The ultimate in mutually exclusive requirements is seeking "transformational change" when your current IFV is at Life of Type.
The US needs a new IFV. Not a Future Combat System, Ground Combat Vehicle or whatever the hell an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle is suppose to be.
The US needs a new IFV. Not a Future Combat System, Ground Combat Vehicle or whatever the hell an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle is suppose to be.
The fundamental issue with the OMFV specification requirements is the desire for tank levels of survivability whilst maintaining legacy strategic mobility requirements using legacy aircraft. When you want it all, you generally end up with nothing. 
While the Bradley is a capable vehicle, it has been in service for 40 yrs & is approaching LOT. Nethier the hull or the turret have any capacity to support the upgrades require to keep it at the head of the pack & sustainability will increasingly become an issues as it ages.
There are plenty of options to replace Bradley if the US applies common sense to it's specifications requirements. KF41, AS21, CV90 Mk4, AJAX IFV even AMP mounting a Griffin 2 or 3 style turret are all options depending on how deep your pockets are.
There is a very good reason this vehicle weighs as much as it does and if you want your accompanying IFV to have similar levels of survivability and tactical mobility as you fight onto the objective the guess what? Your IFV is going to weigh a lot more than 35 tonne.
So the US Army needs to make a choice, because IFVs with MBT levels of protection in combat configuration that carry a minimum 6 people simply don't exist and cannot be delivered regardless of who the OEM is or the time frame. The tech simply isn't there yet.
2 final points.
1. This optionally crewed requirements is rubbish. Your IFV is going to have humans in it. Design the vehicle around said humans and get on with it. Your uncrewed vehicle won't, but will be grievously compromised if you try. Focus on teaming the two instead.
1. This optionally crewed requirements is rubbish. Your IFV is going to have humans in it. Design the vehicle around said humans and get on with it. Your uncrewed vehicle won't, but will be grievously compromised if you try. Focus on teaming the two instead.
2. This idea your going to fly an ABCT to a hot zone in a 35 tonne A kit configuration, take a tactical pause once you arrive in loc so you can fit your 50 tonne B vehicle kit that hopefully arrived on a separate aircraft, in 30 mins is crack pipe stuff dreamed up by stoners.
Need to get there immediately you send an IBCT.
Need to get there fast and fight, but aren't facing the 3rd Russian or Chinese shock armies you send a SBCT.
If you need an ABCT/s, it's going by ship or it's pre-positioned. Don't compromise your IFV design through unobtanium.
Need to get there fast and fight, but aren't facing the 3rd Russian or Chinese shock armies you send a SBCT.
If you need an ABCT/s, it's going by ship or it's pre-positioned. Don't compromise your IFV design through unobtanium.
