American M10 Booker: tank or not tank – as long as the infantry is happy
The Americans are starting to produce a combat vehicle to support infantry units - news, which flew around the world last summer, when General Dynamics was officially announced as the winner of the competition to develop this product. Time has passed, the equipment has already received the official designation M10 Booker, but conversations and speculation about its purpose still do not subside.
About why they didn’t dare call the M10 light a tank and why it is still needed, we will talk in this material.
It will definitely be useful for the infantry
The USA is far from a poor country and finances its army at a decent level, so at first glance it is impossible to blame the American military for the lack of armored vehicles. Indeed, their arsenal of armor and calibers is impressive: Abrams tanks stuffed with modern electronics, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, wheeled Strykers for various purposes, armored cars, and so on. The structure seems to be well-established - each type of equipment is in its place and is designed to perform its tasks.
But why, in this case, did the Americans decide to replenish their troops with a completely new class of vehicles?
The answer is simple: the main purpose of creating the M10 Booker (hereinafter referred to as the “Booker”) was to provide infantry brigades with a universal means of fire support on the battlefield with the ability to quickly deploy outside the country. Or, simply put, a light air transportable tank, which, without limiting the mobility of units, could seriously enhance their combat capabilities and latitude of maneuver. And, presumably, the need for it is very significant.
The fact is that infantry brigades, although being one of the pillars of the combat power of the US ground forces along with armored and mechanized brigades, are very limited in their ability to have heavy armored vehicles. This is due to the fact that, being created on the basis of infantry and airborne divisions, they are intended not only to conduct combined arms combat (as part of the army hierarchy) as part of integrated forces, but also to conduct independent operations far from them. Of course, through the use aviation, which gives them the highest mobility among other brigades, both in strategic terms and in a specific theater of operations.
Typically, an infantry brigade is equipped with field artillery, reconnaissance, engineer and support units. In service there are a large number of self-propelled (TOW-2) and man-portable (Javelin) anti-tank missile systems and Humvee-type vehicles. But the tasks that infantry often encounter cannot be fully solved with this set of tools.
This is stated eloquently in a report by the US Congressional Research Service:
Infantry Brigade Teams (IBCTs) make up the Army's "light" ground forces and are an important part of the nation's ability to rapidly project forces overseas. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as current thinking about where and how future conflicts will be fought, suggest that IBCTs are operationally limited due to a lack of dedicated transport and reconnaissance vehicles, as well as firepower to deal with hardened targets and armored vehicles. .
The IBCT lacks the ability to maneuver and survive in close combat against enemy fortifications, light armored vehicles, and dismounted infantry. IBCTs do not have the mobile protected firepower support to employ immediate, lethal direct fire from long ranges against fortified enemy bunkers, light armored vehicles, and dismounted infantry in machine gun and sniper positions.
The IBCT lacks the ability to maneuver and survive in close combat against enemy fortifications, light armored vehicles, and dismounted infantry. IBCTs do not have the mobile protected firepower support to employ immediate, lethal direct fire from long ranges against fortified enemy bunkers, light armored vehicles, and dismounted infantry in machine gun and sniper positions.
The need for an armored mobile gun for the American infantry did not appear ten or even twenty years ago. History trying to get this weapon dates back to the time of the M551 Sheridan light tank, a replacement for which has been sought since the late 1970s. Then this resulted in the AGS (Armored Gun System) program, within which the XM8 was created - an airborne vehicle with modular armor and a 105-mm gun, planned for production in the 1990s. It should be noted that hopes for its delivery to paratroopers were high, but in 1997 the project was closed due to a change in the priorities of the army command and the cessation of funding.
Pre-production sample XM8 with second-level armor, providing protection against armor-piercing small arms bullets
It is noteworthy that the abandonment of the XM8 came as a real shock to many military personnel, and the decision to close the program itself was viewed by some as an attempt to weaken the combat power of the airborne units. As a matter of fact, reproaches in this style addressed to the highest ranks were heard until the mid-2010s, until the MPF (Mobile Protection Firepower) project, the development of Booker, was launched.
Requirements for a tank that is not a tank
The basic requirements for the new vehicle being developed under the MPF program were determined in 2015. It was to be a "light tank", equipped with a high-impulse 105 or 120 millimeter caliber gun to use existing types of ammunition and covered with modular armor capable of withstanding fire from 30 mm automatic cannons. At the same time, since we were talking about equipping infantry brigades with this product, the most important point in the technical specifications was the possibility of the vehicle participating in combat operations “on the move” or, as they say, immediately from the ramp after disembarking from the aircraft.
Other requirements include a combat radius of at least 300 kilometers, autonomous operation during the day, and the use of existing platforms for the “tank” in order to speed up the development process and reduce costs. It is also important to note here that, unlike the old XM8, airborne capability was no longer a priority, so the maximum weight of the future vehicle was increased to 38 tons or more. This is due both to the very vague prospects for future large-scale air landings somewhere behind enemy lines, and to the fact that a well-protected and armed “tank,” even with modular armor, simply cannot weigh little. So we got by with little expense - just so that the Globemaster III could transport a couple of units, and the S-5 Galaxy 3 units at once.
Griffin II – future M10 Booker
Here, perhaps, we need to dwell on one more point.
As the reader may notice, we use the word tank in quotation marks to refer to the MPF vehicle. Despite the fact that it looks like a tank and is generally designed for the tasks performed by a light tank, it is not classified as such. Why?
The US Army Association answers:
Originally called a light tank, Army officials called the new concept Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF); this approach was intended to dissuade military personnel from viewing it as a tank-like vehicle and then using it in the same way as the M1 Abrams main battle tank (MBT).
The MPF will provide better protection than other vehicles in infantry brigade groups, but it is important to note that it cannot provide the same level of protection that a tank can provide. Given that the MPF will use scalable armor packages to increase its survivability, commanders should understand that Mobile Protected Firepower was named intentionally to avoid the impression of a main battle tank.
The MPF will most likely not be able to break through volleys of rocket-propelled grenade launchers or survive tank fire. Instead, it will be able to provide sufficient protection to survive combat against enemy vehicles and increase the survivability of dismounted troops.
The MPF will provide better protection than other vehicles in infantry brigade groups, but it is important to note that it cannot provide the same level of protection that a tank can provide. Given that the MPF will use scalable armor packages to increase its survivability, commanders should understand that Mobile Protected Firepower was named intentionally to avoid the impression of a main battle tank.
The MPF will most likely not be able to break through volleys of rocket-propelled grenade launchers or survive tank fire. Instead, it will be able to provide sufficient protection to survive combat against enemy vehicles and increase the survivability of dismounted troops.
Formally not a tank, but in essence, probably still a tank. However, there is no difference - as long as the infantry is happy.
M10 Booker
Work under the MPF program was carried out on a competitive basis, in which several companies participated. Among them was BAE Systems, which tried to resurrect the XM8 in a modernized version. However, the technical winner in these competitions was General Dynamics with its machine under the designation Griffin II (“Griffin 2”), which became known on June 28, 2022. This summer, it was officially renamed the M10 Booker in honor of two military personnel with the last name Booker: Stevon Booker, who was killed in 2003 in Iraq, and Robert Booker, who was killed in Tunisia in 1943.
The Griffin 2 project is based on the modernized ASCOD tracked platform, developed by the European divisions of General Dynamics - the Austrian Steyr Daimler Puch and the Spanish General Dynamics Santa Barbara Sistemas. It was also used, for example, for the British Ajax BM, which determined the front-engine layout of the future “light tank”.
In the frontal part of the hull on the left is the driver’s workplace, and to the right of it is the engine and transmission compartment. In the middle of the hull there is a fighting compartment with a three-man turret. The positions of the turrets are no different from the Abrams: to the right of the gun, one behind the other, sit the gunner and commander, and to the left is the loader.
In accordance with the technical specifications, the Booker’s armor must provide protection from fire from 30-mm armor-piercing shells in the frontal projection. The sides must withstand a burst from a 14,5 mm machine gun. Therefore, the basis of the armor of the “tank” hull is made up of rolled steel sheets, which, apparently, are laid in two or three layers with an intermediate low-density filler.
However, the turret, unlike the hull, is made of armor based on aluminum alloys to save the weight of the vehicle, and it, by the way, in its maximum version is 38 tons. In this case, as an addition, removable protective modules are included, one of the components of which can be reinforced ceramics.
In addition to passive protection, the Booker provides for the installation of an active protection complex similar to the Iron Fist or the lightweight Israeli Trophy. Also, judging by statements in the media, it is possible to equip the vehicle with warning systems for laser irradiation and acoustic reconnaissance. The latter, by the way, was available on pre-production samples of the “tank”. Consisting of microphones and an on-board computer that processes data, it is capable of determining the location of the shooter by the sound of shots and providing the corresponding data to the crew. But whether it will be included in the arsenal of the final version is not yet clear.
Elements of an acoustic reconnaissance and target designation system
The vehicle's armament consists of standard 12,7 mm and 7,62 mm machine guns, as well as a rifled 105 mm XM35 high-impulse cannon. Its development began back in 1983, when the US military issued a number of requirements for a promising weapon for medium and light weight vehicles. In fact, this is a lightweight analogue of the well-known L7 and its American version M68. The only difference is that the design of the XM35 uses a lightweight breech and improved recoil devices, which reduce the recoil force and, accordingly, the impact on the tank hull by more than 20 percent.
At the same time, the range of ammunition for both guns is completely identical. It cannot be said that this significantly helps with the production of ammunition for the NATO tank caliber that is gradually fading into oblivion. Nevertheless, the list of shells for 105-mm guns is quite wide, and includes both cumulative fragmentation, sub-caliber and high-explosive fragmentation ammunition, as well as anti-personnel grapeshot, as well as shells with controlled detonation. Therefore, a “light tank” is theoretically capable of defeating almost any target, except for the most modern tanks.
The Booker's armament is controlled using an aiming system similar to the M1A2 SEP v.3 tank. It includes a gunner's sight with a laser rangefinder, optical and thermal imaging channels on a high-resolution FLIR matrix for detecting and engaging targets at any time of the day and in almost any weather. As well as a panoramic commander’s observation device with 360-degree circular rotation with a television and thermal imaging channel and a stabilized field of view. Through it, the tank commander can not only observe the terrain, but also issue target designations to the gunner in the “hunter-gunner” mode, as well as independently fire from the cannon and coaxial machine gun.
The electronic “brains” that help the gunner and commander are a digital ballistic computer that collects the maximum possible information about firing conditions, ranging from wind speed and direction, target movement and ending with the temperature of the powder charges in the cartridges. And with increased situational awareness of the crew, all-round cameras and equipment for connecting the vehicle to a unified troop control network at the tactical level and above help.
The Booker’s power plant is based on a German MTU diesel engine with a capacity of 800 horsepower, paired with an Allison Transmission 3040 MX automatic transmission. It is quite enough to easily accelerate a vehicle weighing about 40 tons to 70 km/h with a relatively moderate appetite in terms of fuel consumption in accordance with the technical specifications for the autonomy of the vehicle and the radius of its combat work.
Transmission 3040 MX for the Booker tank
Heavy, but necessary
In general, we can say that the Americans still managed to come to some common denominator in the issue of equipping infantry units. Of course, the vehicle can hardly be called light due to its weight of 38 tons, which is actually close to the Soviet T-64 type tanks. Nevertheless, even taking into account the lack of the possibility of airdropping, the “tank hunger” of the light brigades will be satisfied one way or another.
However, it is by no means impossible to say that “Booker” is a collection of compromises. Quite good passive armor combined with the installation of active protection systems, in principle, makes this “tank” resistant to most threats on the battlefield, which includes various anti-tank missiles, grenades and small-caliber gun shells. At the same time, powerful weapons with a wide range of ammunition will allow the newfound friend of the infantry to hit targets that were previously too tough for the standard equipment of the light brigades.
It is noteworthy that the US Army Research Council, in its recent report on the prospects for future military conflicts, noting the low usefulness and even the negative impact of classic Abrams tanks on strategic mobility and deployment time, calls for consideration of designs for lighter combat vehicles in addition to heavy. So the possibility of equipping not only the infantry with the Booker, but also other units cannot be ruled out in general.
In the meantime, at the moment, a contract has been signed for the production of 504 units of M10 Booker, and the first deliveries are expected before the end of this year. It is assumed that all vehicles will be formed into battalions and transferred to infantry and airborne divisions. Thus, in the future, each infantry brigade will be equipped with a company of these “tanks.”
Information