U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

By Jon Harper
GM Defense’s all-electric military concept vehicle

GM Defense photo

To combat climate change, boost U.S. industry and achieve operational advantages, the Defense Department has ambitious plans to transform its fleet of ground vehicles through the introduction of electric and hybrid-electric drive technologies. Automakers see major opportunities to help the military and win business.

Addressing what it calls the climate crisis is a top policy priority of the Biden administration.

“The department is committed to meeting the challenge by making significant changes in our use of energy and increasing our investments in clean energy technology,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks said in November during remarks at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan.

The Pentagon is developing a “sustainability plan,” part of which will be focused on developing a zero emissions non-tactical vehicle fleet.

“Currently the Department of Defense has about 170,000 non-tactical vehicles — the cars and trucks we use on our bases,” Hicks noted.

“That’s the largest fleet in the federal government, next to the U.S. Postal Service. Our success in transitioning this massive fleet to zero emissions, most of which will be electric, will depend on America’s auto industry and autoworkers right here in Detroit.”

General Motors has committed to investing $35 billion in advanced vehicle technologies, to include power and propulsion systems for electric vehicles, noted Steve DuMont, president of GM Defense. The parent company plans to have 30-plus EVs in its product offerings by 2035.

“All of that has relevance to what our defense customers are looking at,” he told National Defense. “If you look at the non-tactical vehicles that are used in a [military] base or installation environment, to me that’s just low hanging fruit.”

DuMont has been talking with the brass across the services to discuss the way ahead.

“When I met with [Deputy] Secretary Hicks, she made it really clear. I mean, her vision is let’s start with the things that are easiest to do. And I put [electrifying the non-tactical fleet] in that category,” he said. “There are opportunities to work with the DoD in that first area.”

There will be some challenges involved, he acknowledged.

“There is infrastructure that needs to be put on the bases, there’s a whole rollover of acquisition of these vehicles. But it truly is what we’re doing today on the commercial side” of the automotive business, DuMont said.

GM is looking at creating microgrids to facilitate the transformation.

Army Lt. Gen. Duane Gamble, deputy chief of staff, G-4, said electrification of non-tactical vehicles and their deployment on installations will help inform how the Defense Department leverages EV tech for other elements of the future force.

“Building trust in our soldiers, our civilians and our leaders in our non-tactical wheeled vehicle fleet and the infrastructure that goes along with that … will help us transition and fully understand not only the technology, but the challenges associated with incorporating it into our combat vehicles,” he told members of the House Armed Services subcommittee on readiness during a December hearing on operational energy.

The bipartisan infrastructure deal that Congress passed last year includes large investments in electric vehicles, batteries and the creation of a national network of charging stations, Hicks noted.

“On the non-tactical [vehicle] side, it’s going to be all about the money and whether or not the money is really there,” said Sharon Burke, a fellow in the New America think tank’s Future of War project, and former assistant secretary of defense for operational energy.

“It’s looking like … the administration and Congress together are setting up a situation where that’s going to be possible, where the investment is going to be there,” she said.

The Pentagon also wants to electrify its tactical vehicles — not just to combat climate change, but to achieve operational benefits as well, Hicks noted.

Gamble said the Army is at an “inflection point” for the tactical wheeled vehicle and combat vehicle fleets, largely because of technologies that have emerged from the commercial industry.

The initial push will be for hybrid-electric drive, or HED, because “full electrification for our complex weapon systems at the forward edge of the battlefield is a goal that we don’t believe that currently our technology will support,” Gamble said.

The main roadblock to full electrification is recharging in austere environments.

“How are you actually going to power these vehicles if you’re talking about a deployment far from home?” Burke asked. “You can’t run them off a grid if you’re on a battlefield, so … until you have an answer to that question, you’re not ready yet.”

Hybrid-electric architectures for tactical systems are expected to yield major operational benefits, officials and analysts say.
HED could reduce fuel consumption by as much as 35 percent, Gamble noted. Other advantages include: extended range and persistence; increased onboard power for capabilities such as directed-energy weapons, jammers and electrified armor; reduced maintenance costs and associated logistics footprint; silent watch and silent mobility; and reduced thermal and acoustic signature.

Marine Lt. Gen. Edward Banta, deputy commandant for installations and logistics, told lawmakers that the Marine Corps is also eyeing hybrid technologies for new platforms and as a possible retrofit on legacy fleets.

“There’s no reason not to look at that step right now,” Burke said of moving toward hybrid-electric platforms. It doesn’t add much additional cost compared with buying systems with internal combustion engines, and it provides performance gains, she added. “It’s a good thing.”

Jim Miller, BAE Systems’ director of business development for combat mission systems, said: “The time is now for hybrid-electric drive and … it’s one of those things we need to move fast on.”

BAE has been tapped by the Army Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office to integrate its HED tech into Bradley Fighting Vehicles for demonstrations.

The company has a long history of working on this type of technology, including for commercial buses, he noted.

“They’ve created this baseline of maturity that we’ve taken advantage of on the combat vehicle side and led us to this,” Miller said, adding that he’s “reasonably sure this is going to work out well.”

The contractor is wrapping up the integration work, and the first two vehicles are slated to be delivered to the military by June for testing, which will help inform the way ahead for the combat vehicle fleet.

In fiscal year 2022, the Army will also test hybrid-electric versions of Humvees and Joint Light Tactical Vehicles, according to Gamble.

Miller said the HED for the Bradley was designed to be a scalable system that could be installed in all the vehicles that are part of armored brigade combat teams except for the M1 tank and the M88 recovery vehicle. “We’re trying to make it as plug and play as we can.”

Retrofitting a variety of legacy platforms could soon be “in the realm of the possible,” he added, noting that the company recently held talks with the rapid capabilities office about potentially putting the system in the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle.

The contractor also plans to include HED in its offerings for new platforms including robotic combat vehicles and the Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle.

“We think that’s the wave of the future and where it’s going, and we’re building that way,” Miller said.

BAE has developed a robotic technology demonstrator with its own money that it has been showing off to military brass.

“We had all kinds of very positive feedback about moving in the right direction with hybrid-electric drive,” Miller said.

Gamble said the “hybridization” of tactical wheeled vehicle and combat vehicle fleets is achievable between now and the end of the decade.

The Army aims to acquire “full electric” complex weapon systems in the light and medium categories in the 2030-2035 timeframe. Service officials believe the technology required will be mature enough by then, Gamble told lawmakers. Heavy platforms would likely come later.

But DuMont believes all-electric tactical vehicles could be ready for warfighters much sooner than some are predicting.

“I see the hybrid as maybe a transitional stage that likely will be very short lived, in my opinion, because I think we’re going to be able to demonstrate the viability, the efficacy as well as the enhanced reliability … of having a single fuel source, a single power plant,” he said.

Solving the recharging challenge for battlefield systems with fuel cells or other technologies is “the last piece of the puzzle” and a major focus of GM Defense, he said.

When that happens, “I think the adoption of these vehicles is going to come very quickly, just because the operator is going to be so impressed with the performance of them,” he added.

GM has already proven it can create highly capable, fully electric tactical wheeled platforms, DuMont said.

The company built an all-electric military concept vehicle similar to the conventionally powered Infantry Squad Vehicle. Both systems are based on the Chevy Colorado ZR2, and the concept vehicle utilizes the same power plant as the Chevy Bolt.

“I’ve taken it out and demonstrated it with the Army. I’ve shown it to the Marine Corps. I’ve had Special Operations Command drive it,” DuMont said. There’s nothing the conventionally powered ISV can do that the concept vehicle can’t do, according to DuMont.

Additionally, GM’s Ultium technology, which is the foundation of the Silverado commercial EV truck that was announced in January, will be leveraged for GM Defense’s offering for the Army’s electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle, which the service plans to pursue as its first fully electric tactical vehicle built from the ground up, he noted. Prototyping is slated for 2022.

Gamble said the Army is “thinking big but starting small” when it comes to these types of systems.

However, DuMont said the eLRV project could have outsized implications for industry teams that are eyeing future opportunities to electrify the military’s fleets.

“It’s tough to recover from a negative first impression,” he said. “If we were to deliver an eLRV … and it didn’t meet the expectations of the operator, that would be pretty tough and we would have to do a lot of work to overcome it. So, I am putting additional focus on making sure we get eLRV right.”

To achieve its vision for electric and hybrid-electric platforms, the Pentagon needs to ensure that energy performance and electrification have “real value” attached to them when it develops strategy, concepts, doctrine and requirements, Burke said.

“Until the actual process by which the department decides what the future threat is and what they’re going to build for it, until that includes a value for energy as a capability and a performance gain, then this won’t be real,” she said. “It has to get into the business of how the department builds for the future in order for this to actually happen.”

She continued: “You need to see it incorporated in a program of record in an authentic way, not just a sort of boutique or showcase energy project.”

Topics: Land Forces

Comments (13)

Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

This is all about profiteering. USG spending money they beat out of us through their multiplex money laundering schemes in society (taxes, fees, fines, etc.), then turning around and laundering it through 'private-public partnerships' who's executives and investors all walk away with our riches. Nothing but fraud and theft hiding behind 'the law'. Disgusting. Damnable. Despicable.

cadman at 3:46 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

Adding to what I already said: Chi-M (China GM) designing the U.S. military vehicles that Americans build, which when the U.S. goes to war with China, they disable them based on their own blueprints. Obviously these vehicles weren't meant for foreign warfare, esp. considering the mega push into global governance. So guess who they'll be used against? Americans, that's who.

cadman at 3:49 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

They're NUTS! The POV EVs are not where they need to be. They blow up, catch fire, battery drains because of heat, EVs can't be in an enclosed environment, stills need Fossil fuels to build them & no real distance. What about charging stations? How are they used in the middle of a war? Cost to build? Costof maintenance? Batteries? Why do people turn in their EVs sooner? This is NOT ABOUT SAVJNG the ENVIRONMENT, it's about filling their pockets.

Donnie at 12:34 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

No, no they don't. The Admin purposes it but currently it's beyond stupid even with a fleet of deployable generators that, wait for it, run on fuel.

Innocuous Emailer at 2:34 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

Again the insistence of Biden’s group to make the 170,000 military vehicles battery powered is sign of them having no knowledge of power production we have. Assuming the opponent will give us a timeout. And continuing to eliminate power production but increase the need

Jerry Couchman at 12:19 AM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help


Jerry Couchman at 12:10 AM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

The army's next request: rifles that only point at the soldier's own feet.
Deploying combat vehicles that only go half as far and require ten times as long to fuel up is beyond stupid. This is why electric cars only appeal to a tiny fraction of consumers.
Also, electric vehicles on base seems like an ideal application. But the grid juicing up those vehicles will require huge diesel generators hidden somewhere on site, guaranteed.

Neviss at 7:09 AM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

Electric Vehicles are faster and quieter with over two times the power. So they'll be able to carry bigger weapons and larger payloads. Them being green vehicles is actually a smaller concern. Though having the enemy unable find your troop's locations with drones that can track exhaust with infrared cameras is a very good investment.

RepublicanslovePutan&HateAmerica at 3:03 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

With over 20 years of experience in EVs, I was skeptical at first of tactical EVs over concerns of logistical recharging in the field of operations, range of vehicle, and vulnerability to battery damage. I could not see the advantage EVs might offer - until I had the chance to involve in a 8-week engineering sprint with the Army Applications Laboratory. During that sprint I discovered there is great potential for logistical and tactical advantages that could be gained using EVs. My advice to the naysayers is to stop thinking "passenger cars" and allow the military to focus on how EVs might best accomplish the missions at hand. They are the experts in the military theater; Those of us in the field of EVs need to listen, learn, and respond with most prudent designs that can be tested in battle conditions. Time will tell - battery technology, which is the core of success in all things EV, is advancing beyond the vision of the casual observers and critics- who are, in most cases, fully lacking in knowledge of the technologies involved.

rich weiner at 7:36 AM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

Are we going to have to remove armor from our armored vehicles in order to run battery operated equipment? Another instance of morons running the show requiring technology that is not going to available for decades. Show and tell for a bunch of idiots under unrealistic conditions.

Robert Davis at 12:49 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

To download address the issue of needing to refuel on the battle field, for all electric vehicles, solar generators could be Made to be built into vehicles.

Skyabeth SaintCloud at 12:56 PM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

This will change the entire concept of a combat-zone charge operation. Other than that, there cannot be an advantage to be had if your "one power source" is vulnerable to the enemy.

Tony Bonymaroney at 5:33 AM
Re: U.S. Military Wants Its Vehicles to Go Electric — With Detroit’s Help

Electric vehicles suffer from battery fire and explosions and take a long time to charge. Unless the US Army has plug-and-play of swapping out battery packs REALLY fast for recharging, I doubt that electric vehicles will succeed much except for SOFs and scouting, not conventional units. The US Army might be thinking of Mr. Fusion for the DeLorean in the "Back to the Future" movie that can take anything as fuel---that is what the US Army needs, not heavy battery packs prone to battle damage that burst into explosive flames. Remember, diesel by itself isn't easy to ignite---the diesel vapors are, but foam core explosion-proof gas tanks can prevent explosions...not so with battery packs as crashed electric vehicles show.

The 4x4 GM Defense ISV is said to be unarmored, prone to ambushes, and too cramped. It's mission is to transport US Airborne troops away from the battlefield and that's better than on foot and on a few HMMWVs. Ambushes---that is just tactics that the US Army Airborne need to develop by "leapfrogging" and scouting ahead. But being too cramped and uncomfortable is a problem and that needs to be fixed if 60% of soldiers surveyed hate riding in the ISV. The seats need to be changed for shock-absorbing like on SOF boats---recall that the US Army is trying to cram nine soldiers onto one ISV! The German Wiesel 20mm is also cramped, but armored. So was the ISV the right choice?

The report also said that the ISV lacks firepower and can't "Shoot on the move." However, SOF FAVs also have this problem so again, that's not really the mission of the ISV per se and additional firepower such as the ISV Heavy Gun Carrier pictured here can help add much better firepower via a rooftop stabilized RWS turret gun.

Was the ISV the right choice? Surely it is better than moving out on foot and better than riding on the roof of HMMWVs. But if the US Army Airborne wanted better, than they should have gone with the German Wiesel 2 APC. The 105mm MPF Light Tank will be a welcome addition once it enters service with the Airborne to backup the ISVs.

Trisaw at 8:03 PM
Retype the CAPTCHA code from the image
Change the CAPTCHA codeSpeak the CAPTCHA code
Please enter the text displayed in the image.