Defense News quotes Brent Scowcroft Center Nonresident Senior Fellow James Hasik on the two design contracts awarded by the US Army for the Future Fighting Vehicle, which could yield a Bradley replacement or technology spinouts to upgrade the Bradley:
If the Army wants something that is good enough and is open to 80 percent solutions, it may opt to keep the Bradley. James Hasik, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, called the Bradley A3, “an awesome tank destroyer, and a pretty good mechanized infantry vehicle” whose only significant problem is its “limited margin for further electronics.”
“Getting better than good enough seems to me not a good use of money,” Hasik said. “It’s not suitable for urban counterinsurgency, but that’s what [mine resistant ambush protected vehicles] are for. It lacks the operational deployability of an 8×8, but that’s why the Strykers do those dragoon rides. So there’s just no urgency here.”