Category Archives: Energy

Pentagon JLTV Power

The Danger Room sounds unhappy with the management decision to focus on rapid production and deployment for the HumVee replacement, instead of cool new power-plants:

The new trucks, known as Joint Light Tactical Vehicles, are supposed to be tricked out with the latest in vehicle survivability and electronics. But when it comes to the propulsion system, Pentagon seems to have taken a more conservative approach. Rather than opting for a riskier, Prius-style hybrid, the Pentagon seems to be placing a premium on vehicles that could go into production relatively quickly.

This brings to mind an earlier report, which highlighted a “‘Byzantine’ acquisition system that pushes bureaucrats to protect their own programs and priorities, rather than seeking out the best available option”. What is the incentive to seek the best option, let alone who defines best? I still see a lot of “conservative” vehicles on the road, so why would people suddenly think differently, more logically if you will, when they become bureaucrats?

The real irony of all this is that a failure to deploy armor quickly is said to have precipitated IED use, which now in turn has generated a $166 billion purchase order for armored vehicles that can be deployed quickly. That kind of back-patting pocket-filling economic model has to be discouraging for anyone trying to respond in real-time to threats and actually save lives.

The question now really should be whether $166 billion could prevent or at least anticipate further evolution of IEDs (very likely not, since the design is moving in such a “conservative” fashion), or if the money could be better spent infiltrating human networks of bombers to generate support from Iraqis.

Afghanistan Strategy by Brzezinski

The article is called West Must Avoid Russia’s Mistakes in Afghanistan, and who better to explain how to do that than the man who led the armament and training of Afghan mujahedeen: Zbigniew Brzezinski.

His main point seems to be that the US will fail if it tries to impose its own vision of government, backed by military force, rather than allow political forces within the country emerge on their own. He also says that a major shakedown of the country to “root” out opponents will backfire. Perhaps most interesting, however, is his cost model for fighting drugs:

Simply trying to wipe out the poppies and deprive the farmers of income will not undercut the Taliban, it will strengthen them. The Europeans should pay the Afghan farmers as much as it takes to abandon drug crops. The Europeans should do that because most of these drugs go to Europe. The drug problem in Afghanistan is simultaneously a source of income for the Taliban and a serious threat to Europe. In this respect, the European responsibility for dealing with it is self-evident.

Makes sense, but good luck selling that one to the EU or even the US. Bombs are easy to explain. Who is going to be able to win broad support for a policy that pays foreign farmers to help with domestic security?

Speaking of money, the Danger Room reports that lots of it is being directed into technology companies started by ex-Pentagon executives to achieve…wait for it…nation-building:

The goal of the tech-heavy effort is not only to avoid a Hurricane Katrina repeat. It’s to get better at stabilizing failed states that could easily slip into radical hands. But first, the boys in uniform have to get over their traditional reluctance to cooperate with civilians.

Nation-building, perhaps by default, has become a core mission for the U.S. military.

Has become? Has been for a long time, albeit only small portions of the military. Russia failed at this on a much more costly scale and Brzezinski warns not to repeat their mistakes. Danger Room goes on to explain there might be a silver lining:

The project is called STAR-TIDES (Sustainable Technologies, Accelerated Research-Transportable Infrastructures for Development and Emergency Support). The acronym may be long, but the concept is simple: it is supposed to pull together cheap and effective solutions for humanitarian emergencies or post-war reconstruction.

I’ve been working on just such a plan for the past five years with an ex-military guy myself. My car was running on fuel from a STAR-TIDES-like energy plant for about six months. Wonder if there is a case now to be made for funding. In any case I think the answer here is to remove the military from the equation and get them out of the nation-building game entirely. Let them innovate for their own needs and then pass on the knowledge. No need for management by the brass or ex-brass, thank you. That’s more likely to succeed than trying to overcome the (arguably well-reasoned) American culture and laws that still separate the army from domestic affairs.

Smart Diesel Car

Nice to see the Smart car finally getting back to its roots. It was invented in Switzerland and meant to be a high-efficiency vehicle, but ten years later they are just beginning to incorporate the efficiency into models:

The diesel version has a fuel consumption of only 3.3 litres per 100 kilometres with a carbon dioxide emission figure of only 88 g/km.

After running a test with 100 electric-powered Smarts in London, the car maker also announced the mass production of Smart electric-drive for 2010.

Strange how the inventor wanted a hybrid so many years ago, but Daimler refused and marketed it as a compact vehicle only.

On its tenth birthday the Smart finally appears to fulfil the destiny marked out by its inventor Hayek. Daimler has just announced that from October 2008 all the petrol-engined 45 kW/61 hp and 52 kW/71 hp Smart fortwos would be fitted standard with micro hybrid drive (MHD) and fuel-saving start-stop systems.

It took ten years and Toyota executive leadership to make the obvious obvious to Daimler. Talk about conservative.

Stiletto: Ultra-light Wave-piercing Navy Ship

The story from the almost defunct Office of Force Transformation is that carbon fiber and wave-piercing tunnel hulls can achieve great efficiencies. This is very different from the old style of “shock and awe” city-sized mega-ships:

Stiletto is an 80 by 40 foot wave piercing hull built entirely of carbon fiber. It’s unique “M-Hull” shape (See figure 1) is designed to channel is the energy that normally is produced as wake in a conventional V-Hull craft up under the craft into tunnels created by the M-shaped hull form. […] Capable of speeds up to 50 knots, the craft passively lifts itself out of the water about a foot as it speeds along reducing drag.

So here you have a 60 ton, 88 foot long, 40 foot wide $6M ship launched in 2005. It is said to be in active duty fighting drug cartels. Awesome.

This is the A-Class of Navy warships. Sure they have short range, but nothing puts a smile on your face like efficiency on the water.

Here is the most interesting part:

The wave action and resulting rough ride of the V-Hull has, over the years, taken their toll on these SEALs such that nearly a third of them are medically discharged within just 10 years of service due to the pounding G-forces applied to their bodies.

Is that true? Soldiers can only make it 10 years if they ride on V-Hull boats?

The pounding and crashing from fast-speeds over waves seems quite different to me than G-force effects that drain blood, for example. I mean people already have isolated the issue of hull pounding and solved much of it with foils that lift, no?

In similar news the BOR90 continues to amaze everyone with its efficiency:

While sailing upwind in no more than 9 knots of breeze, they heeled the boat enough to sail on only the leeward float, making even speed with our media boat at roughly 26 knots.

Converting less than 10 knots of wind into 26 knots of speed on the water is cool. The top speed of this thing is expected to break 50 knots, which means (aside from rough weather) it could take on the Stilleto with none of the fuel issues. And it cost $60/lb to build, which is a mere $10/lb more than the Stilleto. Larry Ellison is definitely the type of guy to spend more than the Pentagon on a boat.

Just to re-iterate, the future of vessels clearly is in ultra-light wave-piercing multi-hulls. The V is as dated as the SUV…then again I do not see many people ready to convert to a more efficient model.

Might take a decade or so before we see widespread changes. Imagine Navy fleets of high-speed drone swarms launched from tubes instead of carriers with decks and associated destroyers, and two-seaters that snap together for high-speeds and communicate with one another to navigate.