On the actual power generation side, electric might have an advantage. But the range and recharging story is just too awkward to make sense. I'm not saying never: if battery power density jumped up 10x, they might be able to make it work. Just not right now.

1. Armored vehicles can have enormous gas tanks. The Abrams has a 500 gallon gas tank. If needed, it's pretty easy to double the size of the tank by strapping 10 5-gallon gas cans to the size of the vehicle. I just don't see how current battery technology could hope to compete with that.

2. The vehicle that refuels front line troops is the HEMTT. It carries 2500 gallons of petroleum and can fuel 2 vehicles at a time, maybe 5-10 times faster than a gas station.

That means that these vehicles can drive up to the front lines, fuel up vehicles and leave quickly so that they're less of a target and the front line vehicles can get back to doing what they need to do quickly.

In your generator scenario, you still need the fuel trucks, but there's an additional truck that has to sit there, charging vehicles for a long time.

I just don't see it working.

I want to be up front - I'm far from privy to the military's decision making, which is byzantine and absurdist on a good day.

However, I think I can pretty safely say that the issue is not whether the military assumes that the grid will be off, but rather they don't assume that the grid will be on.

I think the closest they might get is a plug-in hybrid. However, that adds quite a bit of weight and complexity to a vehicle. I honestly don't know one way or the other how well that would work for armored vehicles, which are typically quite a bit heavier than you're probably used to thinking.

For example: homemade armor is typically 1/4" hardened steel plate welded to the outside of vehicles (thin skinned trucks, etc.) - about 2x the thickness of the Cybertruck's body. I'd assume that most purpose built armor kits are even heavier than that.