Slashdot Mirror
US Army Unveils Hybrid-Electric Propulsion System
Gary writes to mention that the U.S. Army recently unveiled a new hybrid-electric propulsion system for use in a new line of manned ground vehicles (MGVs). The new line will have eight different variants, all using the same chassis. The unique feature of the new MGVs is that the traditional engine has been decoupled from the drive train and is used only to recharge the battery and power other systems within the vehicle.
The lastest design for naval destroyers from both the USN and RN have also gone all-electric, and have decoupled all fuel-burning engines from the drive train. If it can work for destroyer, I guess it should work for relatively small ground vehicles.
Bleh... I need to go back to english class
Next thing you know we'll be seeing diesel-electrics in big trucks such as semis.
Then it'll trickle down to pickups and SUVs.
Small cars actually make the least amount of sense to try to make into a hybrid - you have a lot of static costs, making them proportionally more expensive(IE $3k for a $13k car vs $5k for a $30k SUV). Plus - you have the least to gain. Going from 30mpg to 40mpg saves you less fuel per mile than going from 15mpg to 25mpg. Over the course of 10k miles, you'd save 83 gallons of fuel for the car, vs 267 gallons for the SUV replacement.
Then again, we're also finding out that they can produce a four-door 40mpg car without making it a hybrid. The biggest difference I've seen in them is going from a 4 speed auto or 5 speed manual to systems with six gears. Extra gears equals extra expense, and probably extra weight, though the efficiency gains clearly beat it.
I don't read AC A human right
kinetic energy penatrators (anti tank guns) have to be made with very dense materials. before the use of DU, most KE shells used a tungsten alloy of somesort (lead was way too soft or something). DU had the advantage of being denser, as well as being self sharpening (the tip shears while traveling through armor, continously forming a new tip), as well as being extremly flamable under high temperature (once it penetrates, the interior of the tank goes up in flames). for 'normal' bullets, pretty much nothing can beat lead. you need something that's dense, easy to work with, and cheap.
Yeah, so? If you would have bothered to actually read the article rather than just looking at the pictures you would have discovered that they're developing eight new vehicles, not just the one in the illustration which may or may not be a vehicle that is part of the program. Currently the trend for IFVs operating in urban areas, like the Stryker, has been to use wheels rather than tracks. I don't know why you're bothering to comment when you don't even know this.
From what I heard nuke ships are a pain in the ass.
nuke plants are expensive, you need a LOT of training (the navy nuke program is essentially a bachelors degree w/o the English and basket weaving courses crammed into a two year school), the navy is perpetually strapped for the personnel and offer insane reenlistment bonuses for those that stay in (I've heard of $100k, but it might have been a rumor).
Also the plants are never really off, so being a nuke in the navy is an awful job in port. Reactor Officer is considered an even worse job than being the lowliest deck seaman.
Gas Turbines (I'm on a Gas Turbine DDG Navy ship, so I know a little more about them), are powerful, cheaper, and easy as hell to maintain. The Gas Turbine Techs on the ship barely even touch the things since they are warrantied by the manufacturer (just a little bit of preventative maintenance).
The great part about them is that they start up in a minute or two, put out a TON of power, and if they do happen to break it's a VERY simple job of having them replaced.
The only reason I can see for running a nuke ship is either a) the ship is so big gas would be $$$$ (you cant make it independent from gas since a carrier always needs fuel for the planes) or b) you want it to be independent from air (Submarine).
Just my $.02
Remember folks, slashdot doesn't have a -1 "disagree" moderation!
Defence electronics designers have licked the EMP problem a long time ago already. There are devices called tranzorbs that absorb transcient pulses. Tranzorbs are also common in consumer electronics to provide protection against EMP from lightning strikes. Also consider your common garden variety spike arrestor power bar.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
"Unless the Army has completely refitted it's tanks,"
It hasn't, and they remain as described in your post, though there is some discussion of modern diesel powerpacks for the Abrams that will use less fuel.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Don't forget extra power at low RPMs, which should mean quicker turning and starting.