LightShip AE.1 Turbo Edition — Measured Specifications

Ford F-150 PowerBoost towing the LightShip AE.1 with in-motion umbilical charging · what the instrumented program has measured, what it has modelled, and what the manufacturers publish · page revision 1.3, 6 September 2026 · disclosure at the foot of the page
Measured recorded on this rig, 1 Hz OBD telemetry, reduced from raw files Modelled derived from measurements through a stated assumption Published a manufacturer's figure, not verified here Flag a caveat that changes how a number should be read

Two instrumented campaigns stand behind this table: Campaign 1, July 2026, Prescott AZ → Broomfield CO → Oshkosh WI → Prescott, 3,719 miles in the original bed configuration; and Campaign 2, September 2026, Prescott ⇄ Thermal CA via the Salton Sea, in the current lower-topper configuration. Aerodynamic figures carry a configuration label because the bed change between campaigns altered the rig's shape. Every figure is one of three kinds, and the colour says which.

01

The rig

ItemValueBasis
Tow vehicle2025 F-150 PowerBoost3.5 L EcoBoost + 35 kW motor-generator, 10R80 MHT 10-speed, 4×4 SuperCrew 145″, 7.2 kW Pro Power Onboard, 30.6 gal tank
TrailerLightShip AE.18,200 lb · 77 kWh pack (gross) · 1.8 kW solar · TrekDrive drive axle · NACS umbilical to onboard charger
Usable trailer battery69.2 kWh (≈ 90 %)LightShip, stated on camera; the simulator carries a 10 % floor on this basis
Combined mass, as tested15,320 lb · 6,949 kgCAT scale plus verified payload, Campaign 1 load-out; Campaign 2 not re-weighed
Umbilical5.8 kW NACS, truck bed outlet → trailer noseProPower AC out, trailer onboard charger ≈ 92 % efficient (LightShip)
Towing configurationCanopy down · TrekDrive off unless statedCanopy up is a camp configuration only
InstrumentationOBDLink MX+ · 46 PIDs · 1 HzCampaign 1: 42 PIDs at 2 s. Fuel channel reconciles to the truck's own trip-fuel counter to 0.07–0.21 %
02

In-motion charging — V2V through the umbilical

The truck charges the trailer while towing. Three distinct states were observed; the rate never derated with heat.
ItemValueBasis
Delivery rate, bulk charge5.69 – 6.06 kW ACSeven independent legs, Campaign 1; 5.85 kW mean on Campaign 2
Connected, load-support state0.94 kWUmbilical connected, pack not taking bulk charge (0.938–0.951 kW across six legs). Attribution to house-load support is operator judgement, under test
Unplugged0.00 kW
Thermal derate of deliveryNone observedHeld 5.7–6.1 kW at every ambient through 104 °F (Campaign 1) and 93 °F (Campaign 2). Duty is governed by trailer battery-management setpoints and operator command, not by heat
Fuel to generate 5.8 kW at highway speed0.75 gal/hr (band 0.65 – 0.83)Commanded on/off step on flat I-10 at 62 mph, 2026-09-05; grade fitted, not assumed; 65 windows, R² 0.95. Same road, both charge states, truck traffic present in both
AC delivered per gallon7.0 – 9.0 kWh AC/galFrom the row above; matched-grade blocks 7.5
Program reference figure7.70 kWh AC/gal · 0.753 gal/hrCampaign 1 basis, seven legs; confirmed inside the Campaign 2 band
Crank-to-outlet efficiency≈ 61 – 69 %Crank side from the PCM torque model, which under-responds to load (see § 08); read as indicative
DC delivered to the trailer bus per gallon≈ 8.1 kWh DC/gal7.70 AC/gal less a ≈ 95 % DC/AC stage — one modelled step from a measurement
Charging share of trip fuel3.8 % (Campaign 1) · 5.9 % (Campaign 2 return)74.74 kWh AC over 3,719 mi; 9.69 kWh over 278 mi
Fuel-economy penalty while charging≈ 1 mpg at 62 – 65 mph0.75 gal/hr on a ~4.5 gal/hr baseline
Trailer state of charge gained, Thermal → Prescott74 % → 84 %Atlas readings at stops; charging Thermal → Blythe only, then unplugged for test gates
Measured

Turning the trailer charger on and off with the Atlas charge-limit slider — not the truck's Pro Power switch, which does not interrupt delivery in motion — produces a clean 4.9 kW step at the outlet. The fuel cost of that step is the best-supported number in the program: it comes from the fuel channel alone and never touches the truck's torque model.

03

Electrical loads on the truck's high-voltage bus

Everything below draws from the same battery the umbilical charges from, and ultimately the same crankshaft. Moving-time means, Campaign 2 return leg.
LoadValueBasis
DC/AC inverter (ProPower) input, bulk≈ 6.0 kW5.85 kW out at ≈ 0.98 measured inverter ratio
DC/DC converter (12 V system)0.62 kW mean · 3.17 kWh / 5.1 hrHV-side current × bus voltage
Air-conditioning compressor1.28 kW mean · 6.52 kWh / 5.1 hrHigh-voltage device on the HV bus; also serves battery cooling, so it cannot be fully switched off
Accessory total, no charging≈ 1.9 kWDC/DC + compressor; quiet engine-off baseline ≈ 0.8 kW is inside this
Truck HV battery, operating band≈ 40 – 62 % SOC (floor ≈ 28 %, ceiling ≈ 65 – 72 %)Multi-year observation; not a Ford-published envelope
Motor-generator regeneration, neutral coastNone — input side decoupledTorque path: open clutches in Neutral leave the motor no path to the wheels. Confirmed on a stop-and-go drive only; not yet confirmed on a high-speed coast
04

Trailer-side loads

ItemValueBasis
House load at camp, hot ambient, canopy up≈ 3 kWh/hrHVAC plus house; observed on Campaign 1 stops at 100 °F+
Overnight lived-in draw1 – 2+ kWh/hrHVAC alone, observed; arriving near full is the practical priority
House load in motion≈ 3 – 4 % of pack per legDrives charge-limit cycling on hot legs (10–73 min cycles), trailer BMS logic
TrekDrive assist consumption≈ 250 Wh/mi at zero hitch forceLightShip; consistent with the program's road-load bracket at 57–62 mph
TrekDrive assist capacityup to 30 kW assist / regenLightShip
Trailer regeneration with TrekDrive offNoneOperator confirmation; the trailer is a passive load when the drive axle is off
Solar1.8 kW peakLightShip
DC fast charging on delivered unitsNot enabledLightShip; no date given
05

Fuel economy

Speed curve — one road, one morning, both directions on identical ground, no charging, canopy down. Salton Sea eastern shore, 2026-09-03, air density 1.16 kg/m³ (hot day near sea level ≈ 1,800 ft standard).
Cruise speedmpggal/hrNote
50 mph18.62.737th/8th gear mismatch between directions; reads ≈ 2 % low
55 mph17.23.208th
60 mph15.63.908th
65 mph14.34.589th
70 mph12.55.6210th at ≈ 1,700 rpm; light headwind one way, cancelled by round trip
ItemValueBasis
Speed sensitivity55 → 65 mph costs 21 % in mpgFit gal/mi = 0.0258 + 4.68×10⁻⁵·ρ·v², R² 0.98; every 5 mph slower buys 8–10 %, no knee in mpg
Aerodynamic share of fuel at 62 mph62 % (range 55 – 67 %)The v² share of consumption, fitted on the fuel channel; the simulator's speed constant
Marginal price of time≈ 4 gal per hour saved, 50 – 65 mph · ≈ 10 gal/hr above 65The knee is in the trade-off, not in mpg: 65 → 70 costs 1.0 gal per 100 mi for 6 minutes
Same speed, different roadup to 9 % between adjacent two-lane stretchesAZ-71 15.4 vs US-60 14.1 at 64.6 mph, same days, same rig, round trips — pavement matters as much as 5 mph
Interstate with truck traffic, 62 mph≈ 17 mpg (grade- and charge-corrected)I-10, Thermal → Blythe. Includes drafting; not a clean-air figure
Two-lane, clean air, 65 mph14.7 mpg79 mi round trip, US-60 / AZ-71, air density 1.07 — the Salton fit at that density predicts 14.8
Altitude effect, same speed, flat road≈ +8 % mpg per 5,000 ftAero share × density; at 65 mph ≈ 13.9 sea level · 15.0 at 5,000 ft · 16.2 at 10,000 ft (standard atmosphere). Hills at altitude cost more than thin air saves
Campaign 1 overall14.38 mpg3,719 mi · 258.6 gal · 71.8 hr · original bed; includes mountains, plains, charging, TrekDrive tests
Campaign 1 pure-tow baseline15.3 – 15.4 mpg at ≈ 62 mph1,080 mi across Iowa–Wisconsin–Nebraska, original bed. Flag both legs ran 0.75–1.3 m/s tailwinds; flattered, unequally
Campaign 2 return, Thermal → Prescott13.0 mpg278 mi, +5,150 ft net climb incl. Yarnell Hill at 6 %, charging half the leg; level-ground equivalent ≈ 15 mpg (modelled)
Recommended cruise60 – 65 mph, 65 the ceilingJudgement from the curve: above 65 the fuel per minute saved jumps 60 %; trailer tires rated 65; California posts 55 for trailers
05A

Turbo Edition range — one tank, four ways to run the rig

Range is built from measured pieces through stated assumptions, so every figure here is modelled. Common basis: 30.6 gal tank run to empty (subtract ≈ 45 mi for a practical 10 % reserve), 62 mph on a flat road, no wind, sea-level density, the measured speed curve (14.8 mpg, 4.19 gal/hr), summer daytime with the trailer's solar averaging 1.0 kW over the driving day (1.8 kW peak, LightShip). TrekDrive at its LightShip-stated 250 Wh/mi to zero hitch force, cutting truck fuel by the measured 27.8 %; the trailer's 69.2 kWh usable spent to its floor. Charging and TrekDrive are mutually exclusive by interlock, so no case combines them.

Modelled range at 62 mph, sea level, flat, calm — with the arrival state of the trailer battery, which is the other half of every one of these numbers.
CaseRangeTruck economyTrailer battery on arrival · how the miles were made
Without in-motion charging
umbilical unplugged, TrekDrive off
≈ 450 mi14.8 mpgWhatever it left with, less house load. The reference case: 30.6 gal at the measured curve
With in-motion charging
5.8 kW the whole way
≈ 385 mi12.6 mpg+33 kWh into the trailer (≈ 48 % of usable) over 6.2 hr at the measured 0.75 gal/hr. The 65-mile range cost buys a trailer that arrives half-charged from empty. Charging only runs while the trailer wants it, so a trailer that starts full pays none of this
TrekDrive active, whole trailer battery
+ solar, no house load
≈ 535 mi20.5 mpg assisted · 14.8 afterTrailer arrives at its floor. 69.2 kWh + 6 kWh of solar carry ≈ 296 assisted miles on 14.4 gal; the remaining 16.2 gal run unassisted. The 85 extra miles cost the entire camping reserve
TrekDrive active + summer HVAC
+ solar, house load 2 kWh/hr in motion
≈ 525 mi20.5 mpg assisted · 14.8 afterTrailer arrives at its floor, ≈ 36 mi sooner. HVAC takes ≈ 32 Wh/mi that would have been assist; ≈ 260 assisted miles. Band for 1.5–3 kWh/hr house load: 520–530 mi — HVAC barely moves the truck's range, it moves how long the assist lasts
The same four cases at other conditions — the ordering never changes, the level does.
ConditionNo chargingChargingTrekDriveTrekDrive + HVAC
62 mph, sea level (basis above)453384535525
65 mph, sea level427368509499
62 mph, 5,000 ft478402561551
Modelled

What is measured in these numbers: the speed curve, the 0.75 gal/hr charging cost, the 27.8 % assist fuel reduction, the tank. What is assumed: flat road and calm air (every real trip is worse — the Campaign 2 return with a 5,150 ft net climb ran 13.0 mpg against 14.8 here); the 250 Wh/mi assist rate (LightShip's figure, consistent with the program's road-load bracket); a 1.0 kW solar average (summer daytime, canopy down, clean panels); 2 kWh/hr summer house load in motion (observed 3 kWh/hr at camp with the canopy up; canopy down in motion runs lower). The 27.8 % was measured at 55 mph on the Broomfield loops and is applied at 62 unchanged. For reconciliation: the Broomfield pair read 23.3 mpg assisted against 13.15 with the charger on — a no-charging baseline of ≈ 16.9 at 55 mph and 5,400 ft; the same 27.8 % on the 62 mph sea-level baseline of 14.8 gives the 20.5 used here, and ≈ 24 at Broomfield's own speed and altitude.

Flag

The TrekDrive ranges are the rig's maximum reach, not its way to travel: they spend the trailer's whole usable battery on the road and arrive with nothing for camp. The program's own measured energy balance says that with the truck as the only charging source, assist costs more fuel to recharge than it saves — it is worth running to reach a destination charger, or when arriving with a full trailer does not matter. Charging in motion is the opposite trade: 65 miles of range for a trailer that arrives half-full.

06

Aerodynamics and road load

Current configuration — lower topper, canopy down. No figure exists for the original bed and none can be constructed.
ItemValueBasis
Combined drag coefficient, truck + trailerCd 0.46 on a 5.41 m² silhouette → Cd·A ≈ 2.5 m²LightShip CFD, stated by the founder; the reference area is the union outline of both vehicles from the front. Adopted for the simulator's published aero statements
Program's own drag-area bracket2.35 – 3.0 m²Salton speed ladder 2.34 (unratified — see § 08), geometry-calibrated 2.8, corrected road load with physical tires 2.5. LightShip's figure sits inside it
Rolling resistance coefficient≈ 0.0075Physical prior for LT truck and trailer tires; the ladder's fitted 0.0048 is too low to be real and is not used
Total road load at 62 mph≈ 1,620 N · 44.9 kW (≈ 60 hp)Aero ≈ 1,110 N + rolling ≈ 510 N at ρ 1.16, × 27.7 m/s. Within 2 % of the closure-calibrated torque-chain total (≈ 1,650 N: the Salton ladder's 1,370 N rescaled by the closure-gate slope ≈ 0.83). The lumped coefficient in the next row corresponds to ≈ 1,340 – 1,370 N · 37 – 38 kW — 15–17 % below this figure, which is the same ≈ 0.8 scale the closure gates found in the torque channel (§ 09), not a disagreement between two independent measurements. Fuel-side check: 4.19 gal/hr at 62 mph is 141 kW of fuel, so 44.9 kW at the wheel implies ≈ 0.36 brake thermal efficiency at η 0.92 with ≈ 2 kW of accessory load — inside the 0.36–0.42 the closure gates imply, above the 0.30–0.31 the torque channel reports. Rev 1.2 printed 15.1 kW here, which is the trailer-share magnitude two rows down
Lumped road-load coefficient at 62 mph0.0197 – 0.0201 × m·gTwo independent chains (fuel, Campaign 1; torque, Campaign 2) agree to 2 % — the best-determined aero-adjacent number the program has
Trailer's share of road load at 62 mph≈ 505 – 595 N · 14 – 16.5 kWPartition by subtraction of an unmeasured truck-alone figure; consistent with LightShip's 250 Wh/mi
07

TrekDrive assist — fuel and energy balance

Back-to-back loops, Broomfield CO, July 2026. TrekDrive and umbilical charging are mutually exclusive, so every comparison must remove the charging term first.
ItemValueBasis
Mechanical load transferred to the trailer axle27.8 %Fuel-rate difference after removing the ProPower term at 7.70 kWh/gal. The pre-trip model's 60 % (4.28 → 1.73 gal/hr) is not reproduced
Gross fuel saved on the test pair0.568 gal
Trailer battery spent, modelled cost bases8.61 / 11.40 / 13.07 kWhThree battery-cost bases; net fuel is negative under all three when the truck is the only charging source
Net with destination charging availablePositiveValuing trailer kWh at the ProPower recharge chain is only right when the truck is the sole source; the case for assist is battery-neutral operation, not raw fuel saving
Thermal benefit to the transmission≈ 2 °F — not materialMeasured within-leg; 46 °F of margin remained. Dropped from the assist case
08

Thermal — engine and transmission under tow

Worst cases across both campaigns. The published transmission over-temperature threshold (Ford DTC P1783) is 275 °F sustained more than 5 s.
ItemValueBasis
Transmission fluid, Campaign 1 peak228.9 °F65.5 hr towing; median 205 °F; 79 min above 220; 0 s above 230 — 46 °F below P1783
Transmission fluid, Campaign 2 return peak220.9 °FYarnell Hill and the Prescott climb; 2.9 min above 220
Engine coolant, peaks241.2 °F (C1) · 230.3 °F (C2)C1 worst case was at 7,500–8,200 ft in 79 °F air — thin air, not hot air. Thermostat fully open at 217 °F; no numeric coolant limit is published
Charge-air temperature, moving197.6 °F (C1) · 143.6 °F (C2)Against a 140 °F throttle-closure threshold; C1 peak on the same high-altitude climb
Fuel enrichment under loadOne episode, Campaign 1; none, Campaign 2Screen: rich mixture and load > 60 % and charge air > 140 °F, sustained. The hot-weather penalty is electrical (cooling loads), not enrichment
Charging's effect on transmission temperature+1.9 °F equilibriumWithin-leg; not a durability concern
Operator practiceCharging reduced above ≈ low-90s °F ambient on gradesEngine-protection judgement supported by coolant data; the transmission was never the constraint
09

What the program cannot yet claim

Flag

Drag area is a bracket, not a number. The truck's OBD engine-torque channel — the only truck-side force measurement — responds to load changes at about 80 % of truth in the cruise regime (closure tests on known grades, September 2026; the same weakness is documented across production engines by SwRI for CARB). Every drag figure built on it carries ±10 %. The published LightShip coefficient is used instead, and it sits inside the program's own bracket. A neutral coastdown, or LightShip's hitch-force channel, would resolve it.

Flag

Charging behaviour in extreme heat is uncharacterised. One receptacle thermal dropout in Campaign 1 (Cortez → Durango). No output derate was ever observed, but the operator reduces charging above the low 90s on grades to protect the engine, so the ceiling has not been probed.

Flag

Instantaneous TrekDrive draw is not observable from the truck. Trailer-side power is inferred from endpoint state-of-charge readings, not logged. The assist crossover point remains modelled.

Modelled

Every amber figure on this page is one or more assumptions away from a measurement and is labelled with the assumption. The Camping Reserve Simulator uses the measured speed curve and the LightShip drag coefficient; nothing on this page is a manufacturer specification.

Disclosure. The author is an early LightShip AE.1 owner who conceived the Turbo Edition concept and has funded its independent development, including the instrumented testing described here. The Turbo Edition is a potential product in development — not announced, not released. LightShip Energy has stated an intent to pursue it, and this work is proof-of-concept testing that bears directly on that decision. The author holds no financial position in the Turbo Edition at the time of writing, and may acquire one if it proceeds: the interest disclosed here is in the outcome, not in an existing stake. This is an independent analysis of field-recorded data; Ford Motor Company, LightShip Energy and OBDLink did not participate in it or validate its results. Conclusions are experimental engineering estimates, not manufacturer-certified specifications.
Sources: Campaign 1 closed record (2026-07-24), Campaign 2 leg reductions (2026-09-02 / 09-05), Salton speed ladder (2026-09-03, fuel-side reduction 2026-09-05), torque-channel analysis (2026-09-05), LightShip founder interview (2026-09-05). Manufacturer figures: Ford (P1783 threshold, workshop manual 307-01B); LightShip Energy (pack, solar, TrekDrive, Cd, usable capacity). Air density from measured temperature and GPS altitude. Speeds are GPS-referenced. Round-trip figures cancel grade by geography and steady wind to first order; no figure on this page is wind-corrected, and wind exposure was below 2 m/s along-track on every quoted run.