Power at the sprocket: It’s the transmission that gives tracked vehicles their control

U.S. Army Soldiers assigned to 3rd Squadron, 278th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Task Force Reaper, conduct range maneuvers in M2A3 Bradleys during a live-fire exercise in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Feb. 10, 2026. (U.S. Army photo by Joseph Kumzak.)

Ground combat vehicles such as the Bradley Fighting Vehicle have run out of room to add new capabilities, while the next generation will need to power not only what is built into them from the start, but what’s to come over the lifespan of the vehicles.

Improved power generation and efficiency will be critical to ensuring troops can rely on the capabilities they need from their vehicles. Breaking Defense spoke with SAPA Transmission President Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Darren Werner, former commanding general of US Army Tank Automotive and Armament Command (TACOM), and John Tasdemir, vice president of engineering and operations, about the company’s transmission technology and how SAPA is helping to revitalize the US defense industrial base.

Breaking Defense: What is driving the need for new transmission technologies in military vehicles?

SAPA Transmission President Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Darren Werner, former commanding general of US Army Tank Automotive and Armament Command (TACOM)

Werner: Current military vehicle transmission technology was designed and developed in the early 1980s to support heavy combat systems. Those designs were built around the drivetrains, engines, and mission requirements of their time. Legacy transmissions performed well for the requirements they were designed to meet, but today’s combat vehicles face very different demands. Manufacturing, design, and engineering are now digitally enabled, creating opportunities to increase efficiency, adaptability, and growth potential in systems designed and built for the future.

If you look at the history of ground combat systems, and specifically where John used to work at GVSC (US Army Ground Vehicle Systems Center), Army technical assessments in the early 2000s identified emerging propulsion gaps in transmissions and engines. In practical terms, there had been limited incentive to invest capital in redesigning systems that were still functioning. As a result, engine and transmission technology remained largely unchanged for decades while vehicle weight, power demand, and mission complexity continued to grow.

The Army recognized that lack of development and started to incentivize companies to look at better alternatives. SAPA took advantage of the Army’s desire to find a better solution and started working on developing a solution that was more in line with what the future requirements. The introduction of the XM30 advanced infantry combat vehicle is an important example of where this technology is going. XM30 is being developed around the Army’s need for greater growth capacity, improved mobility, advanced electronic systems, and future autonomy. Those same drivers also apply to legacy platforms. The advantage of a more efficient, software-centric, drive-by-wire capable powerpack is that it creates a path to upgrade existing combat vehicles without redesigning the entire platform. In many cases, replacing the powerpack with an advanced engine and transmission solution can restore mobility, increase usable power at the sprocket, reduce thermal burden, and provide the digital control foundation needed for future capabilities. That gives the Army a practical way to modernize legacy fleets while also introducing next-generation performance into new platforms like XM30.

John Tasdemir, vice president of engineering and operations, SAPA Transmissions.

Tasdemir: As vehicles are growing, vehicle capability is growing. We always talk about ‘what does the future next generation of combat vehicles look like?’ There are more protection systems, more electronic sensors, more weapon systems, more autonomous drive requirements. But now you need to improve the vehicle’s overall propulsion system, better efficiency, better thermal management, power distribution as we develop hybridization. Those are the challenges the Army felt back in the early 2000s timeframe. What can we do on the mobility side now that we’re adding all the capabilities on the operation of the vehicle? How do I get that vehicle to be faster and to enable it to grow as the vehicle gets heavier for current platforms and for future systems?

The Army always uses SWaPC, size, weight, power and cooling. What can you replace while also maintaining and supporting those future and current vehicles applications? The architecture that SAPA has, our 32-speed transmission architecture, allows for that scalability and modularity across multiple vehicle classes from ranges of 35- to 75-ton applications and to adapt with newer emerging propulsion systems in the future.

Hybridization and electrification are being enabled on current and new platforms today. SAPA can adapt to those systems, as well, without having to do a major redesign of the vehicle. What can you do on the current platforms to minimize the integration impact and the design aspect of it with the aim to increase mobility? And for new vehicles, what can you do above and beyond? SAPA’s architecture is focused on a compact, power dense design with high efficiency to minimize space on the vehicle and maximize vehicle power and performance.

How does your transmission accomplish those goals? What makes it unique?

Tasdemir: We don’t have a torque converter. The 32-speed transmission architecture allows us to not include a torque converter. Typically on vehicles, ground or track vehicles – and in automotive, as well – the torque converter is the most inefficient point, but it allows vehicles to do better at climbing hills or launch assist.

The 32-speed allows us to remove that torque converter and provide purely mechanical gear shifting. That is where it’s the highest efficiency as compared to a torque converter. Torque converters range from down to 65 percent, 70 percent up to 80 percent, whereas the mechanical systems are 90 percent or greater. SAPA’s transmissions operate at greater than 90% efficiency.

That allows us to reduce power usage and create a lower thermal burden for the vehicle, as well. We also have a fully drive-by-wire integrated system as our inherent design. Our steering and braking functionality are all compact with that architecture that offers a fully teleoperational function for vehicle OEMs.

Werner: SAPA transmissions are software centric. What that means is that it enables the customer, the US Army or the US government, to have the flexibility to adapt and change the characteristics of the combat platform just by making a software change.

The best example I can use is in combat in 2003, I was a part of an organization that had Bradleys. When the Bradleys deployed into Iraq, they didn’t have reactive armor tiles, but soon after we arrived, we started to receive kits of reactive armor tiles to install in the Bradleys. It was great because reactive armor is a great way to defend against different threats, especially rocket-propelled grenades. We wholeheartedly got those tiles loaded up and installed on those Bradleys.

The impact of adding significant weight to the Bradley was that the vehicle lost mobility. It no longer accelerated the way it needed to. It experienced degraded power delivery and other performance issues because the transmission was not designed to move a Bradley with that additional weight.

With our transmission, software changes can adjust shift schedules and control logic within the mechanical design envelope, allowing the vehicle to respond better to changes in weight, configuration, or mission profile. The drive-by-wire capability strengthens that advantage because steering, braking, and transmission control are integrated through the same digital architecture. That means the vehicle can translate operator commands into more precise, software-managed mobility responses, giving the platform greater maneuverability, smoother control, and a more adaptable path for future autonomy, teleoperation, and advanced vehicle functions. That adds an important operational advantage because the customer does not have to replace the entire hardware system to make targeted performance adjustments. It is an element of our transmission that leaders in the Army and across industry recognize as a benchmark for mobility.

Soldiers with Delta Troop, 5th Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, 194th Armored Brigade conduct Bradley Live Fire Training, Aug. 20, 2026, at Ware Range, on Fort Benning, Georgia. (U.S. Army photo by Joey Rhodes II)

In your example, with the reactive armor and adding weight to the vehicle, what can you change via software that allows it to carry another ton that it was never designed for in the first place?

Werner: It’s in the design of the transmission. John talked about 32 gears. Now what you have is a broader scope of gearing that you can transfer the load into. Instead of shifting at X RPMs, you can shift at Y RPMs and it can get the vehicle accelerating quicker.

It’s just like in your car. If you have ever driven a manual transmission and you shift consistently, you can get the vehicle going pretty quickly. But if you put it in first gear and let it stay in first gear and try to get it up to 50 miles an hour, you’re never going to get there. This enables you to shift at a rate that’s consistent with what the different physical nature is of the platform after it’s been changed.

How did you remove the torque converter? How does that work in practice?

Tasdemir: All transmissions have a mechanical element to them. You have your shifting gears, you have either an eight-speed, or five-speed transmission, while SAPA offers a 32-speed design. The torque converter is on the front end of it. We remove that torque converter. The 32-speed design, using the software and the digital controls, enables use to function the entire range of vehicle operations.

Our architecture offers a greater ratio coverage of 20:1. We don’t start at gear one and work all the way up to 32. Depending on the vehicle application, you start at, say, 13 speed and you allow shifting upward to accelerate. If you need to climb a hill, you go downward depending on which ratio you need to be at. Our transmission systems enables almost continuous gear shifting without power interruption using lower average engine speeds, thereby extending the life of the powertrain.

You describe your transmission as power- and engine-agnostic. What does that mean for efficiency and capability in the field?

Werner: You can see the energy losses associated with heat generated by a transmission that uses a torque converter. That heat represents energy that is not being delivered as usable power to the sprocket.

When we say engine-agnostic, we mean the transmission is designed to maximize usable engine output by transferring more available power efficiently to the sprocket, rather than losing energy through a torque converter. Over the last several years, we have worked with engine manufacturers that support the US defense industry and integrated our transmission with multiple engine families. That work has produced an array of transmission configurations with different exterior profiles to support the engines and vehicle platforms in use today.

For example, our ACT850 has multiple designs that support different engines. The ACT1075 follows the same approach. Using digital design and engineering, we can rapidly develop transmission profiles that support the outputs and configurations of different engines. That gives customers flexibility to pair the transmission with a broad range of engine and vehicle configurations. A further advantage is the ability to move toward common transmission architectures across the Army’s tracked combat vehicle fleet. Common transmissions can reduce the number of unique parts in the supply system, simplify maintenance procedures, streamline soldier and maintainer training, and improve readiness by giving units a more consistent sustainment model across multiple platforms. Over time, that commonality can lower lifecycle risk, improve parts availability, and make it easier for the Army to modernize vehicles at scale.

Most Americans associate maneuver and maneuverability with an engine. In tracked combat vehicles the reality is maneuverability, speed, takeoff, braking, all of that is done inside the transmission. The transmission is responsible for taking that power off the engine and making that track maneuverable. When you toss in the drive-by-wire capability along with the software capability, the software management capability, you’ve created a very maneuverable platform.

I did not focus on the engine because its primary role is to generate power. Once the engine produces enough power to move the vehicle, the transmission makes the vehicle maneuverable and turns the power into speed, braking, and maneuverability, making the overall powerpack perform effectively and consequently makes the engine look good.

What do you see going forward and the capabilities needed?

Tasdemir: Where SAPA is looking is how you gain that improvement in efficiency. How much more efficient can I get from my engine to the sprocket, and how much more power can I provide on board electrical power?

Efficiency is a key driver. You can minimize the size of the transmission, minimize the cooling burden of it, and then also provide more power available at the sprocket. Now you have more power available without having to increase the horsepower of an engine, without having to increase the size of the propulsion system. More power at the sprocket allows the vehicle to provide more of a maneuverable architecture in operational mobility and the transmission can modernize current vehicles.

The future battlefield will demand combat vehicles that are more agile, more efficient, more digitally connected, and capable of adapting to technologies that have not yet been fielded. The next generation of mobility systems must do far more than simply transmit engine power. They must intelligently manage energy, support advanced electronics, enable autonomy, integrate new propulsion technologies, and provide growth capacity for evolving mission requirements. At SAPA, we’re engineering those capabilities today so that U.S. and allied forces maintain their mobility advantage for decades to come.

What are the challenges facing the defense industrial base, and how are you helping to solve those challenges?

Werner: The biggest issue with the defense industrial base is age across the board. As the commander of TACOM, I commanded the arsenals, depots and supported ground systems. The arsenals and depots were struggling to maintain their viability and contribute to the defense industry because of the age of the depots and arsenals and the fact that there hasn’t been a very consistent effort to keep them up to current technology.

Even in the private sector, if you look at our foundries, you look at our casting and forging operations across the country, there was a period of time where our government made decisions to encourage offshoring of some operations to other countries where it was economically a better choice to take on offshore-manufactured materials than to manufacture those products onshore. Those decisions that were made stagnated and, in some cases, caused a deterioration of some of the manufacturing skill sets inside of our country.

That offshoring has added a strategic weakness into our defense industrial capabilities. Our strength dating all the way back to World War I and World War II is the ability for us to quickly mobilize and manufacture. We won World War II as a result of our great men and women fighting. But second to that great asset was the fact that we could outproduce any other nation in the world.

Today, the United States does not have the same industrial-base dynamic it once had. Much of the defense industrial base is aged or deteriorated, and there is now a concerted effort to reshore critical technologies, manufacturing, and capabilities that moved offshore in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This is expensive and often requires long lead times, but reshoring can reduce long-term cost, shorten supply lead times and strengthen supply-chain security.

SAPA’s endeavor here in the US supports the administration’s effort to expand domestic defense manufacturing capability. We are building an advanced manufacturing center of more than 200,000 square feet, with eight manufacturing cells equipped with advanced manufacturing tools, multi-axis milling machines, gear manufacturing systems, and automation so we can manufacture using current technology. This expansion not only helps develop the United Stated Defense Industrial Base’s capabilities on shore, but also brings over 200 jobs to the U.S.

If you look out across the US, there’s a lot of new manufacturing that’s standing up to bring in advanced manufacturing technology, whether it’s 3D printed materials, advanced milling materials, and even companies are standing up new casting capability. All that is going to help us revitalize the defense industrial base.

2026年2月10日，隶属于“死神”特遣队的美国陆军第278装甲骑兵团第3中队的士兵在美国中央司令部责任区内进行实弹演习，驾驶M2A3布雷德利步兵战车进行靶场机动。（美国陆军照片，摄影：约瑟夫·库姆扎克）

像布雷德利战车这样的地面作战车辆已经没有空间添加新功能了，而下一代战车不仅需要为最初内置的功能提供动力，还需要为车辆在其使用寿命期间将要出现的功能提供动力。

提高发电效率对于确保部队能够依赖车辆提供所需能力至关重要。《防务新闻》采访了SAPA变速器公司总裁、退役少将达伦·沃纳（Darren Werner，曾任美国陆军坦克汽车与武器司令部（TACOM）司令）和工程与运营副总裁约翰·塔斯德米尔（John Tasdemir），探讨了该公司的变速器技术以及SAPA如何助力重振美国国防工业基础。

突破国防：是什么因素推动了军用车辆对新型传动技术的需求？

SAPA变速器公司总裁、退役少将达伦·沃纳，曾任美国陆军坦克汽车与武器司令部（TACOM）司令

沃纳：现行的军用车辆变速器技术是在20世纪80年代初设计开发的，旨在支持重型作战系统。当时的变速器设计是围绕当时的动力传动系统、发动机和任务需求而制定的。传统的变速器在满足其设计要求方面表现良好，但如今的作战车辆面临着截然不同的需求。制造、设计和工程如今都已实现数字化，这为提高面向未来的系统设计和制造的效率、适应性和发展潜力创造了机会。

回顾地面作战系统的发展历程，特别是约翰曾在美国陆军地面车辆系统中心（GVSC）工作过的情况，你会发现，21世纪初陆军的技术评估就已指出，变速器和发动机的推进系统存在明显的缺陷。实际上，当时并没有多少动力去投资改造那些仍在运行的系统。因此，几十年来，发动机和变速器技术几乎没有变化，而车辆重量、动力需求和任务复杂性却在不断增长。

陆军意识到这种发展不足，并开始激励企业寻找更优的替代方案。SAPA公司抓住陆军寻求更佳解决方案的契机，着手开发更符合未来需求的解决方案。XM30先进步兵战车的推出便是这项技术发展方向的重要例证。XM30的研发围绕着陆军对更大发展潜力、更高机动性、先进电子系统和未来自主性的需求展开。这些需求同样适用于现有平台。更高效、以软件为中心、具备线控驱动能力的动力组件的优势在于，它为升级现有战车提供了一条无需重新设计整个平台的途径。在许多情况下，用先进的发动机和变速箱解决方案替换动力组件可以恢复机动性，提高链轮可用功率，降低热负荷，并为未来能力提供所需的数字化控制基础。这为陆军提供了一种切实可行的方法，既能实现现有车队的现代化，又能将下一代性能引入XM30等新型平台。

John Tasdemir，SAPA Transmissions 工程与运营副总裁。

塔斯德米尔：随着车辆尺寸的增大，车辆的性能也在不断提升。我们一直在讨论“下一代作战车辆会是什么样子？”如今，防护系统、电子传感器、武器系统和自主驾驶需求都在不断增长。但与此同时，我们也需要改进车辆的整体推进系统，提高效率、优化热管理，并随着混合动力技术的进步优化电力分配。这些正是陆军在21世纪初所面临的挑战。既然我们已经为车辆的运行增加了各种能力，那么在机动性方面我们还能做些什么呢？如何才能让车辆速度更快，并使其能够适应当前平台和未来系统日益增长的重量需求？

陆军始终遵循SWaPC（尺寸、重量、功率和冷却​​）原则。如何在满足当前及未来车辆应用需求的同时，实现性能的全面提升？SAPA的32速变速箱架构正是为此而生，它具备可扩展性和模块化特性，能够满足35吨至75吨级多种车辆应用的需求，并可适应未来涌现的新型推进系统。

如今，混合动力和电气化技术已在现有和新型平台上得到应用。SAPA 也能适应这些系统，而无需对车辆进行重大重新设计。在现有平台上，如何才能最大限度地减少集成影响和设计方面的不足，从而提升车辆的移动性？对于新型车辆，又能在此基础上做些什么？SAPA 的架构专注于紧凑、高功率密度和高效率的设计，旨在最大限度地减少车辆空间占用，同时最大限度地提升车辆的动力和性能。

你们的变速器是如何实现这些目标的？它的独特之处是什么？

塔斯德米尔：我们没有液力变矩器。32速变速箱架构允许我们省略液力变矩器。通常情况下，无论是在公路车辆还是赛道车辆上——包括汽车——液力变矩器都是效率最低的部件，但它可以帮助车辆更好地爬坡或辅助起步。

32速变速箱使我们能够移除液力变矩器，实现纯机械换挡。与液力变矩器相比，机械换挡的效率最高。液力变矩器的效率通常在65%到80%之间，而机械换挡系统的效率则可达90%甚至更高。SAPA变速箱的效率超过90%。

这使我们能够降低能耗，并减轻车辆的热负荷。此外，我们采用的是完全线控集成系统，这是我们固有的设计。基于此架构，我们的转向和制动功能都非常紧凑，可为车辆制造商提供全面的远程操控功能。

维尔纳：SAPA 的传输系统是以软件为中心的。这意味着，它使客户（美国陆军或美国政府）能够仅通过软件更改就灵活地调整和改变作战平台的特性。

我能举出的最佳例子是2003年的战斗经历。当时我所在的部队装备了布雷德利战车。这些战车部署到伊拉克时还没有安装反应装甲，但我们抵达后不久，就开始收到反应装甲套件，用于安装在战车上。这真是太好了，因为反应装甲是防御各种威胁，特别是火箭弹的有效手段。我们全力以赴地完成了这些装甲的装载和安装工作。

给布雷德利战车增加大量重量的后果是，它的机动性下降了。它无法像以前那样加速，动力输出也变差，并出现了其他性能问题，因为变速箱的设计无法承受增加的重量。

我们的变速箱可通过软件变更调整换挡程序和控制逻辑，在机械设计范围内实现，从而使车辆能够更好地应对重量、配置或任务概况的变化。线控驱动功能进一步强化了这一优势，因为转向、制动和变速箱控制都集成在同一数字架构中。这意味着车辆可以将操作员指令转化为更精确、由软件管理的机动响应，从而赋予平台更强的机动性、更平顺的操控以及更适应未来自主化、远程操控和高级车辆功能的扩展性。这带来了一项重要的作战优势，因为客户无需更换整个硬件系统即可进行针对性的性能调整。这一变速箱特性已被陆军和整个行业的领导者公认为机动性标杆。

2026年8月20日，美国陆军第194装甲旅第15骑兵团第5中队Delta连的士兵在佐治亚州本宁堡的韦尔靶场进行布雷德利战车实弹射击训练。（美国陆军照片，摄影：乔伊·罗兹二世）

以你举的例子来说，通过反应装甲增加车辆重量，你可以通过软件改变什么，使其能够承载原本设计之外的额外一吨重量？

沃纳：关键在于变速箱的设计。约翰之前提到过32个挡位。现在，你可以选择更宽的齿比范围来传递负载。以前需要在X转速换挡，现在可以在Y转速换挡，这样车辆就能更快地加速。

这就像你的车一样。如果你开过手动挡车，并且换挡节奏稳定，就能很快把车提速。但如果你一直挂在一挡，想把速度提到50英里/小时，那永远也达不到。这样一来，你就能根据平台改造后的物理特性，以合适的频率进行换挡。

你是如何拆卸液力变矩器的？实际操作中是如何操作的？

塔斯德米尔：所有变速箱都包含机械部件。变速箱内部有换挡机构，有八速变速箱和五速变速箱，而SAPA提供的是32速变速箱。液力变矩器位于变速箱前端。我们移除了这个液力变矩器。这套32速变速箱，结合软件和数字控制系统，能够实现车辆的全部操作功能。

我们的架构提供高达 20:1 的传动比覆盖范围。我们并非从 1 挡一直升到 32 挡。根据车辆应用情况，您可以从例如 13 挡开始，并允许升挡加速。如果需要爬坡，则根据所需传动比降挡。我们的变速箱系统能够以较低的平均发动机转速实现几乎连续的换挡，而不会中断动力输出，从而延长动力总成的使用寿命。

您将您的变速箱描述为与动力和发动机无关。这对实际应用中的效率和性能意味着什么？

维尔纳：你可以看到，使用液力变矩器的变速器会产生热量，从而造成能量损失。这些热量代表着没有转化为可用动力传递给链轮的能量。

我们所说的“与发动机无关”，是指变速箱的设计旨在最大限度地利用发动机的可用功率，将更多可用动力高效地传递到链轮，而不是通过液力变矩器损失能量。过去几年，我们与为美国国防工业提供支持的发动机制造商合作，并将我们的变速箱集成到多个发动机系列中。这项工作催生了一系列具有不同外形结构的变速箱配置，以支持目前使用的各种发动机和车辆平台。

例如，我们的ACT850变速箱拥有多种设计方案，可支持不同的发动机。ACT1075变速箱也采用了相同的方法。通过数字化设计和工程技术，我们可以快速开发出支持不同发动机输出和配置的变速箱特性。这使得客户能够灵活地将变速箱与各种发动机和车辆配置相匹配。另一个优势是能够推动陆军履带式战车车队采用通用变速箱架构。通用变速箱可以减少供应系统中不同零部件的数量，简化维护程序，优化士兵和维护人员的培训，并通过为部队提供跨多个平台的更一致的保障模式来提高战备水平。随着时间的推移，这种通用性可以降低全寿命周期风险，提高零部件的可用性，并使陆军更容易大规模地对车辆进行现代化改造。

大多数美国人会将机动性和操控性与发动机联系起来。但实际上，履带式战车的机动性、速度、起步、制动等所有功能都由变速箱完成。变速箱负责将发动机的动力传递给履带，使其具备机动性。再加上线控驱动系统、软件功能以及软件管理功能，就打造出了一个机动性极强的平台。

我没有着重介绍发动机，因为它的主要作用是产生动力。一旦发动机产生足够的动力来驱动车辆，变速器就会使车辆能够操控，并将动力转化为速度、制动和转向能力，从而使整个动力系统高效运行，最终也让发动机看起来更出色。

您认为未来发展方向是什么？需要具备哪些能力？

塔斯德米尔：SAPA正在研究的是如何提高效率。从发动机到链轮，我的效率能提高多少？我还能提供多少额外的车载电力？

效率是关键驱动因素。您可以最大限度地缩小变速器的尺寸，减轻其冷却负担，同时还能在链轮处提供更多动力。这样，您无需增加发动机的马力，也无需增大推进系统的尺寸，即可获得更强大的动力。链轮处更强大的动力使车辆在运行机动性方面拥有更灵活的架构，而变速器本身也能使现有车辆实现现代化。

未来的战场需要更敏捷、更高效、数字化程度更高、且能够适应尚未部署技术的作战车辆。下一代机动系统必须远不止于传递发动机动力。它们必须能够智能管理能量、支持先进电子设备、实现自主作战、集成新型推进技术，并为不断变化的任务需求提供扩展能力。在SAPA，我们正致力于研发这些能力，以确保美国及其盟军在未来数十年内保持机动优势。

国防工业基础面临哪些挑战？您是如何帮助解决这些挑战的？

沃纳：国防工业基础最大的问题是整体老化。作为TACOM司令，我负责指挥武器库、仓库和地面支援系统。由于仓库和兵工厂老化，而且缺乏持续的升级改造以跟上技术发展，这些机构难以维持运转并为国防工业做出贡献。

即使在私营部门，如果你看看我们的铸造厂，看看我们遍布全国的铸造和锻造业务，就会发现，曾经有一段时间，政府为了经济效益，鼓励将一些业务外包到其他国家，因为从海外采购原材料比在国内生产这些产品更划算。这些决策导致产业停滞不前，在某些情况下，甚至造成了我国部分制造业技能的退化。

这种离岸外包给我们的国防工业能力带来了一个战略弱点。我们自一战和二战以来就拥有强大的力量，那就是快速动员和生产的能力。我们之所以能赢得二战，是因为我们伟大的男女战士浴血奋战。但除此之外，我们最大的优势还在于，我们的生产能力远超世界上任何其他国家。

如今，美国的工业基础已不复往日荣光。国防工业基础的大部分已经老化或衰败，目前正大力推进将上世纪90年代末和本世纪初转移到海外的关键技术、制造和能力迁回国内。这需要耗费大量资金，而且往往需要较长的准备时间，但回流可以降低长期成本，缩短供应周期，并加强供应链安全。

SAPA在美国的举措支持了政府扩大国内国防制造能力的努力。我们正在建设一个占地超过20万平方英尺的先进制造中心，该中心设有八个制造单元，配备先进的制造工具、多轴铣床、齿轮制造系统和自动化设备，以便我们能够利用现有技术进行生产。此次扩建不仅有助于提升美国国防工业基地的本土能力，还将为美国带来200多个就业岗位。

放眼全美，你会发现许多新兴制造业正在蓬勃发展，致力于引进先进的制造技术，无论是3D打印材料、先进铣削材料，还是企业正在建立新的铸造能力。所有这些都将有助于我们重振国防工业基础。