Note: There are many traditionalists that dogmatically refuse any translations of the Bible aside from the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate/Gallican Psalter for Latin and the Douay-Challoner for English. Respectfully: I understand your beliefs, and I agree with you on many counts, but this thread is not directed towards you.
The new English translation of the Missal was created under the principles of Pope Bl. John Paul II's 2001 instruction Liturgiam authenticam, which mandated that translations of the Bible be in formal equivalence with the Latin, and always deferring in text choices to the Nova Vulgata. Hebrew and Greek idioms are to be retained in the text and explained through catechesis. The instruction also made it clear that Catholic doctrines should be upheld in thei traditional ways, i.e. Isaiah's "a virgin will conceive" (rather than 'a young woman') and Luke's "full of grace" (rather than 'highly favored one').
It's been twelve years since Liturgiam authenticam was promulgated and nothing's changed! The only thing that most Catholics want is something like the Douay-Challoner that benefits from the since-discovered manuscripts and the archaic language removed, but quite tragically, nobody has been able to provide that. Nobody! The USCCB is still dancing with Rome trying to get the NABRE approved despite having castrated language and heterodox footnotes. Meanwhile there's no international uniformity, what with every country using whatever Bible translation its bishops prefer (though I can't really blame them on that count, considering the U.S.'s nigh-obsession with the NAB despite its obvious and many failures). So we're stuck with the Revised Grail Psalter (which honestly is a quite good translation) as being the only common ground between English-speaking Catholics worldwide.
Why do we keep getting heartbroken like this? Why can't there be one translation that everybody can use; or, barring that, why can't Rome intervene to clean up a few of the problems with a mostly-good translation like the RSV:2CE (why can't Pilate say "Behold the man"; I mean really, what was the problem with that translation? why does every committee on Bible translations have to mess up that traditional quote?) and then promulgate it as the official English translation of the Bible for the Catholic Church.
For the life of me, can anybody tell me why the Church isn't throwing the NAB, NJB, NRSV, etc. into the dumps? I mean that as absolutely no insult whatsoever, but I have not heard a single bishop give a scholarly defense for these translations being upheld over the D-R, or a new universal and orthodox translation being produced.