The M10 Booker, an armored vehicle that was to be the U.S. Army’s first new major combat weapon in decades, was canceled earlier this year because the “light” tanks were too heavy to be of use to the paratrooper units they were built for.
Now the Pentagon is trying to figure out what to do with the two dozen vehicles — currently headed for storage in a military warehouse in Alabama — that were produced before the contract was scrapped.
The Booker program, which had an initial price tag of more than $1 billion, was cancelled in May by Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll as part of the Trump administration’s spending cuts.
“We didn’t design a tank that was effective,” Mr. Driscoll told Pentagon reporters. “We wanted to develop a small tank that was agile and could be dropped into places where regular tanks can’t [but] we got a heavy tank.”
Dropping the 38-ton Booker out of the back of a plane, it turns out, isn’t really feasible.
Pentagon officials said the savings from cancelling the contract won’t be quantified until termination negotiations with the prime contractor, General Dynamics Land Systems are finished. “We do not have an estimated timeline for completion,” said Army spokesperson Ellen C. Lovett.
General Dynamics Land Systems referred all questions about the M10 Booker program to the Army.
The requirements for the Booker were continuously changing throughout its development, said Carlton Haelig, a defense program fellow with the Center for a New American Security think tank.
“They thought they needed a light tank that was armored enough, that prioritized its expeditionary capabilities, its ability to be air-dropped from a C-130, and its ability to get to a medium-level intensity fight relatively quickly,” Mr. Haelig said in an interview with The Washington Times. “
But the modern battlefield has changed dramatically since the M10 Booker program began about 10 years ago.
“They’re looking at a fighting environment which is increasingly more hostile, even to armored capabilities but especially to armored capabilities that don’t have the defensive measures and hardened armor that a main battle tank would have,” Mr. Haelig said.
The Booker is lighter than the leviathan M-1 Abrams, America’s main battle tank for decades, which weighs about 74 tons. But even at a relatively svelte 42 tons, it was too heavy to be dropped out of an airplane or even safely driven over most of the bridges at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
Commentators on the Army’s Reddit page said the Booker was consistently oversold to congressional leaders, whose grasp of weapons systems might be tenuous. Supporters boasted that the M10 Booker could replace four other military vehicles and roll off the ramp of a C-17 with guns blazing.
“Then they get modified out of recognition at a huge cost in money, weight and time. Then the strategic budgetary picture changes,” the Reddit poster said.
Another Reddit poster said he had little faith that the U.S. would ever be able to field a new ground system in significant numbers.
“Every single program is either a failure, over-budget, and/or cancelled due to political pressure,” the poster said.
Despite the requirements creep that made it unsuitable as an air-droppable weapons platform for light infantry units, Mr. Haelig said it would be unfortunate if no other role is found for the completed M10 Bookers.
“I do not see a future for them with the United States Army, but there have been rumblings from those within the active and retired community of the United States Marine Corps,” he said.
The commander and executive officer of the USMC’s 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion made the case for transferring the remaining Bookers to the Marine Corps in an essay in June for the military news website Task & Purpose.
Lt. Col. John J. Dick and Lt. Col. Daniel D. Phillips said their current combat vehicle, the LAV-25, lacks adequate protection and firepower to take on drones, tanks or modern infantry fighting vehicles.
“[The Booker’s] 105mm cannon and tracked durability would transform our ability to fight for information and keep pace against adversaries with real armor,” they wrote. “The M10 is not a luxury, it’s an operational necessity, bridging the gap between maneuver and lethality to ensure Marines prevail when contact is made.”
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Donahoe, a former Fort Benning commanding general, said the Marines should get the Bookers to help alleviate their needs for an armored combat vehicle.
“After that, I would offer them to Taiwan where they could provide additional punch for a counter-attack force if [People’s Republic of China] amphibious forces make a landing,” Gen. Donahoe said.
As late as 2024, Pentagon officials were calling the Booker “a new, modernized capability for the Army, allowing light maneuver forces to overmatch adversaries.” It was meant to address an operational shortfall in infantry tactics by providing a mobile, protected and direct offensive fire capability.
“The Army is undertaking its most significant transformation in several decades to dominate in large-scale combat operations in a multidomain environment, and the M10 Booker is a crucial part of that transformation,” Doug Bush, a former assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology, said at the time.
The Army planned for 504 M10 Bookers to be crewed by active duty soldiers and National Guard personnel. The service would field four M10 battalions by 2030, with most of the fielding being wrapped up by 2035, Army officials said.
The Booker was named to honor two enlisted Army soldiers killed on different battlefields: Private Robert D. Baker, a Medal of Honor recipient from World War II, and Staff Sgt. Stevon A. Booker. He was awarded the Army’s Distinguished Service Cross and died of his injuries sustained in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
• Mike Glenn can be reached at mglenn@washingtontimes.com.