Summary and Three Key Points: The U.S. Army’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request includes just 19 XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicles — the latest attempt to replace the M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the armored personnel carrier that has been the Army’s workhorse since the 1980s.
The XM30 is the Army’s sixth named program to replace the Bradley: previous attempts included the Armored Systems Modernization, the Future Combat System, the Future Fighting Vehicle, the Ground Combat Vehicle initiative, and the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle — all of which were cancelled or quietly wound down before producing a fielded replacement.
Engineers with the 116th Brigade Engineer Battalion conduct M2A3 Bradley fighting vehicle gunnery qualification on March 27, 2018, Orchard Combat Training Center, south of Boise, Idaho. Combat engineers with the 116th BEB trained through gunnery table XII, evaluating their ability to execute collective platoon-level tasks in a tactical live-fire environment; including integrating dismounted soldiers with their assigned BFV. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by 1LT Robert Barney)
The Bradley Fighting Vehicle cuts loose several rounds from the 25mm main gun on the orchard Combat Training Center Range. Soldiers completed training this week of the Bradley Commanders Course with the 204th Regional Training Institute, (RTI), of the Idaho Army National Guard on Gowen Field. The course is designed to train active duty, reserve and national guard officers and non-commissioned officers in combat critical M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle Commander Skills. Field exercises were conducted on the newest Range 10, the Digital Air Ground Integrated Range (DAGIR), on the Orchard Combat Training Center grounds.
Two competitors remain in the current contest: Rheinmetall’s Lynx and General Dynamics Land Systems’ design, both of which survived the cut from an initial pool of five defense primes — but with Army leadership opening the program to additional “innovative solutions” and the recent cancellation of the M10 Booker assault gun still fresh, the pressure on both finalists is significant.
The Bradley Fighting Vehicle Won’t Go Away
Buried within the U.S. Army’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request is an item listed in the tracked combat vehicles section: the XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle. Only 19 XM30s are requested.
Though still in its infancy, that platform exists today as two distinct prototypes built by two different companies. In the end, neither may win the Army’s competition.
False Starts
Over the summer, senior Army leaders met to greenlight the Bradley Fighting Vehicle’s replacement program, the XM30, and move forward to the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase, also known as Milestone B. Consensus was reached, but there was a problem: two of the most senior members of the Army, then-Chief of Staff General Randy A. George, and Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll, wanted other potential Bradley replacements to be explored.
“The Army is not going to rubber-stamp a process that has consistently failed to deliver the capabilities our warfighters need at the speed of relevance or locks us into a specific design that decreases flexibility,” a U.S. Army spokesperson explained to Breaking Defense. “Gen. George is fully aligned with [Defense] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth’s vision: we must break the cycle of slow, bureaucratic acquisition.”
“We are actively assessing multiple, competing designs for the XM30 to foster a truly competitive environment,” the spokesperson added. “We continue to look for partners who can deliver cutting-edge solutions now, not decades from now. This is a deliberate and necessary step to ensure we assess and select the best approach to deliver a world-class vehicle today and into the future.”
XM30. Image Credit: U.S. Army.
Army leadership put out a request for information for what it called the exploration of “innovative solutions” that could “design, production, and delivery of ground combat vehicles” at speed. The request was not very detailed, but that may have been the point—giving entrants the space to be creative.
The move cracks the XM30 program ajar, allowing other competitors to gain entrance by submitting innovative, untested tech to compete with more mature Bradley replacement platforms. In theory, smaller firms, including start-ups, have a chance to compete with the defense primes—perhaps not an invitation to take pole position, but certainly an opportunity to compete.
Sixth Time the Charm?
This latest push to phase out the Bradley is not the first time the Army has eyed that armored Cold War-era workhorse with concern. Since the 1980s, the Army has run several competitions to find a replacement. First, there was the Armored Systems Modernization, which gave way to the Future Combat System. Then came the Future Fighting Vehicle, which was followed by the Ground Combat Vehicle initiative. Eventually, the Army decided to run the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle competition.
Fast-forward to now, and there are two horses in the race to build the XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle: Rheinmetall and General Dynamics Land Systems, the two survivors of an initial competitive group of five defense primes. They’re chomping at the bit to lead what could shape up to be one of the Army’s biggest acquisition programs in decades.
In a post on LinkedIn, Rheinmetall’s American subsidiary wrote that “the Lynx XM30 isn’t being designed in a vacuum.”
“At American Rheinmetall, many of the people shaping this vehicle have served in armored formations and understand what it means to operate in contested environments. That experience directly informs how the Lynx XM30 is built, from survivability to mission effectiveness.”
“It’s a philosophy rooted in the realities of how Soldiers fight, not just what’s written in requirements,” the company added—perhaps a nod to the ups and downs that the XM30 program has gone through over the years of its prolonged development.
A Competitive Market: XM30 Coming
The Army’s decision to open the XM30 program seems to acknowledge the failure of its previous Bradley-replacement programs.
The two major competitors, GDLS and Rheinmetall, have the space to move forward with their own initiatives, but the move also puts a fire to their backs.
One of the Army’s much-anticipated projects recently went up in flames: the M10 Booker, a tracked assault gun meant to support infantry. Although that program successfully completed the prototyping stage, the Army ultimately decided not to acquire the platform, citing a lack of survivability and operational need.
A live fire demonstration of the Army’s newest and most modernized combat vehicle, the M10 Booker, marks the conclusion of the M10 Booker Dedication Ceremony at Aberdeen Proving Ground, in Aberdeen, Md., April 18, 2024. (U.S. Army photo by Christopher Kaufmann)
Needless to say, the pressure is on GDLS, Rheinmetall, and the U.S. Army to find a Bradley Fighting Vehicle replacement on time and under budget.
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the war’s shifting battle lines in Donbas and writing about its civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
