Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”

Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”

Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”

Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”

Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”

Cumbersome requirements will not be tied in to the US Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) development programme, instead the service is presenting industry with problem sets designed to spark innovative solutions.

On 18 December the US Army released its initial concept design request for proposal (RFP) for its latest attempt at replacing the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) fleet. In it, the army is maintaining its set of characteristics – survivability, mobility, growth, lethality, weight, logistics, transportability, manning, and training – in lieu of stringent requirements that have previously hamstrung the effort.

“We are not going to put a nail in a single requirement until we have to,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle modernisation effort, told reporters during a virtual roundtable. “That allows industry to continue to innovate. It allows the government to maximise what the technological advances are, and it also enables us to ensure that we do not move the goalpost inadvertently and cause rework or additional schedule [time].”