U.S. Army trying to figure out what to do with the tank it built but can’t use

The M10 Booker, an armored vehicle that was to be the U.S. Army’s first new major combat weapon in decades, was canceled this year because the “light” tanks were too heavy to be useful to the paratrooper units for which they were built.

Now, the Pentagon is trying to figure out what to do with the two dozen vehicles produced before the contract was scrapped. They are headed for storage in a military warehouse in Alabama.

Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll canceled the Booker program, which had an initial price tag of more than $1 billion, 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 42-ton Booker from the back of a plane, it turns out, isn’t feasible.

Pentagon officials said the savings from canceling the contract won’t be quantified until they finish termination negotiations with the prime contractor, General Dynamics Land Systems. “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 changed 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 airdropped 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.

However, 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 M1 Abrams, America’s main battle tank for decades, which weighs about 74 tons. Yet even at a relatively svelte 42 tons, it was too heavy to be dropped from an airplane or 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 expressed doubt 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.

Mr. Haelig said that despite the requirements creep that made the tank unsuitable as an airdroppable weapons platform for light infantry units, it would be unfortunate if no other role was 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 Marine Corps’ 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion wrote an essay in June for the military news website Task & Purpose, arguing for transferring the remaining Bookers to the Marine Corps.

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 acquire 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 counterattack force if [People’s Republic of China] amphibious forces make a landing,” Gen. Donahoe said.

As late as last year, Pentagon officials called 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 to crew 504 M10 Bookers with active-duty soldiers and National Guard personnel. Four M10 battalions would be fielded by 2030, and most of the fielding would be completed by 2035, Army officials said.

The Booker was named to honor two enlisted Army soldiers killed on different battlefields: Pvt. Robert D. Booker, 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 from injuries sustained in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Correction: In a previous version of the story, the last name was listed incorrectly for Pvt. Robert D. Booker.