testbeds.
C) Modify them into something like engineering support vehicles, for bridgelaying or similar.
D) Sell them to an ally.
E) Give them to the National Guard for "static defense" at critical infrastructure and national defense locations. (This one seems the most far-fetched to me... Does the NG even do that with other armored vehicles currently?)
May 13, 2025, 03:22 PM
cas
quote:
Originally posted by 4MUL8R: Who gets the 80 units already procured? Maybe we can donate them to an ally?
Who got the money/votes to get it approved in the first place?
May 13, 2025, 03:57 PM
229DAK
quote:
Originally posted by 4MUL8R: Who gets the 80 units already procured?
"Currently, the M10 is stationed at Fort Bragg, N.C., with the 82nd; Fort Campbell with the 101st; Fort Carson, Colo., with the 4th Infantry Division; and Fort Johnson, La., at the Joint Readiness Training Center." Link
_________________________________________________________________________ “A man’s treatment of a dog is no indication of the man’s nature, but his treatment of a cat is. It is the crucial test. None but the humane treat a cat well.” -- Mark Twain, 1902
May 13, 2025, 04:14 PM
trapper189
The Army dropped the air droppable requirement in 2020 before any prototypes were created.
May 13, 2025, 04:28 PM
Sig2340
Gents, it is air droppable.
What isn’t guaranteed is for it to survive the drop.
Nice is overrated
"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government." Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
May 13, 2025, 04:41 PM
nhtagmember
Hey if they are looking to give one a new home my driveway is available.
May 13, 2025, 04:47 PM
egregore
Is there any use for this technological terror they've constructed?
May 13, 2025, 04:51 PM
nhtagmember
You’d have to ask the Army and probably won’t get a straight answer.
May 13, 2025, 05:44 PM
Scuba Steve Sig
Sounds like Littoral Combat Ship drama on land.
May 13, 2025, 05:44 PM
10X-Shooter
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK:
quote:
Originally posted by 4MUL8R: Who gets the 80 units already procured? Maybe we can donate them to an ally?
I've seen five options floated:
A) Continue in limited use by a few select units. (They're not air-droppable. But they are still air-landable.)
B) Repurpose them as training vehicles or research/development testbeds.
C) Modify them into something like engineering support vehicles, for bridgelaying or similar.
D) Sell them to an ally.
E) Give them to the National Guard for "static defense" at critical infrastructure and national defense locations. (This one seems the most far-fetched to me... Does the NG even do that with other armored vehicles currently?)
Sell them for pennies on the dollar to SigForum!
May 13, 2025, 07:21 PM
egregore
It's not like the military has never had dumb ideas before.
May 13, 2025, 09:03 PM
Redhookbklyn
quote:
Originally posted by 4MUL8R: Who gets the 80 units already procured? Maybe we can donate them to an ally?
Or airdrop them on the enemy, probably make a pretty big hole in the ground.
“There is love in me the likes of which you’ve never seen. There is rage in me the likes of which should never escape." —Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
May 13, 2025, 10:10 PM
Shackelford
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK: See the Bradley development debacle. (And cue up "The Pentagon Wars".)
From what I gather, that film was unfair to the actual program, and the Bradley is a pretty good vehicle. In Ukraine, they love the Bradley and use the hell out of them, while MBTs have struggled on both sides. (I don’t want to litigate that war, but the lessons learned there sure are interesting.)
quote:
Originally posted by egregore: Is there any use for this technological terror they've constructed?
The M10 was originally intended for two roles. First was to supplement the firepower of the light infantry brigades, secondly as air-droppable firepower for Airborne brigades. What they produced doesn’t meet the requirements for the latter, but is still great for the former.
May 13, 2025, 10:40 PM
Rightwire
Pronoun: His Royal Highness and benevolent Majesty of all he surveys
343 - Never Forget
Its better to be Pavlov's dog than Schrodinger's cat
There are three types of mistakes; Those you learn from, those you suffer from, and those you don't survive.
