No it’s not faster. It has the same power to weight ratio
I disagree. There’s no evidence of the vehicle receiving DU armor, and its layout is highly similar to the ASCOD platform, I highly doubt that they inserted additional composites to make it MBT-like. Realistically. The platform weighs a lot more but because it does, doesn’t mean that the vehicle is loaded with all of this armor. We also don’t have the exact weight measurements anyway. Electronics, the new turret, new engine, there’s a lot that has gone into this that can make its weight very dynamic. If anything, the turret would’ve received the additional armor but the hull is still an ASCOD
I don’t believe you understand how much 42 tons is. Another thing is it gains no speed advantages. Why is this? We already have Bradley’s for troop movements and support. Why would we need a less armored tank? I’m not saying it has DU. I believe it to be way more armored than the passing qualifications though.
Electronics? The Bradley weighs 25- 30 tons. I would say the booker has similar weight to the newest Bradley in electronics. Where is the other 12 tons coming from?
1 Like
105mm gun maybe
? A cannon weighs about 1 ton.
well it should be better armoured then the Bradley
12 tons of armor. This thing is probably the most armored tank we have lol 😂
Cool and the Chinese Type-15 is a light tank weighing over 33 to 35 tons. Your point is. Even then its armor is comparable to a Bradley at best. Trying to claim it comparable to an Abram makes me chuckle since you are not aware of how tank development goes for each country and there different mind sets.
The Bradley weighs 30 tons. How is it comparable?
The booker weighs 42tons
1 Like
What is the USA’s mind set? It can’t weigh 42 tons because of empty space and electronics. Something makes it weigh that much.
1 Like
The Russian t90 weighs 46 tons.
The Russian t90 weighs 46 tons. Maybe the bookers armor should be compared to the t90
no russian tanks are so light due to them makeing the tanks as compact as possible which leads to them being smaller but not alot of space for the crew and restricts people who are too tall to be crew of these tanks
Since the XM8 isn’t tech tree (Which I still believe it should be) the M10 would be a great light tank to slot after either the Stryker or the Bradley as a 10.x lightweight for the US tech tree.
Do you understand the concept of reading or are you just skimming through what I say and making immediate assumptions?
So let me quote myself since you clearly can’t. “Even then its armor is comparable to a Bradley at best”
I fail to seriously think that just cause a tank weighs something comparable to an MBT means its armor is also comparable. it’s like trying to say that a Mark V tank which weighs a whopping 29 tons has armor comparable to a Type 4 Chi-To medium tank which only weighs 1 ton more at 30 tons.
Meanwhile, in the Type-4 Chi-To Medium tank, armor thickness goes anywhere from 12mm’s+ on the sides to 75mm’s+ front.
While frontally the Mark V is 14 front, 12 or a little less on the side, and 6mm at the minimal on the roof.
So let me put this into basic English just cause a tank weights a lot doesn’t mean it has a lot of armor.
No, I’m really not reading your reply’s after the first sentence because it’s ridiculous. We don’t know what the armor ‘s like because it’s classified but until we know- the weight & size are the only comparison to hypothesize armor thickness. The Bradley- 30 tons- and the booker-42 tons- are relative in size.So yes there is a solid chance that the booker doesn’t weigh 12 tons more just because of magic.
I compared the t90 and booker because of their size & speed & weight are similar. It’s just an observation though, that’s it. The weight has to come from SOMEWHERE, that’s all I’m trying to say. You’re not understanding my replies.
Are you 12?
It doesn’t matter if it’s classified or not. It doesn’t take a person with 2 brain cells to figure that it will not have the armor thickness nor packages that an Abrams has.
The M10 Booker is fulfilling the gaps that were left when the US Army was forced to remove the planned XM8 tanks to be serviced. For cost deduction reasons. That was not directly related to the project. The US Military is simply restructuring since its incredibly rigid rather than flexible. However, knowing you. You’re not gonna read this.
1 Like
Not really…Abrams are ALL just really large light tanks…/shrug. They should give them ability to spot like other light tanks.