The Electric Army

[leadcounsel]

There are already companies doing EV mods on large pickups. Ford is already making an EV version of the Transit. These vehicles aren't tasked with moving materials hundreds of miles. They're meant to take stuff from one end of a base to another or to move things from the one nearby base to another that might be 10-25 miles away.

Yes, these short ranges are great. And yet if it's this nonsense, why the major overhaul to infrastructure for obviously so little gain? Again, makes no sense.

Here's a bus that was scheduled to take a Congressional delegation from the Capitol Building to Joint Base Andrews (less than 15 miles) for a flight. I would think this type of vehicle would be almost ideal for electrification. It would have a lot of room under the floor for batteries and one of the things I've always hated about getting on a bus was the smell of diesel exhaust and the rumbling engine noise. And they wouldn't need to keep the engine running like I've seen with typical coach buses.

Great, glad my tax dollars are making the lives of ultra wealthy officials better.

This is just the furtherance of absurdity.

 

[y_p_w]

Yes, these short ranges are great. And yet if it's this nonsense, why the major overhaul to infrastructure for obviously so little gain? Again, makes no sense.

Great, glad my tax dollars are making the lives of ultra wealthy officials better.

This is just the furtherance of absurdity.

These are cumulative. The typical military base is going to have hundreds of vehicles moving all sorts of stuff around on short trips with lots of cold starts. I'd think that's the ideal situation for electric vehicles, and it might even be better if there's an infrastructure to charge them as they're being loaded/unloaded.

There are a lot of things that the DoD does that I'm not necessarily happy with, but we live with complete budgets that pay for a lot of things that the DoD (or Congress) has prioritized.

This is certainly not absurd. What are they going to do in the future? Ford and GM have already pledged to stop production of internal combustion engines within 15 years. And there's been gloom and doom in this topic about the maintenance and reliability, where EVs are demonstrably more reliable and require less maintenance. The weak points would be the batteries, but with large fleets I would think there would be an incentive to supply the DoD with replacement batteries .

I've ridden on all-electric buses before. It was great. They were quiet, didn't smell, and had a really good ride with smooth acceleration compared to the jerkiness I remember with diesel buses. Heck - I remember the smell that used to come out of the GM New Look buses that I rode to school.

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

The trouble with all this is there is no common sense used in the implementation whatsoever.

Foe example, a couple of admins ago some genius decided to make part of Nellis AFB green. They built a large solar array that provided enough electricity to save the base $1M a year over commercial sources.
The life of this array was projected out to 20 years. The land it uses is provided at no cost. The taxpayer cost for the array was $100M.
So, with no land costs figured in and zero cost of funds (even 1% per annum would eat up all the savings for energy produced) the project would lose $80 million over it's lifespan.
I fear exactly the same thing happening with the green vehicle push. More expense with no return.

 

[UncleDave]

I don't know about zero heat signature. I've seen the discussion about infrared guidance, and it doesn't really require a hot target but heat contrast. And if there's an engine that's warm, it's not going to be easy to hide that. But it should be harder to spot.

However, I haven't found anything to suggest the OP's premise that there's an order to go all electric for combat ground vehicles. There is a move for all electric non-combat vehicles. The majority of the DoD's vehicles aren't combat vehicles. They're the buses that move people around the base or to town. They're the cars, the vans, and the vehicles used to move stuff around the base. That's the technology that already exists and has been proven to work for moving people and material relatively short distances

Thats the thing - the engine wont need to be running to provide electricity, HVAC and targeting for the crew so it will be ambient and not stick out.

 

[Shannow]

 

[y_p_w]

Thats the thing - the engine wont need to be running to provide electricity, HVAC and targeting for the crew so it will be ambient and not stick out.

I suppose it might be better in a sea of noise. I was thinking more of direct infrared targeting, where it's more infrared optical than anything else. I remember hearing claims that somehow the DoD would have a hard time hitting that Chinese spy balloon with a missile, when it seemed to be pretty easy. There were all the claims that it didn't have a heat source, but everything I heard about modern infrared targeting is that it's just a camera that's homing on features of an image like we might see in a night vision camera.

 

[andrew_j]

Everyone squawking about this has simpleton view that battery technology or other power generation won’t evolve by the 2035 cutover rate proposed for light and medium duty vehicles.

Electric vehicles have been around well before ICE just the battery technology takes time to evolve. It seems like last 10 year of EV have gone a rapid and steep climb up ….

 

[Shannow]

Everyone squawking about this has simpleton view that battery technology or other power generation won’t evolve by the 2035 cutover rate proposed for light and medium duty vehicles.

Electric vehicles have been around well before ICE just the battery technology takes time to evolve. It seems like last 10 year of EV have gone a rapid and steep climb up ….

No...the EVs will still need to have certain power and capacity issues to "do the job"...and will therefore have to have some means of charging them...out in the field...they will still need an available, local energy source to provide the quantum of energy that they will need to do that...new battery technology doesn't replace Newtonian physics.

Unless you are carrying around micronukes on trailer mounts, it will be diesel gen sets...makes more sense to liquid fuel the equipment at that stage.

 

[leadcounsel]

These are cumulative. The typical military base is going to have hundreds of vehicles moving all sorts of stuff around on short trips with lots of cold starts. I'd think that's the ideal situation for electric vehicles, and it might even be better if there's an infrastructure to charge them as they're being loaded/unloaded.

There are a lot of things that the DoD does that I'm not necessarily happy with, but we live with complete budgets that pay for a lot of things that the DoD (or Congress) has prioritized.

This is certainly not absurd. What are they going to do in the future? Ford and GM have already pledged to stop production of internal combustion engines within 15 years. And there's been gloom and doom in this topic about the maintenance and reliability, where EVs are demonstrably more reliable and require less maintenance. The weak points would be the batteries, but with large fleets I would think there would be an incentive to supply the DoD with replacement batteries .

I've ridden on all-electric buses before. It was great. They were quiet, didn't smell, and had a really good ride with smooth acceleration compared to the jerkiness I remember with diesel buses. Heck - I remember the smell that used to come out of the GM New Look buses that I rode to school.

You apparently live in San Fran. Have you ever served in the military or in any capacity similar?

I'm telling you, I have. EVs are almost entirely unsuited for military duty. They don't have the range, durability, and weight capacities. They require MASSIVE infrastructure and are really inconvenient to 24/7/365 military requirements.
There, theoretically, might be say 5% of vehicles which could be replaced - short range passenger courier type vehicles. But then the huge infrastructure costs simply make that transition not cost effective. Why? Because different supply chains, now you need different MOS mechanics trained specificially on EVs. etc.

The military has many, many people and creates efficiency on standardization. Uniforms. Guns. Calibers. Boots. Body armor. Backpacks. Airplanes. Helicopters. Cars and Trucks. Adding yet another EV to the mix, would cost a massive amount of money to train additional mechanics and techs. Plus all the charging stations, thousands per installation. For short range vehicles where a gas car is far cheaper, easier, more efficient.

That's in garrison operations in ideal climates.

Cold weather like any northern state where 1/2 the bases are. Not useful.

Deployed? Not a chance. In a deployed environment it's generally very austere, rugged, poor infrastructure. Any EV would rely on a big diesel generator. EVs would be totally out-of-element as these environments are far too austere.
Getting shot at? Bullets + huge lithium batteries. No thanks.
Armor plate, not going to move under EV power.
Longer range with 100% certainty of having available energy/fuel for the trip. EVs present range anxiety.

It's clear to me, folks have not thought this thru.

 

[y_p_w]

No...the EVs will still need to have certain power and capacity issues to "do the job"...and will therefore have to have some means of charging them...out in the field...they will still need an available, local energy source to provide the quantum of energy that they will need to do that...new battery technology doesn't replace Newtonian physics.

Unless you are carrying around micronukes on trailer mounts, it will be diesel gen sets...makes more sense to liquid fuel the equipment at that stage.

But that's not the current plan by the Pentagon, which is to deal with it at the military base level for all the vehicles that transport across the base and nearby. Building the electrical charging infrastructure in San Diego or Florida isn't all that difficult.

 

[leadcounsel]

Everyone squawking about this has simpleton view that battery technology or other power generation won’t evolve by the 2035 cutover rate proposed for light and medium duty vehicles.

Electric vehicles have been around well before ICE just the battery technology takes time to evolve. It seems like last 10 year of EV have gone a rapid and steep climb up ….

And a similar investment in ICE over the next decade, would return radical improvements.

Just look at the radical advances in ICE power and economy since just 2005. It's amazing. Typical sedans now have 300hp motors with 30mpgs. That's the same power as muscle cars from the 1960s but with fuel economy of small cars from the 1990s. It's a mistake to abandon ICE when we have more to gain.

 

[leadcounsel]

But that's not the current plan by the Pentagon,

Is this the same pentagon that has gotten everything important wrong for 50 years? One that just hired a questionable person for Navy recruiting this week?

 

[y_p_w]

You apparently live in San Fran. Have you ever served in the military or in any capacity similar?

I'm telling you, I have. EVs are almost entirely unsuited for military duty. They don't have the range, durability, and weight capacities. They require MASSIVE infrastructure and are really inconvenient to 24/7/365 military requirements.
There, theoretically, might be say 5% of vehicles which could be replaced - short range passenger courier type vehicles. But then the huge infrastructure costs simply make that transition not cost effective. Why? Because different supply chains, now you need different MOS mechanics trained specificially on EVs. etc.

The military has many, many people and creates efficiency on standardization. Uniforms. Guns. Calibers. Boots. Body armor. Backpacks. Airplanes. Helicopters. Cars and Trucks. Adding yet another EV to the mix, would cost a massive amount of money to train additional mechanics and techs. Plus all the charging stations, thousands per installation. For short range vehicles where a gas car is far cheaper, easier, more efficient.

That's in garrison operations in ideal climates.

Cold weather like any northern state where 1/2 the bases are. Not useful.

Deployed? Not a chance. In a deployed environment it's generally very austere, rugged, poor infrastructure. Any EV would rely on a big diesel generator. EVs would be totally out-of-element as these environments are far too austere.
Getting shot at? Bullets + huge lithium batteries. No thanks.
Armor plate, not going to move under EV power.
Longer range with 100% certainty of having available energy/fuel for the trip. EVs present range anxiety.

It's clear to me, folks have not thought this this thru.

Again - it's been noted that there are about 170,000 noncombat ground vehicles operated by the DoD. Exactly why would it be something that would be so difficult when the military is always adapting to new technologies. On top of that, I would think that training mechanics to work on EVs (which frankly don't require that much maintenance) would be a good selling point in recruitment. I mean - EVs are bound to be the majority of the vehicles on the road in two decades and being trained to work on them would be a good selling point to recruiters.

And again, GM and Ford have pledged to stop making internal combustion engines within 15 years. Moving to electric vehicles is inevitable for most of the mundane things that the DoD does on a daily basis. I have the feeling they're still going to have at least hybrid combat vehicles, but it's going to be interesting who is going to make them.

 

[leadcounsel]

Again - it's been noted that there are about 170,000 noncombat ground vehicles operated by the DoD. Exactly why would it be something that would be so difficult when the military is always adapting to new technologies. On top of that, I would think that training mechanics to work on EVs (which frankly don't require that much maintenance) would be a good selling point in recruitment. I mean - EVs are bound to be the majority of the vehicles on the road in two decades and being trained to work on them would be a good selling point to recruiters.

And again, GM and Ford have pledged to stop making internal combustion engines within 15 years. Moving to electric vehicles is inevitable for most of the mundane things that the DoD does on a daily basis. I have the feeling they're still going to have at least hybrid combat vehicles, but it's going to be interesting who is going to make them.

Sigh.
You don't understand logistics. Or military needs. Or EV costs. Or EVs. Or their capabilities or cold weather performance, or their longevity. Or EV capabilities.

It seems you're envisioning little 2 person clown cars in the military. No. 170,000 Noncombat vehicles? That's like 1 per 2 people in the military! I would guess would have to include ambulances, fuel trucks, food trucks, troop transports, large equipment trucks, trucks, trucks, and more trucks. There really aren't any "small" vehicles, other than some passenger cars about the size of Tesla 3. And these are generally senior officer rides. Around the typical motor pool it's 7000+ pound Humvees configured differently, plus all manner of large trucks for hauling people and equipment. I just cannot visualize a role where modern EVs could be useful to most units in any number significant enough to impact budgets, environment, convenience, or costs in a positive fashion.

Ford has posted a loss of $60,000 per EV this week. https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/03/ford-losing-tens-of-thousands-per-ev/

EVs are super complex, very expensive, and not capable for military service now or in the foreseeable future. Also, with HIGH military needs/demands, you're burning thru batteries. Fast. The military needs vehicles that last a really long time during rugged use. EVs have failed to demonstrate that ability/longevity.

No, "most" vehicles will not be EVs. Not now. Not in 20 years. They are just unsuited for what most drivers need or can maintain/charge.

 

[y_p_w]

Sigh.
You don't understand logistics. Or military needs. Or EV costs. Or EVs. Or their capabilities or cold weather performance, or their longevity. Or EV capabilities.

Ford has posted a loss of $60,000 per EV this week. https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/03/ford-losing-tens-of-thousands-per-ev/

EVs are super complex, very expensive, and not capable for military service now or in the foreseeable future. Also, with HIGH military needs/demands, you're burning thru batteries. Fast. The military needs vehicles that last a really long time during rugged use. EVs have failed to demonstrate that ability/longevity.

No, "most" vehicles will not be EVs. Not now. Not in 20 years. They are just unsuited for what most drivers need or can maintain/charge.

Good luck with that. Both GM and Ford have stated that they wish to complete their phaseout of ICE by 2035. Could be later, but not much later.

But then again, I've gotten around on a bus system where it was nearly 100% electric buses. I was actually surprised when one was still an older diesel bus.

 

[leadcounsel]

Good luck with that. Both GM and Ford have stated that they wish to complete their phaseout of ICE by 2035. Could be later, but not much later.

But then again, I've gotten around on a bus system where it was nearly 100% electric buses. I was actually surprised when one was still an older diesel bus.

And that will change. ICE will surge in demand. Or they'll be eaten by another company with a money printing press making reliable simple ICE at a low cost. Bank it.

 

[SammyChevelleTypeS3]

This insane war on fossil fuels is going to be the final nail in the coffin for the US. There's too many dumb, over-educated imbeciles believing all this brainwashing.

It is the nightmare come true. Too many of those over-educated think they have some destiny to force the rest of us to believe the lies they believe. They do not care one bit what others believe. They certainly dont care to discuss it either. It has to be their way or no way at all.
Nice folks!

 

[Shannow]

Just thought I'd share for perspective...
Got a fairly large solar set up on my roof..

Would take 5 winter days to charge a Trsla plaid, or 2.5 summer. 2 winter months to charge a tesla semi, or 1 summer month.

Question...do they do all thuis logistic moving at night ?...vampire army ??

 

[Snagglefoot]

Fully electric makes little to no sense.
Hybrids do, especially considering all the waiting and watching armored crews do.
The hybrid Abrams is pretty awesome zero heat signature when hanging out to give away your position.

Yes, looks like it’s underway.

 

[hrv]

I am sure they will have charging stations on the battle field...