· ·

XM30 Bradley Replacement: Wolf and Lynx Reach Army Soldiers

General Dynamics and American Rheinmetall prototypes of the XM30 infantry vehicle are at Fort Hood for soldier trials meant to pick a Bradley successor.

U.S. Army M2A3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle under a night sky in northern Syria, the vehicle the XM30 is meant to replace
U.S. Army photo by Master Sgt. Raymond Boyington

The Army’s latest attempt to replace the M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle has reached the soldiers who would ride in it. General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) delivered its first Wolf XM30 prototype at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, on 21 August, the company said. American Rheinmetall followed with its Lynx XM30 on 1 September, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS IF12094). “Now it’s in soldiers’ hands,” Chris Haag, American Rheinmetall’s vice president of business development and strategy, told Military Times in a story published 13 October.

The test plan has also changed. Both companies told The War Zone that each will now send seven prototypes to the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, Texas, for soldier touchpoints and field evaluations that could wrap up in February or March 2027. A spring rotation at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, which 1st Cavalry Division commander Maj. Gen. Thomas Feltey had described in April, DefenseScoop reported, is no longer planned.

A program built to avoid past failures

The XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle began as the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, meaning it should be able to operate under remote control with no crew aboard. CRS says the Bradley, in service since 1981, is widely considered to have reached the limits of the electronics, armor and defensive systems it can absorb. Two earlier replacements, the Future Combat System and the Ground Combat Vehicle, were cancelled over cost and program problems.

This time the Army is using a Middle Tier Acquisition rapid-prototyping path and a Modular Open Systems Approach, an Army-owned standard meant to let new hardware and software be added without a full redesign. Five firms shared about $299.4 million for concept designs in 2021. In June 2023 the Army narrowed the field to GDLS and American Rheinmetall, with contracts worth about $1.6 billion combined for detailed design and prototype testing, CRS says. Military Times put American Rheinmetall’s engineering and manufacturing development contract at nearly $764 million.

The path has not been smooth. CRS cites reports that the Army approved Milestone B in June 2025, but that in February 2026 then-Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George and then-Secretary Dan Driscoll declined to sign the paperwork finalizing it, to leave room for a major rework. An Army spokesman said at the time that the service was “actively assessing multiple, competing designs.” CRS, citing Defense News, says the Army planned to pick a winner in fiscal 2027 and field the first vehicles in fiscal 2029.

U.S. Army M2A3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle under a night sky in northern Syria, the vehicle the XM30 is meant to replace
U.S. Army photo by Master Sgt. Raymond Boyington

Key specs: XM30 prototypes against the Bradley

ItemM2 BradleyXM30 (Wolf and Lynx)
Combat weightAbout 40 tonsAbout 50 tons
Main gun25mm M242 BushmasterXM913 50mm automatic cannon, uncrewed turret
Vehicle crewThree, with commander and gunner in the turretTwo, seated side by side below the turret
Drivetrain and exhaustRight-front exhaust exitHybrid-electric with silent-watch mode, rear exhaust
Loitering munitionsNot citedWolf: Switchblade 300; Lynx: a Coyote Block 3 version
Design lineageIn service since 1981Wolf from GDLS Griffin III/ASCOD 2; Lynx from Rheinmetall’s Lynx family
FY2027 requestNot applicable$547 million in procurement for 19 prototype vehicles

Table compiled by Peter’s World from The War Zone, Military Times and CRS, listed under Sources. Figures are company or reported values, not final Army specifications.

Early feedback and the drone question

Both companies describe encouraging starts, though these are their own accounts. Geoffrey Norman, GDLS director for U.S. strategy and growth, told The War Zone that three Wolf prototypes are at Fort Hood for safety checks and that the vehicle has already fired its cannon at Aberdeen. He said the Wolf’s 32-speed transmission and composite rubber tracks have been well received, with favorable comparisons to the Bradley’s ride. Jim Schirmer, American Rheinmetall’s senior vice president of programs, said one Lynx is at Fort Hood, another is at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, for company testing, and the rest are in assembly in Slidell, Louisiana. He acknowledged “some small bugs” in the first Lynx and said passengers at a late-September demonstration praised its six-soldier squad compartment and air conditioning.

The open issue is protection from drones. CRS notes the XM30 is to carry an active protection system against anti-tank threats, but says it is not clear whether the vehicle will have its own counter-drone capability, and lists that as an oversight question for Congress. The War Zone said the Army did not answer its question on the subject. Both contractors expect the service to choose a counter-drone system on its own and require the vendors to integrate it. Schirmer said the Lynx already has some counter-drone capability but declined to describe it.

Why it matters

Peter’s World analysis, based on the sources cited in this article.

Armored brigades still depend on a vehicle designed in the Cold War, and the XM30 is meant to work alongside the M1E3 Abrams, whose prototypes are going to the same division. Military Times describes the XM30 as designed for battlefields crowded with drones and electronic warfare, like those in Ukraine, so the counter-drone gap CRS flagged may matter as much as the bigger gun. The Pentagon is testing lasers and microwaves to stop drones at U.S. bases, and is building an autonomous warfare command, but neither effort yet shows how a heavy infantry carrier will defend itself in the field.

In our view, the larger risk is institutional rather than technical. CRS points out that the Army had no Senate-confirmed senior leaders as of its 8 September update, after Gen. George retired in April and Driscoll reportedly resigned on 31 August. New leaders could rewrite the requirement again. A clean Fort Hood evaluation would give whoever arrives a harder reason to change course.

What to watch: delivery of the remaining prototypes by year end; results of the Fort Hood evaluations; nominations for Army Secretary and Chief of Staff; whether the Army sets a counter-drone requirement; and the fiscal 2027 decision on which company builds the 19 follow-on prototypes.

Sources

Additional sources

Recommended articles