Hybrid Electric Drive (HED) engine solutions are now mature enough to be integrated into the next-generation of armoured vehicle programmes, industry representatives proclaimed today.
Speaking to MT at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) conference in London, on 27 January, executives from RUAG, BAE Systems Hägglunds, Milspray, and Nexter explained their aspirations for the inclusion of HED technology in the future.
According to BAE Systems Hägglunds’ Per Samuelsson, deputy director of business development, HED will be both a “necessity and choice” for governments moving forward with future development of medium-sized armoured platforms. “Both within wider the BAE systems and Hägglunds companies, we are basically ready to do [HED] now, having developed this technology for the US Ground Combat Vehicle and Swedish SEP programmes. SEP was eventually cancelled but we stayed developing and maturing it and took it up in the commercial domain. Now we are ready to bring it back into the military platforms,” he said. “HED technology is not really new but we have seen a bit of wariness amongst defence forces to be the first to actually go down this path. But eventually, HED will be one of the only solutions to actually solve that capability requirement while maintaining a balanced combat vehicle.”
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Nexter described how the company had also experimented with HED, before admitting that existing customer bases remained unconvinced by the technology. “Countless programmes have been delayed and cancelled because the technology aspiration [for HED] is placed too high. Until there is a mainstream heavy commercial hybrid technology fielded that is robust, it will be some years yet until the customer takes the leap.”
Elsewhere, a spokesperson for Milspray warned that the proliferation of additional technology being integrated on board armoured vehicles, resulted in requirements for increased power generation and management systems to distribute it. “HED can make that happen and reduce sustainment and logistics tails but we have to convince governments and industry to go that way. However, Special Operations Forces (SOF) may be more likely to go to HED initially before it is rolled out into larger formations. But we need to find that pivot point to get it into the mainstream, but for the niche [SOF] market, i think we are pretty much there,” he said.
Finally, RUAG Defence CEO, Dr Markus Zoller, said future integration of HED on board armoured vehicles was based around power availability and distribution on the platform, explaining: “Demands will increase and it will take time and conviction before these solutions are available. I see a two-phased approach where trial processes will give it enough momentum to proceed to wider development.”
Attempting to define the future character of conflict, Samuelsson highlighted a growing rise in hybrid warfare although he was quick to confirm this would not represent the end of traditional or conventional warfare. “It does however present a complicating factor for defining planning and thus a challenge for the defence industry in order for us to remain relevant,” he explained while highlighting how future requirements would have to consider the environment and terrain of future conflict areas; required missions sets; character of hybrid, conventional and irregular threats and adversaries; and political and societal factors.
He also listed certain assumptions regarding future development and requirement of armoured vehicles, which he said would include survivability, higher demands on C4ISR, information management, supportability and incremental capability enhancements.
More specifically, Samuelsson said this could include requirements tailored around signature management; soft and hard kill defensive aids suites; power management systems; sensor fusion for increased situation awareness; flexibility and scalability.
“This keeps options open for the next generation of armoured vehicles with the flexibility of a common base platform concept reducing lifecycle costs and logistics footprints, obsolescence management, and an ability to build variants on a common chassis, not to mention economy of scale,” Samuelsson continued.
Finally, he outlined future requirements in electronic architecture with the integration of ECM, radios, computers, sensors, defensive aid suites, soldier systems and weapon systems all set to be increased in the future. “In hybrid wars, the adversary will exploit modern technology and present us with asymmetric modes of operations and unanticipated tactics. This will assume changes in our approach to operational art, command and control, leadership development, training and education as well as force structure,” he continued.
“To ensure the required breadth when responding to the corresponding demands for capabilities in the land domain, armoured vehicles would have to provide the requisite base platform flexibility while allowing for rapid insertion and fielding of new functionality and special to role capabilities,” Samuelsson concluded.
Speaking to MT at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) conference in London, on 27 January, executives from RUAG, BAE Systems Hägglunds, Milspray, and Nexter explained their aspirations for the inclusion of HED technology in the future.
According to BAE Systems Hägglunds’ Per Samuelsson, deputy director of business development, HED will be both a “necessity and choice” for governments moving forward with future development of medium-sized armoured platforms. “Both within wider the BAE systems and Hägglunds companies, we are basically ready to do [HED] now, having developed this technology for the US Ground Combat Vehicle and Swedish SEP programmes. SEP was eventually cancelled but we stayed developing and maturing it and took it up in the commercial domain. Now we are ready to bring it back into the military platforms,” he said. “HED technology is not really new but we have seen a bit of wariness amongst defence forces to be the first to actually go down this path. But eventually, HED will be one of the only solutions to actually solve that capability requirement while maintaining a balanced combat vehicle.”
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Nexter described how the company had also experimented with HED, before admitting that existing customer bases remained unconvinced by the technology. “Countless programmes have been delayed and cancelled because the technology aspiration [for HED] is placed too high. Until there is a mainstream heavy commercial hybrid technology fielded that is robust, it will be some years yet until the customer takes the leap.”
Elsewhere, a spokesperson for Milspray warned that the proliferation of additional technology being integrated on board armoured vehicles, resulted in requirements for increased power generation and management systems to distribute it. “HED can make that happen and reduce sustainment and logistics tails but we have to convince governments and industry to go that way. However, Special Operations Forces (SOF) may be more likely to go to HED initially before it is rolled out into larger formations. But we need to find that pivot point to get it into the mainstream, but for the niche [SOF] market, i think we are pretty much there,” he said.
Finally, RUAG Defence CEO, Dr Markus Zoller, said future integration of HED on board armoured vehicles was based around power availability and distribution on the platform, explaining: “Demands will increase and it will take time and conviction before these solutions are available. I see a two-phased approach where trial processes will give it enough momentum to proceed to wider development.”
Attempting to define the future character of conflict, Samuelsson highlighted a growing rise in hybrid warfare although he was quick to confirm this would not represent the end of traditional or conventional warfare. “It does however present a complicating factor for defining planning and thus a challenge for the defence industry in order for us to remain relevant,” he explained while highlighting how future requirements would have to consider the environment and terrain of future conflict areas; required missions sets; character of hybrid, conventional and irregular threats and adversaries; and political and societal factors.
He also listed certain assumptions regarding future development and requirement of armoured vehicles, which he said would include survivability, higher demands on C4ISR, information management, supportability and incremental capability enhancements.
More specifically, Samuelsson said this could include requirements tailored around signature management; soft and hard kill defensive aids suites; power management systems; sensor fusion for increased situation awareness; flexibility and scalability.
“This keeps options open for the next generation of armoured vehicles with the flexibility of a common base platform concept reducing lifecycle costs and logistics footprints, obsolescence management, and an ability to build variants on a common chassis, not to mention economy of scale,” Samuelsson continued.
Finally, he outlined future requirements in electronic architecture with the integration of ECM, radios, computers, sensors, defensive aid suites, soldier systems and weapon systems all set to be increased in the future. “In hybrid wars, the adversary will exploit modern technology and present us with asymmetric modes of operations and unanticipated tactics. This will assume changes in our approach to operational art, command and control, leadership development, training and education as well as force structure,” he continued.
“To ensure the required breadth when responding to the corresponding demands for capabilities in the land domain, armoured vehicles would have to provide the requisite base platform flexibility while allowing for rapid insertion and fielding of new functionality and special to role capabilities,” Samuelsson concluded.
Andrew White