But there probably isn’t alot of Leo Is left and spare parts might be a issue?
1 Like
Yikes. Cancellation of M10 coming!
We’ve seen these before with the Comanche and FARA helicopter projects.
That unmanned AFV looks like a lawn mower robot super sized. Haha
2 Likes
Well, the M8* AGS** was cancelled soon after it was accepted, albeit prior to a LRIP contract.
*M8 was type-classified, superseding the XM8 designation
**The M8 was never named “Buford”, Tom Clancy wish casting aside
The 105mm M8 AGS is a whole lot lighter than the M10 Booker, and I think that is why it lost among other reasons such as being too small and cramped. M8 may possibly be transportable by C-130, but I have not seen any Army unit bolt on add-on armor in the field as practically all AFVs with bolt-on armor have it already installed since the add-on armor plates are so heavy and unwieldy.
1 Like
It will be interesting to know the fate of the 96 that allready was produced,
Are they going to be scrapped or sent to the armys bone yard in California?
I guess the photos mentioned above aren’t really that important now. Unless you like modeling interiors of vehicles in the boneyard.
2 Likes
The “correct” move maybe for the USA would be to give a company’s worth to Ukraine 
so that they can be tested in on a modern battle field to determine:
-
is the M10 Booker combat effect
-
is the M10 Booker able to survive
-
what Ukraine does to improve vehicle
Being able to haul ass at 40 mph in reverse might be a BIG benefit.
If Ukraine wants more make, build more since we’re already geared up to make them. They can buy them etc.
This trial by fire might result in a less expensive, lighter more useful M10 Booker with an active protective system…or not.
Anyway, the Booker would look a lot cooler with ERA on it.
4 Likes
I thought the Ukrainians were demonstrating that Bradleys can indeed kill things as big as MBTs… 
3 Likes
Ukraine is killing tanks with drones, doesn’t need a Bradley
Don’t forget the grandma that killed one with a Molotov Cocktail in the first days of the SMO! No need for a 42ton tank…
But they have managed some impressive duels with Bradleys punching way above their weight.
4 Likes
Just need to shoot that tank in “the vulnerables”
Indeed they are, but that’s not their intended targets. Until drones came along, we typically killed MBTs with aircraft, infantry antitank weapons and MBTs. That Bradley’s are capable of that regularly is a happy surprise.
2 Likes
Is everyone forgetting Desert Storm?
4 Likes
The Chinese have designs on invading Kuwait too?
2 Likes
Bradleys routinely killed T-72s during Desert Storm. In fact, they destroyed more tanks than the Abrams.
4 Likes
Just for fun…
M36 - “White Feather”
Modern Precision Assault Gun (MPAG)
“You’ll never see it. You’ll only hear the shot.”
Why “White Feather”?
Carlos Hathcock’s nickname among the Viet Cong, who feared his skill and lethality.
A symbol of stealth, precision, and psychological dominance. This vehicle, like Hathcock, engages from concealment, with one-shot effectiveness, and vanishes before the enemy reacts.
Precision Fire Support Redefined
The White Feather is a next-generation turretless assault gun, blending the simplicity and silhouette of the StuG III, the firepower focus of the KaJaPa, and the automation and survivability of the Strv 103 (S-Tank). Designed for the modern networked battlefield, it delivers rapid, precise fire support with minimal exposure.
Key Features:
105mm L/62 Gun: Hull-mounted, high-velocity, long-barreled cannon with autoloader; based on Swedish L7 variant for excellent range and punch.
Turretless Design: Lower profile, fewer mechanical points of failure, and easier armor protection and weight savings.
Tracked Mobility: All-terrain performance with ~32–34 ton weight for air transportability.
Trophy APS: Full-spectrum active protection against RPGs and ATGMs.
Remote Weapon Station (RWS): .50 cal or 40mm with independent sighting.
Laser-Slaved Fire Control: Accepts external target designation from ground teams or drones; auto-aligns and fires with optional auto-evasion maneuver.
Crew of 2–3: Driver, systems operator/gunner, optional commander.
Deployment Role: Fire support, overwatch, ambush, urban clearance — not a tank substitute but a precision battlefield tool.
Tactical Concept:
-
Dismounted infantry paints target with laser.
-
White Feather slews into firing position, using GPS and terrain map.
-
Auto-fires when firing solution is ready.
-
Immediately reverses into cover using programmed withdrawal path.
This vehicle reimagines the classic assault gun for a digital battlefield — a precision sniper cannon that supports troops without exposing itself like a tank.
Motto Ideas:
“One Target. One Round.”
“Invisible until impact.”
“White Feather watches.”
3 Likes
Why even bother with a crew? You’d save alot in weight just going with a RPV instead of a manned one.
Another thing to consider about this-due to the Bookers weight and the expected weight savings in the M1E3/A3, which might be back down to 60 tons, it just makes more sense to fly the M1E3 instead, since it would be more survivable then the M10
4 Likes
Kali-Katt & I kicked around the autonomous vehicle idea but felt based on the following that wasn’t a good idea.
-
Asking the military to accept a turretless design is radical. It rubs against established doctrine. If doing that you better bring new capability that works NOW.
-
Elon Musk has proven for a decade autonomous technology can blow up in one’s face and not work out. We don’t want an Elon Tesla grade fiasco of making promises and failing to deliver for ten+ years. We believe it best keep the new vehicle manned and use established technology in a newly combined manner.
-
While laser destination, shoot & scoot is fundamental, judgment on approach route, positioning & withdrawal route is best left to an experienced and trained vehicle commander. Likewise, if the vehicle commander believes target is wrongly designated he can override any firing solution.
-
Even in the digital age there’s no substitute for a well trained and experienced AFV commander.
-
Combination of established technology allows a new approach and allows a weapon system that can be quickly delivered now when it’s needed not 20 years from now when it’s irrelevant, obsolete and surpassed.
HTH explain our choices
4 Likes
I am not a military analyst but it seems like, when fighting a modern battle, stripping away the drone fleet of the enemy is an extremely high priority. Once the drones are stripped away, conventional methods of war fighting should work.
Based on what I see on YouTube, if drones are available in large numbers and cannot be stripped away, conventional machines and soldiers cannot survive.
A vehicle like the M10 is fine when used as part of a battle plan that first strips away drones and keeps them away.
I think the M10 is kinda neat. What makes me mad is that the people running the project did immediately correct the design when it went over weight. That was a first order requirement. I do not want those decision makers anywhere near another procurement project.
4 Likes