With the cancellation of the US Army’s FCS-MGV system, the 20 ton class (30 ton+ in operational use), the army has been cast about for a vehicle to fill the role, and they have found it in their ground combat vehicle (GCV) program, which is supposed to have, the “urban mobility of a Stryker, with the off-road capability of a Bradley and the survivability of an MRAP,” while being C-130 transportable. (see also here)
Truth be told, a slightly improved Bradley, particularly one that has the manned turret replaced with an external remotely operated one, which would allow for a single vehicle to carry a full 9 man squad, but the way that it is all phrased does seem to be an invitation to mission and cost creep juxtaposed with schedule slippage.
By “urban mobility,” they mean “road speed”, though I noted about 3 months ago that they were calling for the “sustainability of a Stryker”.
With improved tracks and propulsion, the road mobility can be achieved, though it would still be more maintenance intensive, and less fuel efficient than a wheeled vehicle.
In any case, the Army is looking to spend about a billion bucks on developing the GCV, and they have already delayed the review, though they are claiming, with some justification, I might add, that this was a result of the snowpocalypse.
My inclination would be to look toward improving existing systems, or purchasing and making minor modifications to foreign systems.
*Full disclosure, I worked on the Future Recovery and Maintenance Vehicle, FRMV, “wrecker” variant of the FCS-MGV† from 2003-2006 at United Defense (later BAE Systems after the Carlyle Group sold me to buy Dunkin Donuts).
†Future Combat Systems-Manned Ground Vehicle. These are the ones that are the tanks and APCs. As opposed to the various unnmanned vehicles, networking technologies, etc. that form the full FCS along with the MGVs.‡
‡Yes, I have worked everywhere. Maybe I can’t hold down a job, but more likely this has been my role as “technical hit man”, where you are parachuted in to take care of a specific need.
GCV is required to be C-17 transportable according to the article you linked to.
Yep, it is, but it's not a hard requirement to meet.
The 70-ton M-1 Abrams is C-17 transportable.