Committee on Powering the U.S. Army of the Future
Board on Army Research and Development
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract W911NF-18-D-0002-0001 with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology (DASA(RT)). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-25803-6
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-25803-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26052
Limited copies of this report may be available through the Board on Army Research and Development, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001; (202) 334-3942.
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2021 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Powering the U.S. Army of the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26052.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON POWERING THE U.S. ARMY OF THE FUTURE
JOHN KOSZEWNIK, NAE,1 Achates Power, Inc., Co-Chair
JOHN LUGINSLAND, Confluent Sciences, LLC, Co-Chair
JOHN KASSAKIAN, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MICHAEL MacLACHLAN, National Intelligence University
PAUL ROEGE, Creative Erg, LLC
DEBRA ROLISON, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory
SUBHASH SINGHAL, NAE, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
JOHN SZYMANSKI, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Staff
STEVEN DARBES, Program Officer, Study Director
WILLIAM “BRUNO” MILLONIG, Director, Board on Army Research and Development
CAMERON MALCOM, Research Associate
SARAH JUCKETT, Program Officer
CLEMENT MULOCK, Program Assistant
LINDA WALKER, Program Coordinator
AANIKA SENN, Program Coordinator
CHRIS JONES, Senior Finance Business Partner
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
BOARD ON ARMY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
KATHARINA McFARLAND, U.S. Army (retired), Chair
MICHAEL BEAR, BAE Systems, Vice Chair
ANDREW ALLEYNE, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
DAVID AUCSMITH, University of Washington
JAMES BAGIAN, NAE1/NAM,2 University of Michigan
JOAN BIENVENUE, University of Virginia
LYNN DUGLE, Independent Consultant
JOHN FARR, United States Military Academy at West Point
GEORGE “RUSTY” GRAY III, NAE, Los Alamos National Laboratory
WILLIAM HIX, U.S. Army (retired)
DUNCAN McGILL, Mercyhurst University
CHRISTINA MURATA, Deloitte
ALBERT SCIARRETTA, CNS Technologies, Inc.
GEOFFREY THOME, SAIC
JAMES THOMSEN, Seaborne Defense, LLC
JOSEP TORRELLAS, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Staff
WILLIAM “BRUNO” MILLONIG, Director
STEVEN DARBES, Program Officer
SARAH JUCKETT, Program Officer
TINA LATIMER, Program Coordinator
LINDA WALKER, Program Coordinator
CAMERON MALCOM, Research Associate
CLEMENT MULOCK, Program Assistant
CHRIS JONES, Senior Finance Business Partner
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Medicine.
Preface
I consider it an honor and a privilege to have served as a member on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine committee studying how to best “Power the U.S. Army of the Future.” Our warfighters who put their lives on the line for our country certainly deserve the very best capabilities that rapidly advancing technology in a number of areas can provide. This is particularly important as we move toward the Department of Defense’s vision of a multi-domain scenario, where the best land, air, space, and sea resources are brought together in a coordinated, strategic fashion against any adversary for competitive advantage.
The number one objective, consistent with Army Operational Energy doctrine developed 10 years ago, is to use energy in a manner that provides the greatest net operational advantage on the battlefield. This entails not just energy logistics, but encompasses a more complete information-driven understanding of how energy can best be used to win against near-peer and other adversaries.
Supporting this overall objective, there are a number of other important considerations that the committee had in providing its recommendations. These include the following:
- Supplying whatever energy is needed to whomever needs it wherever and whenever they need it. Just as one would never want a soldier to run out of ammunition, food, or water, having adequate power and energy saves warfighter lives and is essential to their success;
- Recognizing the need to meet growing power demands;
- Supporting enhanced battlefield situational awareness for all our warfighters based on improved communications, information processing, and artificial intelligence;
- Reducing fuel transport needs to save lives during resupply;
- Reducing the weight that the dismounted soldier has to carry;
- Reduce the weight of all types of vehicles (i.e., ground and flight assets both manned and unmanned);
- Increasing the Army Brigade’s self-sustainment capability from 3 to 7 days;
- Providing rapid mobility across a variety of terrain for dismounted soldiers, vehicles, and forward operating bases. This includes rapid setup and breakdown times for forward operating bases;
- Maintaining or reducing the time required to refuel, recharge, or provide new sources of power;
- Possessing a capability to utilize a wider range of globally available resources (i.e., fuel resources utilized by allies and adversaries);
- Maintaining a capability to disable or lock out energy resources that fall into hostile hands particularly those with proprietary technology; and
- Employing environmentally friendly technologies wherever practical without compromising military objectives.
Figure P.1 tells an interesting story. Since World War II, the Army is using approximately 20 times more energy per soldier, while reducing the number of soldiers by a roughly equivalent amount. This direction will likely continue in the future and highlights the importance of energy supply and management.
Although the total power demands for an Army Brigade are massive, the solutions the committee investigated and endorses require both a “macro” and “micro” look, due to the significant differences (several orders of magnitude) in power requirements for different use categories, including the following:
- Milliwatts for distributed remote sensors;
- Watts for small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and soldier equipment;
- Kilowatts for emerging directed-energy weapons, such as lasers; and
- Megawatts and more for ground combat vehicles, emerging FVL (Future Vertical Lift) helicopters/VTOL (vertical take-off and landing) aircraft, and forward operating bases.
Using a metaphor, there’s a “raging river” of power being supplied to U.S. Armed Forces expeditionary and defensive forces. Tapping into that river to take a drink presents some interesting challenges. History has shown that power demands increase over time—a trend expected to continue or accelerate with the ever-increasing pace of technology, including new weapon systems now under development, such as electromagnetic pulse technology, lasers, and rail guns and new communications, artificial intelligence, and data processing systems, such as 5G. Therefore, providing the needed power and energy to our troops using the best available technologies will remain an essential responsibility to ensure the overall security of our nation.
John Koszewnik, Co-Chair
Committee on Powering the U.S. Army of the Future
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John Stenbit, NAE, TRW, Inc. (retired). He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Contents
1 THE MULTI-DOMAIN OPERATIONS AND THE 2035 OPERATIONAL AND TECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENT
2 THE POWER AND ENERGY TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
3 ENERGY SOURCES, CONVERSION DEVICES, AND STORAGE
4 SYSTEM-WIDE COMMUNICATION ISSUES IN SUPPORT OF MULTI-DOMAIN OPERATIONS
5 DISMOUNTED SOLDIER POWER AND LIGHT UAVs AND UGVs
8 FUEL CONVERSION EFFICIENCY AND OTHER MATERIAL DRIVEN OPPORTUNITIES
9 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
D List of Data-Gathering Sessions
E Abstracts of Selected White Papers
F Data-Gathering Session Agenda
I Soldier Silent Power Challenges
J High Performance ICE Engines Roadmap
