Comparison of armored, unmanned combat vehicles (UGCVs) and their lightweight construction potentials

This technical report provides a comprehensive analysis of selected armored unmanned combat vehicles (UGCVs) with autonomous operational capability. The comparison includes key figures such as empty weight, payload, payload efficiency, drive architecture, speed and lightweight construction strategies. The aim is to understand the technological design and implications for holistic lightweighting principles, including structural, systemic and material-related lightweighting.

Technical comparison

The following table provides an overview of the main technical data of selected UGCVs:

VehicleEmpty weight (kg)Payload (kg)Payload/empty weightMax. Speed (km/h)
CS/VP16B Lynx120011000.92120
Mission Master SP7506000.8040
THeMIS163012000.7420
RCV-L400027220.6864.37
Titanium UGV9074540.5024
Warthog UGV5902720.4618
Ripsaw M51050036290.3572

Drive architecture and lightweight construction effect

The drive concepts of the UGCVs vary greatly and influence both the performance and the integration capability in the context of systemic lightweight construction. Hybrid drives such as in the RCV-L and THeMIS offer flexibility in design and enable modular system integration. Pure electric drives such as the Titan and Warthog UGV reduce mechanical complexity, but are limited in range. Conventional diesel systems such as the Mission Master SP and Ripsaw M5 deliver high performance at the expense of weight and efficiency.

Holistic lightweight construction principles

Structural lightweight construction

  • Application of topology optimization and FEM to reduce mass.
  • Use of monocoque and modular frames.

Systemic lightweight construction

  • Hybrid electric drives reduce mechanical components.
  • Modular sensor and control system reduces cable harnesses and weight.

Lightweight material

  • Use of high-strength aluminum alloys and composite materials.
  • Elastomer materials for mine protection with low additional weight.

Estimated lightweight construction optimization potential

The following table shows the estimated optimization potential in various lightweight construction areas:

Lightweight constructionEstimated potential (%)
Structural lightweight construction10-20%
Systemic lightweight construction15-25%
Lightweight material10-30%

Conclusion

The analysis shows that diesel-electric hybrid and electric vehicles are superior in terms of payload efficiency and system integration, while conventional diesel platforms dominate in terms of power output. In order to achieve a balance between protection, mobility and autonomy, all aspects of holistic lightweight design must be consistently applied in future UGCVs.

Literature sources

  • Ashby, M. F. (2010). *Materials and the Environment: Eco-informed Material Choice*.
  • Fiebig, W., et al. (2014). "Structural optimization in lightweight vehicle design." *International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management*.
  • Mollenhauer, K., & Tschöke, H. (2010). *Diesel engine handbook*.
  • Großmann, R. (2022). *Lightweight System Design - Principles and Applications in Mobility*. Springer Vieweg.
  • Davies, G. (2001). *Materials for Automobile Bodies*.
  • Callister, W. D., & Rethwisch, D. G. (2014). *Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction*.
en_USEnglish