Next-Generation Combat Vehicle

Next-Generation Combat Vehicle
Name	Next-Generation Combat Vehicle
Caption	Concept art of a tracked armored fighting vehicle
Origin	Various
Type	Armored fighting vehicle
Service	Prototype/testing
Manufacturer	Multiple defense contractors
Crew	Varies
Length	Varies
Width	Varies
Height	Varies
Weight	Varies
Primary armament	Varies
Secondary armament	Varies
Engine	Varies
Speed	Varies
Range	Varies

Contents

Next-Generation Combat Vehicle

Next-Generation Combat Vehicle programs represent multinational efforts to produce a family of advanced armored fighting vehicles intended to succeed legacy platforms such as the M1 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2, T-90, and Type 99. These programs involve collaborations among defense firms like General Dynamics, BAE Systems, Rheinmetall, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, and Oshkosh Corporation and research institutions including DARPA, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, DGA (France), and Defence Research and Development Organisation. Development targets include integration of technologies demonstrated in projects such as XM30 prototypes, FCS (Future Combat Systems), Taranis, and Projektil 2030 experiments.

Development and Procurement

Programs trace lineage to initiatives like Future Combat Systems, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle program, Land 400, and the British Army's Mechanised Infantry Vehicle plans, with procurement pathways influenced by policy decisions in capitals such as Washington, D.C., London, Berlin, Paris, Moscow, and Beijing. Funding sources include national ministries such as the United States Department of Defense, Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom), Bundeswehr, Direction générale de l'armement, and multinational frameworks like NATO procurement cooperation and the European Defence Fund. Competing contractors—Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Thales Group, Leonardo S.p.A., Elbit Systems, Saab AB, Patria, and Hensoldt—submit designs under requirements set by operational commands such as U.S. Army Futures Command and strategic studies from RAND Corporation, International Institute for Strategic Studies, and Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Design work draws on research from institutions including MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Oxford University, Imperial College London, Fraunhofer Society, and TNO (Netherlands), and incorporates materials from suppliers such as Carlisle Companies and Rheinmetall Materials. Key technical elements reference advances in composite armor research, active protection system prototypes like Trophy, Iron Fist, and Arena, and propulsion work paralleling developments from MTU Friedrichshafen, Cummins, and Honeywell. Electronics suites integrate modules from Raytheon Technologies, BAE Systems Electronic Systems, Selex ES, and Thales, with software engineering influenced by methodologies from Carnegie Mellon University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, and University of Cambridge research groups.

Mobility concepts take inspiration from tracked platforms such as M2 Bradley and wheeled examples like Stryker and Boxer while exploring hybrid-electric architectures championed by research projects at Argonne National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Protection systems combine passive armour developments from BAE Systems Land UK with active systems like Trophy and countermeasure suites developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Elbit Systems. Survivability studies reference battlefield data from conflicts including the Gulf War, Iraq War, Russo-Ukrainian War, Syrian Civil War, and lessons distilled by analysts at NATO Defence College and Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Armament options span low-recoil cannons, autocannons, and turreted guns derived from programs such as Cockerill, Rheinmetall Rh-130, Nexter 120mm, and naval derivatives from Bofors work; anti-tank guided missile integration follows developments from Javelin, Spike, and Hellfire families. Sensor integration leverages electro-optical systems from FLIR Systems, radar suites influenced by Northrop Grumman developments, and networking protocols harmonized with standards championed by NATO Interoperability Standards and projects like Link 16 and C4ISTAR architectures. Fire control draws on algorithms from Lockheed Martin Fire Control research and trials by institutions including DSTO (Australia) and DSEI exhibition demonstrations.

Crew concepts vary from traditional four-man crews on platforms like M1 Abrams to reduced-crew or optionally-manned designs influenced by unmanned vehicle projects such as MQ-9 Reaper, ORCA (drone) experiments, and Robotic Combat Vehicle (RCV) studies. Human-machine interfaces adopt technologies from Microsoft and IBM human factors research, with decision aids modeled on systems developed at RAND Corporation and Cornell University cognitive labs. Training and simulation incorporate virtual environments from Bohemia Interactive Simulations, live training doctrines from Combat Training Centre (Australia), and lessons from institutions like West Point and Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

Doctrine adapts tactics demonstrated by armored engagements such as the Battle of Kursk and maneuver concepts promoted by strategists like J.F.C. Fuller, B. H. Liddell Hart, and contemporary analyses at Royal United Services Institute. Operational roles include combined arms integration with units like Armored Brigade Combat Team (United States), mechanized infantry formations used by French Army, Bundeswehr, People's Liberation Army, and expeditionary concepts applied by British Army. Concepts of operations are tested through exercises such as Exercise Defender-Europe, Operation Trident Juncture, Red Flag, and multinational experiments organized by NATO Allied Command Transformation.