QUOTE(oe_kintaro @ Aug 23 2023, 01:45 PM)
It's still a light tank by any other conventional definition. This one is in the same class as a CV90120-T and that one is classified as a light tank. In the end we just have to accept whatever US wants to call it.
Then that would be "M10 Booker Infantry Assault Vehicle"

"Light tank" is a category. Reaching back to WW2 when the term was most relevant, light tanks were used for many different roles, such as reconnaissance, infantry support, and anti-tank vehicles. The name "tank" tends to mean a generalist combat vehicle able to manoeuvre and break through enemy defences, and that would indeed be a description of tanks such as the Italian L6/40, American M3 Stuart, and Japanese Type 97 Chi-Ha (described as a medium tank but more comparable to the Stuart than to the Sherman). But that's not what all these types of vehicles do. Hence to get a better idea of what the vehicle is to be used for, and what it is NOT used for, a more descriptive name should be applied.
In the case of the M10 Booker it's not going to be used for independent manoeuvre and attack, its stated role is as a specialist vehicle to provide anti-structure and anti-tank support to air mobile infantry. So... it's an assault gun really.
If America is constructing a Light Tank Brigade made up of hundreds of M10s structured similarly to their M1 Abrams tank brigades and with the doctrine of manoeuvre and attack just like their tank brigades then yeah I'd call it a Light Tank
This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Aug 24 2023, 03:09 AM