IN Brief:
- Ford, GM Defense, and BC Customs will each produce three ISV-Heavy prototypes.
- The requirement combines payload and towing capacity with 60 kW of continuous exportable power.
- Electrical generation, cooling, software, vehicle control, and low volume production will shape the competition.
Ford, GM Defense, and BC Customs have been selected to manufacture prototypes for the US Army’s Infantry Squad Vehicle Heavy competition.
Each team is expected to deliver three vehicles for evaluation, with the first prototypes due by 30 March 2027. The requirement calls for a platform capable of carrying a 4,000 lb payload and towing 6,500 lb while retaining tactical mobility.
Drive by wire control and 60 kW of continuous direct current export power are also required. Those features move ISV-Heavy beyond a conventional transport vehicle and towards a mobile host for sensors, communications, electronic warfare, counter drone systems, and future high power equipment.
Automotive manufacturers bring extensive experience in engines, transmissions, chassis engineering, controls, supplier management, and repeatable assembly. Military production adds requirements around severe terrain, long storage, air transport, tactical electrical loads, electromagnetic compatibility, and decades of support.
The 60 kW output may prove more difficult to integrate than the headline payload. Electrical power must be generated, conditioned, distributed, protected, and controlled without undermining mobility, reliability, or vehicle range.
Alternators, generators, batteries, converters, cabling, connectors, contactors, and cooling equipment add mass and occupy space. Their installation must remain accessible for maintenance while avoiding vulnerable routing and electromagnetic interference with mission equipment.
Power quality will be as important as capacity. Sensors, radios, computers, and electronic effectors need stable voltage and protection against spikes, faults, abrupt changes in load, and interference from the vehicle itself.
A mission system may draw relatively little power while waiting, then create a sharp demand during transmission, tracking, or engagement. The vehicle must absorb those transitions without disturbing steering, braking, engine control, communications, or other essential functions.
Heat follows electrical output. Power electronics and mission equipment generate substantial thermal loads, while the engine and transmission already operate under demanding conditions.
A prototype may demonstrate 60 kW during a controlled event, but qualification will require sustained output in heat, dust, altitude, low speed movement, and stationary operation. Fans, pumps, radiators, and control software must maintain temperatures without creating excessive noise or fuel consumption.
Drive by wire provides a route towards remote operation, autonomy, and advanced driver assistance, yet it also places steering, braking, and propulsion under electronic control. Redundancy, cybersecurity, fault detection, and safe degraded operation become central to vehicle safety.
The three teams will balance commercial content against military adaptation. Existing automotive components can reduce cost and use mature supply chains, but parts designed for civilian duty cycles may not tolerate repeated shock, unusual fuels, long storage, tactical loads, or military maintenance.
Ford and GM can draw on large automotive engineering organisations and supplier networks. BC Customs brings specialist vehicle development experience and may be able to alter its design through shorter internal decision paths.
The contest will show whether industrial scale or engineering agility provides the stronger route to a relatively low volume military platform. Both approaches must eventually produce controlled drawings, repeatable processes, approved suppliers, and dependable support.
Comparable integration pressure is shaping the US Army’s autonomous launcher programme, where commercial vehicle technology has to accommodate military control, weapons, communications, and safety requirements. ISV-Heavy applies the same convergence to a crewed transport and power platform.
Prototype manufacture should reveal where commercial structures, suspension, driveline, and electrical equipment can be retained. Representative payloads may expose the need for stronger frames, revised axle ratings, larger cooling systems, or dedicated military connectors.
The Army will also need to control future growth. Vehicles designed to host several mission systems can accumulate armour, antennas, computers, weapon mounts, batteries, storage, and cooling until mobility and transportability decline.
Defined payload envelopes and electrical interfaces will help prevent individual users from creating incompatible configurations. The vehicle should accommodate growth without becoming an uncontrolled collection of equipment added after qualification.
Low volume production creates a further economic challenge. Automotive suppliers are accustomed to large orders and continuous output, whereas military programmes often buy small batches across several years.
Commercial components may also become obsolete within a few model cycles. The Army could operate ISV-Heavy for decades, so software access, technical data, substitution authority, and planned lifetime purchases should be considered before selection.
Nine prototypes will establish which designs can meet the initial requirement. Serial production will determine whether the winning team can reproduce that performance across a supported fleet without allowing electrical complexity, configuration growth, or low volume economics to erode availability.
