(Live Updates) Florida 1/14 to 1/23 - Tampa show + real world use

[josephpRV]

@Rory (Lightship Team) … would appreciate a video walk-through of the production variant of the Lightship, in particular those things that changed from the pre-production version, e.g., the new pop-up table and anything else that changed.

 

[josephpRV]

@Rory (Lightship Team) … great post on Instagram. You had me worried! When I saw 1.44 mpKWH I almost panicked … until you mentioned that was with TrekDrive off … phew !

I’ve already bought into AE.1’s aero + TrekDrive delivering close to Tow Vehicle standard efficiency (I believe the website now says within 5% to 10% which I think is a very safe claim)
and having more and more reinforcement of that data via real world use cases, in cross winds no less, is immensely reassuring.

I suspect you guys are running a series of test scenarios against baseline efficiencies to satisfy a hungry audience. I’m also interested in understanding why you’re making some of those choices. E.g., driving with Trek Drive off … was that a test scenario or were you low on Tow Vehicle range and knew you’d pull into serviced camping, etc.

I’m hungry for the “what” which you guys are increasingly providing data upon, as well as the “why” to speed up my own learning curve come April.

Keep the content coming. Great stuff.

 

[Rory (Lightship Team)]

Hahah! Sounds great, and noted your earlier points of request. By the way, we’ve got the giant QR up for you guys!

 

[turbopilot]

I’m also interested in understanding why you’re making some of those choices. E.g., driving with Trek Drive off … was that a test scenario or were you low on Tow Vehicle range and knew you’d pull into serviced camping, etc.

Depending on the logistics and availability of parking at the next charger, it would seem to me sometimes it might more sense to take the range loss associated with operating "TrekDrive Off" rather than charge two vehicles at a location father down the road. It will be interesting to see how often an EV owner pulling a LightShip can successfully charge both the EV and the LightShip at the same time without going through the hassle of unhooking from the tow vehicle.

One nice addition to the Atlas tablet would be to have a map plotting those charging locations that offer pull through charging that would allow simultaneous charging of both the EV and LightShip.

 

[josephpRV]

I've taken the liberty of token-blitzing my AI tool of choice. After quite a few rounds I'm comfortable with the hypothesis below based on my R1T and the Lightship. As @Rory (Lightship Team) and the team travel around FL and back up to CO and CA, I'm going to enjoy watching their energy based decision making to update my model.

Lightship + R1T Battery Strategy - A Three Axis Model

When towing the Lightship, energy strategy isn’t just about efficiency, it’s about managing three key axes that determine your options mid-drive and at camp:

1. Energy liquidity, prioritize R1T over Lightship (mobility, escape, and ability to fetch energy)
2. Camp viability, prioritize CER* (Camp Establishment Reserve)
3. Charging friction, in-transit decoupling, stall geometry, stop count, and fatigue on long tow days

On short/moderate trips, axes 1 & 2 dominate, on long-haul trips (e.g., 500+ miles), axis 3 may temporarily override energy logic mid-route to reduce stops or hassle. Axes 1 & 2 always dominate when you reach camp.

*The CER is the minimum Lightship SOC required to establish and operate camp (unhitching, leveling, systems bring-up, HVAC, comms). CER is not a fixed number. In boondocking scenarios, it’s a function of daily energy usage, and expected daily solar refill. In practice, CER must float upwards if daily usage exceeds solar recovery.

Core Strategy Principles

1. Spend Lightship energy first, but never below the CER, and
2. Protect R1T energy unless downstream charging is guaranteed and abundant

Why This Works

• Axis 1: Energy that can go get energy is more valuable than energy that can’t.
• Axis 2: A powerless trailer isn’t a campsite, Lightship CER is sacrosanct.
• Axis 3: Charging friction affects mid-drive decisions on long days, but arrival priorities still govern..

The Three Real Scenarios

1. Abundant, concurrent charging at destination, i.e., multiple pedestals / EVSEs, no load constraints

Play: Bias to travel speed. Use TrekDrive aggressively. Spend Lightship energy freely (respecting CER).
Why: Energy is liquid, speed/time can safely dominate.

2. Limited charging at destination, i.e., one pedestal or shared power

Play: Use TrekDrive. Arrive with R1T SOC higher than Lightship SOC, while respecting CER.
Why: A charged truck keeps options open, a charged trailer doesn’t.

3. No charging at destination (boondocking)

Play: Use TrekDrive until Lightship approaches CER. Preserve CER and as much R1T SOC as possible.
Why: Lightship can slowly recharge via solar, the truck is irreplaceable.

One-Line Rule

Spend Lightship energy down to the CER (which floats with usage vs. solar) and protect the R1T unless charging is guaranteed and abundant.

 

[turbopilot]

*The CER is the minimum Lightship SOC required to establish and operate camp (unhitching, leveling, systems bring-up, HVAC, comms). CER is not a fixed number. In boondocking scenarios, it’s a function of daily energy usage, and expected daily solar refill. In practice, CER must float upwards if daily usage exceeds solar recovery.

Great start. Once we understand these variables I don't see why it could not be integrated into the Atlas tablet and let it run real time in route.

We are going to have to have a fair amount of experience to determine a typical CER. But I suspect the weather forecast may be the most important set of variable since HVAC is going to use most of the camping battery capacity. So high and low temperatures and cloud cover will have to be considered when defining the CER.

 

[josephpRV]

Great start. Once we understand these variables I don't see why it could not be integrated into the Atlas tablet and let it run real time in route.

We are going to have to have a fair amount of experience to determine a typical CER. But I suspect the weather forecast may be the most important set of variable since HVAC is going to use most of the camping battery capacity. So high and low temperatures and cloud cover will have to be considered when defining the CER.

Given the continuing accumulation of travel efficiency data (i.e., aero + TrekDrive deliver near to baseline tow vehicle efficiency) my mental model has now shifted to ‘camp dynamics’, and I think the CER, particularly in boondocking situations is going to be critical.

If i have time this week I’ll turn my mind to the math. It can’t be that hard, we have the solar capacity, can make estimations on capability in certain scenarios like time of year, and weather, and make some basic assumptions on daily power usage.

 

[turbopilot]

my mental model has now shifted to ‘camp dynamics’, and I think the CER, particularly in boondocking situations is going to be critical.

Before I forget the in motion variables for your mental model are just as important to consider for calculating CER. Air density is an important variable particularly out West with elevation changes. So altitude, temperature, wind and atmospheric pressure has to be considered in calculating CER. This is going to be tricky because these variables are always changing when in motion. It is important because these variables can impact efficiency +/- 15% before considering the wind direction and speed. These variables (except the wind) are captured in the drag equation but inefficiencies associated with elevation changes are not.

 

[Blackstone]

@josephpRV super helpful what you put together there. Thanks!

I’m not sure the feasibility of your Rivian, but for my Cybertruck, my bed outlets work while Supercharging (DC charging in general)

In an ideal world, I’ll be able to use pull thru chargers with the ability to DC charge both the truck and trailer without unhitching.

But I’m eager to test daisy chaining and charge the trailer with the 240volt outlet in my bed, while the truck supercharges

 

[turbopilot]

But I’m eager to test daisy chaining and charge the trailer with the 240volt outlet in my bed, while the truck supercharges

I have a 7.2 kW outlet in the bed of my F-150 PowerBoost. When I was back at the factory last April I hooked up the Powerboost generator using a Tesla Mobile Charger to the LightShip. I did not have much time to play with it, but without changing any settings I was able to move 6 kW to the Lightship via the NACS port bringing up the LightShip SOC by a couple of percent before we declared victory. I may have been able to get up to 7.2 kW but initially it only wanted to take 6.0 kW. So I am sure you can daisy chain while charging the CyberTruck.

This was the crew watching the test. That's Ben plugging in the NACS connector to the LightShip.

 

[josephpRV]

@josephpRV super helpful what you put together there. Thanks!

I’m not sure the feasibility of your Rivian, but for my Cybertruck, my bed outlets work while Supercharging (DC charging in general)

In an ideal world, I’ll be able to use pull thru chargers with the ability to DC charge both the truck and trailer without unhitching.

But I’m eager to test daisy chaining and charge the trailer with the 240volt outlet in my bed, while the truck supercharges

@Blackstone ... Cybertruck beats Rivian in this regard. The R1T only has 120 volt outlets in the bed. One of my biggest fears (on high mileage travel days) is decoupling the trailer if my only available option is an Electrify America at a Walmart. I'm thinking I'll become very versed, very quickly on where the pull-through DCFC's are and only use those.

Putting the Cybertruck into my test cases. I think my overall conclusions hold, but the Cybertruck does deliver some advantages because of the 240 volt capability in the bed. I'm not across the Cybertruck capability, but I'm assuming the 240 volt in the bed is akin to Level 2 charging, or in other words, what you'd reasonably expect from an EVSE at campsite. Crucially, it's not Level 3, or DCFC.

On to my test cases (and I added one for transit scenarios):

1. Abundant, concurrent charging at destination, i.e., multiple pedestals / EVSEs, no load constraints

Play: Bias to travel speed. Use TrekDrive aggressively. Spend Lightship energy freely (respecting CER).
Why: Energy is liquid, speed/time can safely dominate.
Cybertruck advantage: n/a

2. Limited charging at destination, i.e., one pedestal or shared power

Play: Use TrekDrive. Arrive with R1T SOC higher than Lightship SOC, while respecting CER.
Why: A charged truck keeps options open, a charged trailer doesn’t.
Cybertruck advantage: Mild convenience advantage, i.e., you can plug in Cybertruck - or - Lightship and daisy chain to the other vehicle. I only have Lightship to R1T as an option, you are bi-directional.

3. No charging at destination (boondocking)

Play: Use TrekDrive until Lightship approaches CER. Preserve CER and as much R1T SOC as possible.
Why: Lightship can slowly recharge via solar, the truck is irreplaceable.
Cybertruck advantage: High convenience advantage, energy is now liquid as you can use the Cybertruck refill the Lightship, whereas I cannot do that with the R1T.

4. In transit charging

Cybertruck advantage: Medium convenience advantage. You can charge the Cybertruck on DCFC and the Lightship via daisy chain via Level 2 charging from the Cybertruck bed without decoupling. I think the issue here is the negligible SOC benefit you'd get from a 30 to 60 minute DCFC stop.

We're obviously brainstorming these scenarios, and these are my early views. If you see a hole in my logic I'll go back to token-blitzing my AI helper to get a better answer!

 

[josephpRV]

I have a 7.2 kW outlet in the bed of my F-150 PowerBoost. When I was back at the factory last April I hooked up the Powerboost generator using a Tesla Mobile Charger to the LightShip. I did not have much time to play with it, but without changing any settings I was able to move 6 kW to the Lightship via the NACS port bringing up the LightShip SOC by a couple of percent before we declared victory. I may have been able to get up to 7.2 kW but initially it only wanted to take 6.0 kW. So I am sure you can daisy chain while charging the CyberTruck.

This was the crew watching the test. That's Ben plugging in the NACS connector to the LightShip.

View attachment 31018

6.0kW to 7.2kW in my experience is a lot higher than a 120V outlet, and what I'd call half of a Level 2 (I regularly get 10.5kW to 11.0kW at home or close to +20 mph) via my 240V wired charging at home.

The advantage that you both (@turbopilot and @Blackstone) have is the ability to refill the Lightship (at whatever charge rate) delivering a convenience (daisy chain) and safety advantage, particularly when Boondocking as the Tow vehicle can 'refuel' on demand if solar isn't enough.

 

[turbopilot]

The advantage that you both (@turbopilot and @Blackstone) have is the ability to refill the Lightship (at whatever charge rate) delivering a convenience (daisy chain) and safety advantage, particularly when Boondocking as the Tow vehicle can 'refuel' on demand if solar isn't enough.

One additional advantage from a timing standpoint. Apparently the LightShip will also accept a charge from a 240 volt equipped tow vehicle in motion. I did not get a chance to actually confirm that this works but Ben said it should. However, apparently the current firmware will not allow charging in motion at the same time TrekDrive is ON. So I will have the option of in motion charging or TrekDrive ON. But not both at the same time.

 

[Rory (Lightship Team)]

I love this discussion! And the three axis theory is awesome

The reason I chose no trekdrive was that I started with 50% on the trailer and intended to host two full days of demos while boondocking overnight. With plentiful DCFC here, I figured it would be easy to boost the R1T on the way.

That said, we pulled a longer day today because there was an opportunity to film a tutorial/explainer on the auto leveling system. So, instead of going far out into the swamps, I pulled into a campground and am charging up from the pedestal. Tomorrow should be close to topped up and really have no concerns with energy on this trip because there are ample options at every campsite from here

 

[josephpRV]

I love this discussion! And the three axis theory is awesome

The reason I chose no trekdrive was that I started with 50% on the trailer and intended to host two full days of demos while boondocking overnight. With plentiful DCFC here, I figured it would be easy to boost the R1T on the way.

That said, we pulled a longer day today because there was an opportunity to film a tutorial/explainer on the auto leveling system. So, instead of going far out into the swamps, I pulled into a campground and am charging up from the pedestal. Tomorrow should be close to topped up and really have no concerns with energy on this trip because there are ample options at every campsite from here

A CER (Camp Establishment Reserve) early validation example.