US Army's New M10 Booker (MPF)

[Armor_Buff]

Regarding light tanks, why is a vehicle with a turret needed for building & bunker busting duty?

An updated clean sheet version milthe KaJaPa/Stug ^ could have weighted less than 40 tons and still mounted a newer 105mm to 120mm main gun.

---

With continuing military aid consisting of more of the same old equipment & ammo, Ukraine can probably wipe out the remaining 1/3 of Soviet era legacy army equipment and the invaders hopes of expansion for many years.

That’s a good use of old obsolescence western military equipment.

[Ted_Dannemiller]

Try turning to cannon 360* in about 4 seconds. That’s why.

Perhaps asking the question differently would enlighten more: “WHY did designers and end-users of things like ASUs and JK90 discontinue the practice?”

• Not quick on the draw in anything but set-piece defense. Even then, they are remarkably plodding.
• More flexibility of AFVs, especially IFVs with larger and larger autocannon and ATGMs
• The drift towards universal chassis for the family of lighter AFV systems

[Edro]

It’s not a matter of how many of this and/or that…

“The Russians probably knew?” Thats not like saying that they absolutely knew. Question? How many M1 Abrams did the Russians manage to possess, before the war in Ukraine??

Well we know now that the Russians have at least one M1 and with that they can now make comparisons to their own tanks.

Edro

[Ted_Dannemiller]

LOLZ-
It’s literally laughable to state that the absence of something proves it meets a certain condition. You’ve never worked in Intel, have you?

The Soviets observed the M1 up close during every REFORGER from 1979 until the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Some observer missions continued with the FSU. They continued Into the bit of detente early in the 21st Century.

There’s a few Egyptian MBTs that were damaged and later picked up during their attempted revolution. Same with Saudi Arabia and their fight with Houthis. Kuwait has a BN. Iraq lost a few in fights with ISIL et al. Iran has supported Hezbollah training and use of a few. The counter-intel of most of those “friendly” sovereign states is a bit porous.

To say “absolutely” is the same as saying “hopeful.” Neither is a plan. The problem is that the technology is not all that secret, with the exception of the actual alloying and composition of the armor arrays. But everyone knows since the 80s that Staballoy is mostly DU, some Ti (titanium), some Nb (niobium), and some V (vanadium). But the exports do not use DU. So-

3rd Gen FLIR is pretty easy to solve. Comm gear has been well-exploited, except for the frequency-hopping technology specific to a system. The engine (LV-5/AGT1500) is in use all over the world, primarily as a rotary-wing plant. But the differences involve the adaptation to the ground platform, and those documents and design data are prolific on teh web.

A new crystal ball, I suggest you get.

[Edro]

So you think it’s laughable that the absence of something proves it meets a certain condition, huh?
I guess that makes you the intel expert in this conversation?

Ok, let’s try another example. (And remember this is only an example meant to explain the point)

Let’s say we wanted to compare a current Toyota Camry to a 70’s era Fiat. Both are cars, and both contain the same technology. But one is obviously far better than the other. Traditionally, Toyotas have had the reputation of producing some of the most reliable cars on the market, whereas the 70s era Fiat (or Fix It Again Tony) were known to have built some of the worse cars ever (and some may argue that they still do)

What makes them “different” (in terms of quality) if they basically use the same technology? Technology is a wonderful thing and maybe there aren’t any secrets, but technology alone doesn’t explain everything. Perhaps Toyota has a different ethic to that of Fiat, or holds to a different business plan. Whatever it is, they chose to build cars with a level of quality that beats many other cars on the market.

Now if you happened to live in Lada land, and that’s all you know, but then you hear about another brand of car which claims to be much better. You may want to acquire one to see if it’s indeed a better car. So, once you get it, you will drive it, study it, put it thru it’s paces and if it is truly a better car, you might want to find out why it’s better and then maybe, you take what you’ve learned and incorporate that into your Lada.

The Russians may already know everything there is to know about, say, -metallurgy. But not every nation which builds tanks are going to use the exact same mix of alloys and whatever they do use is typically held as secret. (Since differences in the percentages of materials in the steel alters the performance of armor) Therefore, you should conclude that the Russians would want to know the exacts, so that they could counter it.

Thats my point and btw, my crystal ball has been in the shop for the last few weeks.

Edro

[JacquesD]

The problem with a fixed casement gun, ie the KaJaPa and ASU-85 is that they are more limited in their role than a light tank. But first, it does depend on the mission you expect for them: If you expect to paradrop a vehicle that will mainly be defensive and be used to bust structures, then you can skimp. TO a point. A fixed casement gun is going to have to stop to shoot and that will make it more vulnerable to ATGM’s and now drones. If you need a general vehicle that can handle, maybe not excel at but handle, most missions thrown at it, you want a light tank. Having a turret opens up a LOT more flexability AND precise aiming without needing overly complicated/touchy suspension systems for aiming (ALA the STRV). Currently, the plusses outweight the minus’

[Trisaw]

3rd Gen FLIR is pretty easy to solve.

The M1A1 has a 2nd Generation FLIR and I’d still be worried about reverse engineering thermals and fire-control optics because the US left a lot of night vision military-grade goggles and devices in Afghanistan. Night vision is what the US leads in and it’s not easy to copy it effectively, but if peer nations do, then the US will no longer “Own the night.” Peer nations set up fake stores to export night vision because it is against federal law to export military-grade night vision equipment. Peer nations do have night vision, but their green-hue images are so poor that they’re about 1st GEN of the Vietnam-era. The commercial night vision devices that you buy online for cheap is about peer nation quality night vision. To buy military-grade night vision google is in the thousands of dollars because the image resolution is so crisp. To capture 3rd GEN FLIR for Western MBTs is a real huge loss because that is just being added to M1A2s now.

What are weaknesses in peer nation armor and tank design can be copied from a captured Western MBT. I am really glad that the US DoD didn’t send M1A2s over to Ukraine, and I don’t mean that as an offense to the Ukrainians. The M1A1s will have to do and Australia is sending some M1A1s over as well. There were rumors that the Egyptians or Saudis sold a few M1A2s to Russia, but those are just rumors.

US Javelin and UK NLAW ATGMs have also been captured, but their microchips are made all over the world so they are not easy to copy those either. To reverse-engineer Javelin missiles means hacking, stealing, and spying on some nations all over the world which isn’t easy to do without alerting several foreign intelligence agencies. It’s great to have allies.

Metal analysis is another area of concern. The BEST US steel goes to the US military to make warships, tanks, tactical trucks, warplanes, submarines, etc. Why do you think many US skyscrapers are built with steel imported from China? It’s because the Chinese steel is cheaper and just as good quality, but also because US steel and metals are rare because the US steel production isn’t high due to environmental laws and the few US steel plants. Peer nations’ AFVs, APCs, and IFVs are known to have thinner armor than their US counterparts. Edro is correct regarding American tank metallurgy interests to opponents. It’s not so much the Russians, but the Chinese military scientists because just look at the space stations orbiting the Earth. The Russian Mir is leaking and getting dilapidated as a testament to their care for metals and quality construction. The Chinese space station is almost brand new.

Sure, in war, there is always a risk of capturing the opponent’s weapons systems intact and the Ukrainians have done so too with Russian military technology, especially their latest and greatest electronic warfare systems. The Ukrainians also captured some of the latest Russian tanks, but I believe they’re using them for battle instead of sending them over to NATO although I don’t know for sure.

[18bravo]

As for me...

[Ted_Dannemiller]

So you’re a mage? And you foresee this. It’s entirely possible, because nothing is impossible.

Comparing a FIAT and a Camry is a pretty interesting bit of a straw man fallacy. You do realize that, yes? Countries build technicals and bulldozer weapons systems all day long. And talk about a false premise!

Of course they want technical intelligence to validate their assumptions in the designs of ammunition for use against any Abrams. But their ammunition and tanks are not FIATs or Ladas, and the Russians do not live in Lada land. Your premise is flawed in this regard: that the difference between MBTs can be assessed as having the same basis as the differences between FIATs, Ladas, and Toyotas. And the original diversion was about the use of Jagdpanzer Kanone. You’re more fickle than hurricane!

I’m going back to that Jagdpanzer Kanone. Your false premise Toyota story has me laughing. Still. Wait for it.

This is why non-turreted gun/missile platforms are an inadequate offering in peer-v-peer combat. The Bradley system offers the lethality, survivability, and better mobility than the KanJPz. Nearly ANY IFV has better armor than the KanJPz: it has only 50mm thick armor. The M2A4 BRAT is rated >>450mm against HEAT. That might be the top of the predator food-chain right now (might). Adding ERA or NERA to the KanJPz adds protection against HEAT (to an indeterminate amount), but nearly all IFVs are moving to heavier guns and improved APFSDS ammunition for the autocannon.

Let’s give Hans credit. Between 1983 and 1985, 163 of these tank destroyers were converted into [Raketenjagdpanzer] Jaguar anti-tank guided missile carriers by removing the gun, adding a roof-mounted [TOW] missile launcher and fastening further spaced and perforated armor on the hull. I think it carried 14 missiles. They finally settled on HOT missiles (20) and SS.11 (14).

The IFV is the king of ATGM fighting. Even light divisions eschew light AT tracks for wheeled , high-mobility. The Abrams secrets are not special-sauce, just a variation. The importance of knowing allows adjustments in muzzle velocity and terminal velocity to suit the user’s best guess about the design of their armor-penetrating rounds.

Thanks for the laughs. Happy Birthday Marine.

[Dan]

Lets not become a website that yells at one another please.

[Ted_Dannemiller]

Thank you Dan

I am reminded of a southern aphorism:
“Never wrestle with pigs. Everybody gets dirty. Pretty quickly, it’s hard to tell the difference. Some pigs get hurt. And all the pigs like it.”

My apologies to the Members.

[Armor_Buff]

Thanks for the various insights on KaJaPa type vehicles.

---

Regarding Abrams…

The outstanding thing, in my opinion about the Abrams is it can be configured with various diffrent armor modules or protective schemes so even if the enemy knows they are facing Abrams, they won’t know exactly how any given Abrams is specifically protected.

So basically given all the data hacks, leaks, traitorous spys, passing selling information, the basic parameters of something Chrysler designed in ~1972 -1976 and we’ve shared with our various allies for 30+ years are going to be well known to the Russians or whomever.

However, basically any given adversary won’t know exact which flavor of protective measures any given M1xx is packing.

---

Regarding thermals…

A friend demonstrated a very nice near military spec thermal that’s commonly available for purchase for $10,500 on sale for $8,800 to the public. He implied it wasn’t up to US military standards but it clearly was amazingly good.

If the US public can buy that sort of stuff off the internet, then a lot of that sort of gear can end up in conflict zones regardless of laws or regulations.

Quality looked better than this…

[Damraska]

The Wikipedia article for Currently Active United States Military Land Vehicles classifies the M10 as an assault gun. Based on what I have read, it is the modern descendant of the M4A3E8(105).

(For someone like me who is not up to speed on the modern United States Army, the article above is very useful. Finding decent, up to date books on modern military vehicles is difficult.)

[Uncle-Heavy]

The sensors aren’t all that expensive.
I bought a thermal camera for the housing association to check for heating leaks.
It was on sale so we got it for something like $1000.
If I stand outside, 60 feet from a window the camera can take a recognisable
“selfie” from the heat signature of my face reflected by the windowpane.
Pressing my palm to an indoors wall for 10 seconds leaves a visible imprint
that needs several minutes to fade.
The optics are obviously not designed for long range work so that part would
probably add significant costs.

[18bravo]

@Armor_Buff

basically any given adversary won’t know exact which flavor of protective measures any given M1xx is packing.

That’s how the Borg defeated phasers and other directed energy weapons. Changing frequencies according to the weapon used against it.

@Armor_Buff

Regarding thermals…

That’s not an image of my dog. That’s an image of where my dog had been sleeping on my Afghan rug while I was out, though she knew better. That image was also way better, but taking a photo through the eyepiece was not easy.
Also useful for determining how many sh!theads were in a room before violence was occurring next door…

[Ted_Dannemiller]

That is a reference “title” is a Wikipedia entry. It is not a US data plate nomenclature.

I think you mean M4A3E2 Jumbo (your comparative)

Sherman Minutiae- Jumbo

IIRC, no M4A2 variants were manufactured with the 105mm cannon.

The Jumbo started life as a medium tank. The M10 is a clean sheet of paper, and CAN defeat MBTs with its 105mm APFSDS rounds. The Jumbo could not. The Booker started life as an IFV.

[Ted_Dannemiller]

Shot traps are a non-sequitur in the days when an APFSDS round behaves like a hydraulic lance.

[Uncle-Heavy]

@Ted_Dannemiller

when an APDDSFS round behaves like a hydraulic lance.

uh-huh
Forcing its way into the side of a tank gun barrel at a 10 or 15 degree angle.
Some photo I saw like 30 years ago

Other interesting entry hole

[Ted_Dannemiller]

I recall that myself. Thanks for that insightful pic.

I’ve studied a good bit of the theory of LRPs (long rod penetrators). I have a few e-books on them. The science was known a bit before the practical application. But Lord have mercy, that looks to be a complete perforation!

The ROK Is doing some expensive thinking that might make it possible to give smaller WHA (tungsten alloys) LRPs nearly the same performance as DU. It would reduce the need for the extreme high pressures being used in the L/55 and the Korean CN120 they licensed from France.

[Uncle-Heavy]

“Dad, why does that entry hole bulge outwards like that?”

“Son, let me tell you this. That hole isn’t an entry hole, that right there son is an EXIT hole”

The extreme pressure heats the armour to semi liquid so the penetrator doesn’t actually
force it’s way through solid armour, when it passes through the armour is soft.
The effect on the inside is somewhat gruesome. Hypersonic lumps of red hot armour goes flying around the inside of the tank. Not a good place to be.
When an LRP punches through thin armour or sheet metal there is only the holes and no other damage.

Entry hole in a Shilka turret:

Plonk-Plonk