Electric vehicles in the military

[Pontius Navigator]

As the world moves towards electric vehicles, how about the military? Will deployed forces have to establish a generator park to recharge the vehicles? All very well recharging 'day-running' vehicles, but what of those deployed forward?

Would mobile recharging vehicles have to deploy as well as a replacement for bowsers and tankers?

[B2N2]

Had a look at a Prius recently?
It's all about drag reduction.
All Terrain Vehicles aren't known for their amazing fuel mileage.
Let alone when you add tons of armor. Getting even a light truck to move on electric power will take a stupid amount.

Now electric weapons is a different story.
Laser anti missile batteries and electromagnetic cannons.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1dHZg9XsKDQ

[tucumseh]

Batteries, and power in general, is termed a "critical enabling technology". Historically, the subject is poorly managed in MoD. For example, 10 years ago the focus was on providing enough man-portable power to last a 48-hour dismounted mission. MoD let a 3-year R&D contract to produce a prototype, ignoring the fact one bidder produced an old production model that more than met the specification. The winner gave up after 2 years. Faced with that scenario, and as B2N2 says, we are a long way away.

The other determining factor is the old "battlefield fuel" chestnut, whereby our allies try to achieve interoperability, and share resources; despite perpetual failure to agree such strategies. We have international committees up the ying yang who debate this, seemingly taking two steps back every time they meet. We have people in London who monitor use of the word "interoperability" and actively prevent its use in programme titles or plans. Pontius, you chose a hot potato!

[just another jocky]

....Pontius, you chose a hot potato!


Electrically heated? :}

[Pontius Navigator]

Tuc, I am reminded of the question in 1990 "who is considering the long term future of the navigator branch?" This was asked by the SO1 responsible for postings in said branch

I ask as this is tomorrow's question that will carry no solutions or brownie points for today's staffer or department head. It is also definitely a Jointery issue with the Army no doubt in a position to demand lead authority.

Rather than Toyota, Tesla might be better placed to profit. B2N2, I suspected as much.

[tucumseh]

JAJ Excellent.

PN The issue will lie with the Defence Scientific Advisory Council, who report to Secy of State. Their March 2004 report that led to the aborted contract I mentioned postulated Ammonia Borane Fuel Cells as the ultimate solution in a 3-phase, long term R&D programme. As I said, the Chosen One didn't get past phase 1. Not by coincidence, the same year (2006) saw the total recall and destruction order on Li-Ion radio batteries, which contributed to so many deaths. Same company. I suspect you are right. We need to look outside the traditional MoD suppliers. Some are many years ahead.

[Nomorefreetime]

Lithium Ion Batteries can only fly with a 30% charge, not good if you want to use it straight away. Lithium Metals Batteries the ALARP police wouldn't let anyone on the same aircraft.

[ORAC]

The other determining factor is the old "battlefield fuel" chestnut, whereby our allies try to achieve interoperability, and share resources; despite perpetual failure to agree such strategies I've seen the number of adapters STANAVFORLANT needed for sharing fuel, God alone knows how many adapters the army would have to carry around to share electric power sockets worldwide in 2 and 3 phase let alone dedicated proprietory electric charging points....

[Pontius Navigator]

Silly me, I forgot the military runs on power point, death by power point Tec, who needs petrol.

[Mechta]

QinetiQ built a hybrid off-road truck demonstrator a bit like an Alvis Stalwart. Claimed advantages were simpler transmission (a motor in each wheel), and reduced thermal and noise signatures. Short range movements could be made on batteries alone, with claimed reduced risk of detection.

it-SSrrLWwA

https://www.qinetiq.com/news/2016/08/next-generation-combat-vehicles-a-step-closer-as-qinetiq-hub-drive-technology-secures-darpa-investment

The Navy has had electric vehicles, AKA submarines, for over a century, and now electric surface vessels in the shape of Type 45 destroyers, although the latter do seem to have got off to a bit of an inauspicious start.

Aircraft-wise, Desert Hawk and in the near future, Zephyr are the trend setters.

[tucumseh]

Mechta

Thanks for the link. The point I'd make is that in the examples I used the poor soldier has to hump his own power around, within a notional overall limit of 28kg. (Much more than that of course, but that's the official target). In other examples, the weight of the power source is negligible compared to the rest of the vehicle, and in some cases, arguably, not really an issue.

The age old question is, when do you stop and say, right we'll go with this, knowing it will be obsolescent by the ISD. Especially on anything that works on wiggly amps. Is the QQ demonstrator aimed at the AJAX programme (FRES), already nearly 20 years old and barely 2 steps forward? Or is it aimed at the AJAX replacement?

From a more practical viewpoint, what availability are they looking for? Given the rest is a relatively simple mechanical device, a truck only needs diesel and off she goes. I suggest we are decades way from having the infrastructure, which is what Pontius was getting at, quite rightly. QQ will have lots of clever people working on the science, but applying that science is equally complex. It may be this limits use to the rear echelon, or even just moving stores between depots. In which case you need two infrastructures, which would be enough to scrap any programme.

Reminds me of the problem we used to have on the old CVSs. There was only room in the workshops for 2 ATE suites. With 3 aircraft types (SHAR, SK and Merlin), 2 had to double up. So, for example, when ASaC Mk7 was being developed, it had to use either BVATE or MATS, not its own bespoke ATE (RATS); which became a major development burden. If that couldn't be achieved, the programme was dead on its feet, despite wonderful technology elsewhere.

Is that load on the truck the battery packs, within an explosion-proof box, a la Dreamliner?

[Army Mover]

With regards to road vehicles, I was involved in a project with Volvo trucks where we were trying to improve the environmental performance of our fleet and part of that process was considering all potential fuel sources. One thing became very obvious quite quickly with regards to electrically powered vehicles; up to 3.5t gvw, providing the infrastructure was available to support it, battery power was achievable. Anything greater than 3.5t gvw, the weight of the batteries required to move it, would take practically all of the available payload. The end-result was that for commercial use, bi-fuel engines are pretty much the way this is going to go for the foreseeable future and would appear to be confirmed by the latest Volvo announcement (albeit this is for their cars, which are no longer owned by AB Volvo).

Having moved on and now involved in the world-wide recall of failed Li-Ion batteries, the latest news is that Lithium is on its way out, to be replaced by Sodium-Ion.

[Davef68]

Is the QQ demonstrator aimed at the AJAX programme (FRES), already nearly 20 years old and barely 2 steps forward? Or is it aimed at the AJAX replacement?


MIV surely (The wheeled element from FRES), rather than the tracked Ajax/Scout?

Reading that, it looks like they have their eye on the US Stryker replacement/update as well

[Tankertrashnav]

My eldest son works in Rotterdam II port where he runs the section responsible for the servicing of the electric vehicles which transfer containers from the ships to the waiting trucks and vice versa.

The vehicles have a conventional lead acid battery pack which weighs 12 tonnes. They can carry two 30 tonne containers, and when fully laden the whole rig weighs around 100 tonnes. Their maximum speed fully laden is around 30kph. They are working more or less continuously and typically they need to visit the battery section every 8 hours to have their depleted batteries removed and a new pack fitted. The whole procedure is entirely automatic, as this, as well as the vehicles' loading/unloading schedule is computer controlled, and the vehicles are driverless.

I'm not sure how relevant all this to military operations, but I only post it as it indicates what can be achieved with even conventional battery powered vehicles.

[tucumseh]

Davef68

I'm afraid the very thought of FRES makes me twitch. When we got the URD in April 2002, showing an In Service Date commencing 2007, we were quietly told to completely ignore this, and assume it wouldn't be met by over a decade. That early version of the URD didn't really break it down the way you do. It stated the main vehicles we'd need until 2025 would be Challenger 2 and Warrior, so wheeled was rather ignored at that time. Regarding batteries, the issue was providing charging in the back of Warrior, but we were aware the FRES contractor at the time was looking at hybrid drives. On MBT, the main concern was the tank telephone cable was cut every time they slotted a new engine in!

[KiloB]

The bottom line preventing the use of electric is energy density. The kWh per kilo figure is still 10 times higher for diesel! We need a technology breakthrough in battery design before we can even start to address the infrastructure aspect.
Having said that, there is of course lots of potential on docks, airfields etc.

[Basil]

Unless there's a tactical advantage I really can't see fully electric army trucks in the near future; hybrid maybe for limited ops quiet running with a low heat signature (after your IC eng has cooled down).

[MPN11]

As the owner of an all-electric Peugeot iOn, I'm fully conscious of the limitations. Sub-100 mile range, in my case, but at least I don't have to travel large distances on this small Island. It's currently plugged in to a 240v socket in the garage - I must check whether it's full in a minute.

BUT ... take away the 240v socket indoors, or need to do more than a handful of laps of the airfield, and you really do start to hit the down-side. There are a few Goverment-operated iOns here: fine for running around St Helier and beyond, and undoubtedly plugged in when not being used. I would struggle to see their utility outside our constrained little world.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I think a few people have got it nailed for military application. Charging isn't going to happen in the field, so the solution is perhaps a hybrid in the mid term for logistics vehicles.

However, with regards civvy trucking I feel bound to disagree with a few. Sure there is an energy density problem, but outside of that, trucking has to be the easiest thing in the world to design for, because the usage pattern is almost entirely rigid within a given country. Driver is allowed to drive for X hours at Y mph. Must then take break of at least Z followed by repeat of X & Y and a further prescribed break. All one requires is the technology to charge for range X*Y in time Z & a decent charging infra. Then you're sorted. None of the standard consumer driver issues of 'but what about my holiday to the south of France where I want to drive there without stopping?'. Granted the technology is not easy , nor the infra cheap, but the goal is very clearly defined and I'd be amazed if someone hasn't achieved it (at least in prototype) inside a decade. Tesla have already stated they aim to develop a 'semi' I believe.

[MPN11]

The issue is the charging infrastructure. Pan-National standardisation, fast v. slow charging, And who will pay for these innumerable charging points? And how does the user payment system work?

Count the number of petrol pumps you see on a typical 50 mile journey, capable of replenishing a vehicle in <5 minutes. Extrapolate that to the requirement for nationwide charging points that need (fast charge) maybe 30 minutes. How many tens/hundreds of thousands would be needed? Not forgetting the real estate needed to have vehicles sat there for ~30 minutes at each charging point.

I'm not going near any possible Army/Field aspects. I don't know enough.

[langleybaston]

The bottom line preventing the use of electric is energy density. The kWh per kilo figure is still 10 times higher for diesel! We need a technology breakthrough in battery design before we can even start to address the infrastructure aspect.
Having said that, there is of course lots of potential on docks, airfields etc.

Quite so, and not only for military vehicles. Many of us would need two totally different cars if ]not when] all-electrics become dominant.

Why? Range. My journeys are fairly typical: either local, short distance, short time [electric, tick the box] OR long long distance [recently lincolnshire - Harwich- Wernigerode Harz in one go on one tankful.

How long to charge an electric car, and what mileage?

The prospect is very unattractive indeed.

Don't hold your breath until battery technology evolves [and it cannot even solve battery life for smart phones ............]

[MPN11]

According to Peugeot's website (http://www.peugeot.co.uk/showroom/ion/5-door/technology/) ...

The iOn’s lithium-ion battery stores much more energy than the old NiCd batteries of the 1990s. You can fully recharge it in about nine hours from a 220V domestic plug socket, using the five-metre cable that comes with the car. Special 380V recharging stations for electric cars, located throughout the UK, will replace half the battery’s capacity in just 15 minutes.I wonder how many "Special 380V recharging stations" there are in UK? ;)

As to 'normal charging', I tend to recharge when the battery is down to about 50% ... normal charging will then take 5 hours or so to restore 100%/70 miles.

As I said previously, it works for us, and has done for the last 4 years: we love it. Loads of interior space [wot, no engine?], excellent performer in traffic, quiet, really nice to drive, well-equipped and quite comfortable. But batteries/physics will always be the constraint.

Peugeot iOn | 5-Door - Peugeot UK (http://www.peugeot.co.uk/showroom/ion/5-door/)

[Just a spotter]

Well, one major US defence contractor is working on a potential power source;

Compact Fusion · Lockheed Martin (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html)

Although one suspects they have other useses in mind as it's primary deployment.

JAS

[Pontius Navigator]

The Navy has had electric vehicles, AKA submarines, for over a century, and now electric surface vessels in the shape of Type 45 destroyers
Accepted, my old man was on an all electric mership in the 50s and cruise ships today, such as the Vista class are electric with Azipods, but these are all hybrid.

I was driving at the pure electric vehicle which is more dependent on infrastructure, mokbile or static, than a pure fossil fuel vehicle.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Everyone does harp on about domestic infra and, to a certain extent, you're right. But at the end of the day, the entire country is already wired for and produces natively electricity. So yes, charging points are required for out and about. But if you're a car park owner or a service station owner and the money is right, market forces will make it happen. There's enough chickens out and about already to rapidly increase the number of eggs, so it's only a matter of time.

Military wise though, the high altitude pseudo satellite application is where it's at I'd say. Definitely a market there, both disaster relieve and permissive air environment conflicts.

[YellowTom]

The U-2 guys are currently testing Teslas as their chase cars because they don't need hard to find petrol.

[heights good]

The technology exists already!

https://electrek.co/guides/tesla-semi/

[Pontius Navigator]

Military wise though, the high altitude pseudo satellite application is where it's at I'd say. Definitely a market there, both disaster relieve and permissive air environment conflicts.

True but the thrust of my initial post:

Will deployed forces have to establish a generator park

Is essentially aimed at off-grid application for pure electric vehicles. An electric air vehicle may operate from a base or require only a limited generator capacity.

As for the Tesla heavy duty vehicle, once such a road vehicle has reached cruising speed its consumption may well reduce significantly. As said earlier, ATV needs will be a far greater test.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

If you treat it in a Bastion type contex where you're shipping in fuel to run generators, it's less efficient to charge a vehicle than to pour diesel in it I would guess? Losses in generating, charging etc vs losses in a diesel engine. However, I never understood why they didn't just build a solar farm in Bastion!

[Pontius Navigator]

pba target, probably the same reason they didn't install solar heating for hot water in Ascension. "It is very cold in the Falklands etc so no point." Yes, they thought ASI was near FI and South Georgia.

Probably thought it was very cold in Afg in the winter so no sun!

[Pontius Navigator]

Many of us would need two totally different cars if ]not when] all-electrics become dominant.

Why? Range. My journeys are fairly typical: either local, short distance, short time [electric, tick the box] OR long long distance [recently lincolnshire - Harwich- Wernigerode Harz in one go on one tankful. ......]

There was a suggestion many years ago that the typical commuter did just that. But rather than own a family car and a commuter car, they should hire a family car for holidays.

Of course society developed in a different direction and many found the people carrier/SUV essential for the mother and a smaller car for commuting. Once you are down to the original 1+1 and no kids then an electric car for short distances and hiring a big car for holidays might be attractive.

However that original 1+1 remains elusive even in retirement. With one set of grand children 90 minutes away (doable) and the other 300 minutes (not doable) and the need to carry the GC, seats etc . . .

[BEagle]

Pontius Navigator wrote: ...many found the people carrier/SUV essential for the mother and a smaller car for commuting...

Sadly not the case around here. The infernal yummy-mummy Chelsea tractor SUVs are used for everything from taking little Tarquin and Chlamydia for their half-mile trip to school, going into town to buy yet another bottle of prosecco or blocking railway station car parking spaces designed for Ford Escorts....

[Pontius Navigator]

BEagle, exactly what I meant, Mr Yummy gets the small car. Of course if Mr Yum uses public transport Mrs Yummy HAS to use the tractor as it is blocking in the small car.

[Pontius Navigator]

Islandlad, brilliant, I think you solved the military problem. Electric vehicle pulls trailer containing super battery pack and low powered generator, a la hybrids, but unhitches in forward area becoming pure electric.

Hybrid tank tows battery trailer for rear area mobility and reverts to diesel, with full tank, on reaching start line.

[Cazalet33]

How long to charge an electric car, and what mileage?

I drive one of those things and your two questions, in reverse order, are always the first that people ask.

I tell 'em the range is 321 miles and that you can charge 175 miles worth in 25 minutes.

Heavy armour seldom makes as much as 200 miles of advance without having to wait for the supply tail to form up and start hauling pork, beans and motion lotion, so the range limitation isn't going to be strategically important in a real-world invasion of some sad-sack Muslim country like Iraq or Afghanistan (or Syria?). If we're ever silly enough to invade the Russian motherland we'll run into the perennial problems of winter where the difference between diesel and electric is irrelevant.

[Cazalet33]

90 minutes away (doable) and the other 300 minutes (not doable)

A five hour trip is doable, albeit with a thirty or forty minute lunch break while you top up the battery. I have a three or four hour bladder, so I don't have a problem with stopping off once or twice on long journeys.

[163627]

As I understand things the UK is already on the edge where spare generating capacity is concerned. So not only will there be a need to build more power stations but the whole of the UK's National Grid will need a major upgrade to cope with the demand for the extra power flowing through it, a not inconsiderable task? Just a simple example from my own street: a small cul-de-sac of fifty houses has between them about 130 cars, most of which would require charging up between 16.00 and 06.00 a significant power requirement that would be replicated across the UK. Fine for me in my Surrey hideaway where everyone parks in a garage or on their drive but unfortunately this isn't an option for most of the car owning population of the UK!
As to the military use of electric vehicles I’m afraid at this stage of the technology cycle I’m totally unconvinced. For Herrick 13 I was at a small base where we had two Huskies and a Ridgeback and a constant effort was required to ensure we always had sufficient fuel to keep them operational with our only source of electricity being a rather temperamental portable generator. Also how much extra will an electric equivalent of a Husky, Ridgeback or Mastiff weigh and will those rickety old bridges, culverts and embankments out in the back of beyond cope?

[Willard Whyte]

Those vehicles are pretty heavy to begin with, ~17 tonnes for a Mastiff. I should think the downsides of battery weight start to become irrelevant at those levels.

Obviously a move to deployable solar arrays is a big step, but up until the 80s the military led the civvy world in technological development, particularly during conflict, it's only the past 3 decades where consumerism has started to take the lead. The problem is we, well I'm not 'in' any more, so they, only seem to react these days, rather than pro-act*

*I might have just invented that, according to spell checker.

[Pontius Navigator]

WW, in electronics in particular the mass market economy has as big bucks as the military with minimal unit costs. As you say, the military technological lead of the 80s is now reversed.

[Mechta]

With regard to the Camp Bastion example, electric vehicles may have had an application for all the on-camp tasks. Its usually more efficient to have one diesel generator running at max load and efficiency and full operating temperature, than smaller engines being started and stopped, whilst they are still nearly cold. The cost in time and lives to get fuel in made it a much more valuable resource than at home.

The Camp Bastion example and domestic use cases are similar in that vehicles generally wouldn't have been run flat, and off-peak (load not cost) electricity could have been used for charging, again allowing generators to run at optimum efficiency. Most users in the the domestic case wouldn't need their vehicle until the morning, so could be encouraged to avoid charging at peak demand times by a smart charger which only gives peak output at a lower price when network demand is low via a signal from the grid.

The MOD used to use fleets of electric trucks for on site tasks back in the 1980s. I drove them on a daily basis for about three years and don't ever recall ever having to stop using one due to a flat battery.

[Sevarg]

The whole idea is bl**dy stupid. If, being used for real, who gives a damn about emissions, you need something that works, can be refuelled quickly with out having to find the right volts/amps. Petrol or diesel every time!

[tdracer]

The first question you need to ask is "what's the carrot"? What would the military gain with widespread use of all electric vehicles?


Environmentally friendly? Seriously, that's a priority for the military? They're going to kill people and blow stuff up in an environmentally friendly manner?
Increased range or rapid refueling capability? No, compared to petroleum electric is nearly always worse.
Flexibility/mobility? Most battlefields don't have a wide spread electrical grid to provide the juice (and if they do, it's going to be a prime target for the opposition). So you need to bring that electrical infrastructure with you (along with fuel to generate that juice) - again, making things worse.
Quiet/Stealth? Ok, here things look promising - electric vehicles can be very quiet with a low thermal profile (although even the thermal profile needs to be worked - rapid discharge or charging of a battery creates a lot of heat). So for limited role scout/reconnaissance vehicles electrical operation may have some benefit - perhaps a hybrid. But anything bigger is a non-starter.
So in short, aside from some specialized roles, Sevarg is spot on.

[tucumseh]

MoD UK deals with this in two ways. First, by including in the price the cost of disposal. Second, by having a general policy of using secondary batteries (rechargeable). One or two units use primaries.......

The US, are (or were) the opposite. Use once, chuck them a way. There must be millions of batteries lying in Iraqi and Afghan ditches. You never hear about the environmental effects. They might be told to bring them back, but humping a few useless house bricks around isn't appealing.

We used to have "Safety Plans". These became Safety and Environmental Plans. Lots of hoops, and the focus was on the latter. Never mind that Li-Ions went off in your face like a Roman Candle; demonstrated during 1990 trials. As long as they could be disposed of properly, who cares about providing CSAR or proper kit.

[Pontius Navigator]

My original post was not intended to suggest that the MOD would go green, but that petrol/diesel engines might become rare, for example Volvo going pure electric.

A similar problem arose in the 80s. At the time the sole supplier of the grade of avgas used by the Shackleton was Venezuela. If global petrol and diesel supplies became limited, then what?

I guess Saudi better invest in solar panels and technology to export wiggly amps :)

[tdracer]

My original post was not intended to suggest that the MOD would go green, but that petrol/diesel engines might become rare, for example Volvo going pure electric.
So long as the fundamental issues with batteries remain unsolved - energy density, recharge time, weight - the demand for IC engines won't go away. It may well change, and the source of the fuel will likely change to something bio based (while the concept of peak oil has been horribly overblown, the bottom line is that fossil fuel is a finite resource and eventually we'll run low). But imagine the battery you'd need to drive a huge ship across the Pacific, or a 50 ton long haul truck/lorry coast to coast, or a large airliner halfway around the world?
It'll change - likely in ways none of us foresee - but unless someone can invent a battery with similar weight, energy density, and refuel times (or perhaps a fusion reactor that is the size/weight/cost of a comparable liquid fuel engine), the demand for liquid fuel engines isn't going to go way.

[Mechta]

tdracer wrote:
...But imagine the battery you'd need to drive a huge ship across the Pacific,....Not an ideal example, given that large vessels were crossing the oceans long before engines and electric motors. Wind turbines or water turbines can generate power, and with modern wingsails, they don't need crews to reef canvas either.

http://www.greenport.com/__data/assets/image/0026/73682/page-38.jpg

MV Ashington with an experimental Walker Wingsail.

[riff_raff]

Over the past few decades, the US military has put much effort into developing combustion engines capable of "multi-fuel" operation for land vehicles. The reason being that they could use any locally available fuel supply such as gasoline, diesel, alcohol, etc. Never figured out a truly practical "multi-fuel" engine design, but all their recip engines now use a standard JP-8 heavy fuel.

One significant issue with military fuel logistics is the cost/gallon to transport it. The cost for transporting JP-8 fuel to Afghanistan is something like $400/gallon.

[Pontius Navigator]

I see HMG is fully committed alternative energies so expect the MOD to be pushed in that direction regardless of operational necessities.

I suppose solar powered UAV are a possibility as that technology was proven in the round the world flight that concluded last year. Take the man out of the equation and you gain a couple hundred pounds for payload.

[gr4techie]

Electric vehicles? No chance... not when we are still dependent on constantly running diesel powered electrical generators and lighting rigs. Daily. On MOB flight lines.

The MOD is still nowhere near providing the basics, nevermind EV's.

[Pontius Navigator]

gr4techie, I was really thinking of the Government going down one path with fossil fuel provision withering on the branch. Where the Services, particularly the RAF, were at the bleeding edge of technology with English Electric, Bristol, Saunder Roe, Supermarine, Avro etc, now we are leaders in historics - Red Arrows, BBMF, Tornado etc.

Of course when it came to MT things were very different - Standard Vanguard, Minis, Montego, Vauxhall

It was really would the Military be left a legacy users of fossil fuels or how could they cope. Certainly, on a main base, at a stroke, the whole lot could be switched to electric vehicles. Could power sets also be reverted to trolley ac style?

[gr4techie]

Pontious Navigator,

Apparently certain sqns electricity supply/wiring would not cope with the extra load of running aircraft of the mains rather than diesel powersets.

I'm all for renewable energy, but I don't think I've ever seen one solar panel on a raf building for the domestic supply?

[Pontius Navigator]

Gr4, just think of all that empty space, could turn airfields in solar farms. Great camouflage too wheat with farmers farming solar.

[gr4techie]

I was thinking of all the space on hangar roofs and barrack blocks that could be used for solar.
So the MOD wouldn't have to moan about "energy saving".

My earlier post about inadequate infrastructure on flightlines that run off diesel generators rather than a mains supply, is a typical example of thinking about short term costs rather than long term savings. I've always wondered how much does it cost to run diesel generators every day for x years because they don't want to modernize the infrastructure?

Another example is using bowser trucks to drive the avtur to aircraft rather than using underground pipes for refueling

[IcePaq]

Since most vehicles have chargers specifically for the vehicle.

I would think that losing one to the enemy would render it useless in a short period of time unlike a hummer they simply fill with diesel.

[gr4techie]

Since most vehicles have chargers specifically for the vehicle.

I would think that losing one to the enemy would render it useless in a short period of time unlike a hummer they simply fill with diesel.

I think the M1 Abrahams is multi fuel. They can refill the tank (pun?) with anything they come across.
Having read about the Battle of the Bulge, the Germans knew they didn't have enough fuel for their offensive to succeed and depended on capturing Allied stock along the way.

Is there any truth to the rumour that Soviet Cold War aircraft being built with two styles of fuel connectors...their own style and also the NATO refueling connector. For when they capture NATO airfields in Germany, they could have used our bowsers?

[Pontius Navigator]

Gr4, hydrant refuelling has had a dismal history in the RAF. All V-bomber bases were so equipped but there were problems. One I heard was contamination, they might have been left empty too long or there was a pressure problem.
Brize had a fuel pipe network but when the USAF pulled out it was abandoned only to become a massive environmental problem years later.

The other problem in the cold war was lack of resilliance and flexibility. Disrupt the network and without bowsers you were fooked. I don't know about HAS sites.

[riff_raff]

The US Navy would love some viable method to produce a supply of turbine engine fuel using the excess electrical power available on their nuclear powered aircraft carriers.

[Pontius Navigator]

Rr, better AvGas

[Haraka]

Is there any truth to the rumour that Soviet Cold War aircraft being built with two styles of fuel connectors...their own style and also the NATO refueling connector. For when they capture NATO airfields in Germany, they could have used our bowsers?

I would not be surprised. IIRC ,apparently some mysterious small ventral "aerials" on a few types in the 70's were later identified as matching NATO standard electrical GSE connectors.

[4mastacker]

Gr4, hydrant refuelling has had a dismal history in the RAF. All V-bomber bases were so equipped but there were problems. One I heard was contamination, they might have been left empty too long or there was a pressure problem.
Brize had a fuel pipe network but when the USAF pulled out it was abandoned only to become a massive environmental problem years later...............

Not quite PN. The Brize hydrant system was in use when I was first posted to there in the early 70's and was still in use in the 90's. As far as I know, it's still going. It became an environmental problem when PSA/DOE (remember them?) failed to put a blanking plate on the end of a pipeline spur near the Brit Line "Frying pan" and put fuel through the pipeline to test the pressure. Likewise, Fairford had a "bit of a spill" when a pipeline coupling failed in 1974 - another PSA/DOE triumph.

[Pontius Navigator]

4m, thanks. My daughter mentioned that spill, said they didn't know the layout of the network.

[4mastacker]

PN,

Check your PMs.

4ma