Military Review

Ricardo's company showed off an economical car

30
Ricardo's company showed off an economical car



Two years of field tests showed that Ricardo Inc was able to create a fuel efficient technology Ground Fuel Demonstrator (FED) technology vehicle that consumes significantly less fuel than existing military vehicles.

The FED project was developed from scratch under the leadership of a team with Ricardo, which included representatives of the scientific advisory group to control the US Army vehicles and armored vehicles (TARDEC). The program aims to reduce US oil dependence through the development of fuel-saving innovative technologies.

The demonstrator was equipped with a Cummins I4 turbocharged engine, Goodyear tires with low rolling resistance and an aluminum chassis developed by Alcoa Defense.

The FED project is being tested at the US Army site in Aberdeen over the past 19 months.

The analysis showed that, compared to the American HMMWV M1151 military vehicles as standard, the FED provided the 72's percentage improvement in fuel efficiency. FED indicators were evaluated on a number of realistic duty cycles, including highways, off-road driving and idling.

In addition to improved fuel economy, field tests demonstrated significantly improved acceleration rates compared to current cars, even with loads of up to almost seven tons.

Chief Project Engineer Ricardo Wesley Sharmen (Wesley Scharmen) said: "We implemented a relatively conservative approach using available or near-affordable technology to achieve our fuel economy goals, and we proved that these goals are achievable. This approach has reduced costs and brought closer possibility of production of the final product ".

Carl Johnson (Carl Johnson), head of the TARDEC team at the FED project, added: "The team chose a common approach to improving the fuel efficiency of the car. And they did it using proven technologies. When the government and industry work together, the results can be significant. 72's a percentage increase in fuel economy gives us a significant competitive advantage in this area. "

Since fuel is the second most delivered cargo for ground forces (water first), FED is important for reducing fuel consumption in the deployment area, along with improving military vehicle technology itself.

Tom Apostolos, president of the American branch of Ricardo Inc, said: "The FED is an extremely valuable model for the further development of military vehicles. It creates the conditions for creating cost-effective, high-performance, fuel-efficient vehicles that will allow American troops to perform tasks in the best possible way. "
Originator:
http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/mil-log/ricardo-project-proves-vehicle-fuel-economy/
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mark1
    mark1 5 June 2013 08: 39 New
    +1
    The strange approach to the design of an army car, the significant role of low rolling resistance tires is doubtful, in combat conditions it will be necessary to drive mainly off the freeways, and the aluminum chassis is certainly cool, but perhaps a little expensive and not practical. Most likely this is a crossover for American army senior dudes and their colleagues in other armies.
    1. Professor
      5 June 2013 08: 47 New
      +2
      Quote: mark1
      Yes, and the aluminum chassis is certainly cool, but perhaps a little expensive and not practical.

      What is not practical? You can’t make autogenous on your knee? Aluminum SUVs (HMMWV) are already raging battlefields ...
      1. mark1
        mark1 5 June 2013 08: 51 New
        +2
        Well, in Israel, it’s clear, you have from the battlefield to the nearest car service 150-200 meters (I’m exaggerating)
        1. Professor
          5 June 2013 08: 58 New
          +1
          Israel has nothing to do with it - the fuel truck is not far to go. The aluminum case is no less reliable than the steel one, and at the modern price for fuel and lubricants it will easily return the invested money. In addition, the car is lighter - higher patency, maneuverability, etc. hi

          PS
          In general, repair crews in the AOI are at an altitude, they will fix what is needed on the spot.
          1. mark1
            mark1 5 June 2013 09: 09 New
            +5
            Yes, no one speaks. that the aluminum chassis sucks, it's all progressive and correct, just a little expensive. If we assume that a car is a consumable in war (I’m talking about a "good" war), then the criterion of cost - effectiveness goes to the 1 plan
            1. zvereok
              zvereok 5 June 2013 10: 05 New
              0
              Quote: mark1
              Yes, no one speaks. that the aluminum chassis sucks, it's all progressive and correct, just a little expensive. If we assume that a car is a consumable in war (I’m talking about a "good" war), then the criterion of cost - effectiveness goes to the 1 plan


              And when did the Americans count money?
              1. Professor
                5 June 2013 10: 09 New
                +2
                Quote: zvereok
                And when did the Americans count money?

                Re-read the article once again, and that’s what they are doing — consider the money. Fuel economy more than pays for the aluminum case. hi
                1. mark1
                  mark1 5 June 2013 10: 25 New
                  0
                  I agree. But this is the so-called exploitation of peacetime. If you’re not going to fight with anyone. then it is preferable to focus on her.
                  1. Professor
                    5 June 2013 10: 53 New
                    +2
                    Not for the sake of argument, but in the name of truth. Aluminum cars were deployed in Afghanistan (as they say they shoot), and the supply of fuel and the 40th Army in the past and NATO now causes no small headaches. Therefore, a car consuming a quarter of the fuel will go to warheads with a bang.
                    1. mark1
                      mark1 5 June 2013 11: 21 New
                      0
                      Truth is your middle name. Fueling in Afghanistan is a headache. I am not against economical cars at all - just a real engineering solution is not that expensive and complicated, but that which is simple, practical, reliable and logically justified.
                2. zvereok
                  zvereok 5 June 2013 11: 39 New
                  +1
                  I can not argue with you. But the machine pays for itself in peacetime, and in war - you need to count, although most likely you are right.
              2. Lopatov
                Lopatov 5 June 2013 11: 06 New
                +1
                We have aluminum the entire range of BMD-BTRD and vehicles based on them, as well as BMP-3 and vehicles based on it.

                So I would be wary of such conclusions
                1. mark1
                  mark1 5 June 2013 11: 24 New
                  +1
                  In this case, everything is just logical, because light weight with strong weapons and less satisfactory protection must be combined
    2. QW4238
      QW4238 7 June 2013 00: 23 New
      0
      What about aluminum BMD?
  2. xetai9977
    xetai9977 5 June 2013 08: 42 New
    +2
    Military developments have always played a catalytic role in technology development. After a short period of time, they will get to the citizen. The right thing ... Unless of course the message is true.
    1. mark1
      mark1 5 June 2013 09: 13 New
      +1
      In this case, civilian technologies are more likely to be used in the military field.
  3. Metlik
    Metlik 5 June 2013 11: 01 New
    +3
    Aluminum is not used in the automotive industry for only one reason - such cars are too durable (Land Rovers in Africa last 50 years), and the manufacturer needs people to constantly buy new cars.
    And yet, due to aluminum, 70% savings can not be achieved, most likely it is a hybrid with a battery.
    1. mark1
      mark1 5 June 2013 11: 11 New
      0
      The Land Rover seems to have a steel frame - an aluminum body
      1. the47th
        the47th 5 June 2013 11: 22 New
        +3
        Landrover’s body was made aluminum for one reason - in England in 1947 there was not enough steel, but aluminum was. The subsequent models are a tribute to tradition.
    2. the47th
      the47th 5 June 2013 11: 27 New
      0
      Quote: Metlik
      Aluminum is not used in the automotive industry for only one reason - such cars are too durable (Land Rovers in Africa last 50 years), and the manufacturer needs people to constantly buy new cars.

      For example, the body of the Audi A8 is made of aluminum, like other similar cars of the WAG concern. "Frets", "Muscovites", 123 and Mercedes in Africa have been traveling since the beginning of production, so this is not an indicator.
      1. Metlik
        Metlik 5 June 2013 13: 03 New
        0
        Quote: the47th
        For example, the body of the Audi A8 is made of aluminum, like other similar cars of the WAG concern

        I read about Audi - I agree, I was wrong, the aluminum body is simply more expensive to manufacture. Hopefully with the new A2 project Volkswagen will succeed.
  4. USNik
    USNik 5 June 2013 11: 02 New
    0
    The analysis showed that compared to the U.S. military vehicles HMMWV M1151 as standard, the FED provided a 72 percent improvement in fuel economy.
    This is all fine, but for the sake of completeness, one could also voice the difference in the cost of Hammvi and Ricardo. And how quickly in the conditions of intense conflict the difference in cost will be beaten off? And yet, yes, you can’t boil aluminum on your knee, bullet holes will have to be chopped up by choppers ...
    1. Roll
      Roll 5 June 2013 12: 09 New
      +1
      wassat Why is aluminum so expensive? You all forget about recycling, and normal recycling returns 50 percent of the cost. Plus fuel economy, then this machine has an excellent escape system. Doors open towards and the soldier is protected by doors on both sides. As a unit of a synecentric war, a class car, the only thing I didn’t like was the small volume of the trunk, but it should be free to place a rocket launcher of the mestizo level-m and ordinary grenade launchers such as flies and anti-aircraft type Needles-s. Then this is a full-fledged combat unit.
      1. the47th
        the47th 5 June 2013 13: 30 New
        0
        Quote: Rolm
        Why is aluminum so expensive?

        It is expensive to make supporting structures from aluminum, because it has low mechanical strength, so it is mixed with other rare metals.
        1. Professor
          5 June 2013 14: 00 New
          0
          Quote: the47th
          It is expensive to make supporting structures from aluminum, because it has low mechanical strength, so it is mixed with other rare metals.

          You're not right. The tensile strength of the aluminum alloy of which Hammer is made is 300 MPa, the fatigue limit is 241 MPa. Now compare this to a structural flock. By the way, this is not the most durable aluminum alloy used for these purposes.
          1. the47th
            the47th 5 June 2013 17: 08 New
            +1
            Is Hammer a very cheap car ?! In addition, second-grade aluminum is no longer suitable for power elements.
            1. Professor
              5 June 2013 20: 08 New
              0
              Quote: the47th
              In addition, second-grade aluminum is no longer suitable for power elements.

              T6 is far from second-class aluminum, its fur. St. I have already shown you.
  5. Simple
    Simple 5 June 2013 13: 44 New
    0
    A few photos:

    US Army RDECOM

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdecom/page78/



    TARDEC:

    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=TARDEC



    Intercity Bus for Colonial Wars.
    1. Professor
      5 June 2013 14: 07 New
      +1
      Here is a selection of photos of another economical demonstrator. By the way, I already wrote an article about him.





  6. Simple
    Simple 5 June 2013 14: 22 New
    0
    Yes, I already glanced at the works of RDECOM-a.
    True, not all (17882 photos).
    Well done, what else can you say.

    By the way, I still can’t put more than one photo
    in one comment. How right?
  7. sergey261180
    sergey261180 5 June 2013 18: 27 New
    0
    The program aims to reduce US oil dependence
    I don’t understand, what are they tired of colonizing?
    1. salah
      salah 6 June 2013 01: 09 New
      0
      Money is running out, so they began to seriously look in the economy direction.