[aerohead]

In spirit,I don't see anything wrong with the plan.I'm not a powertrain guy,and am unsure about delivering power "backwards" through the output shaft.Perhaps it doesn't matter to the gear sets.Don't know.I would be reluctant to expect the alternator to keep up with the power load,as it would be measured in the tens of horsepower.At full current,your alternator would be good for about 1.5-horsepower gross output.At a battery charging efficiency of 80%,the batteries could receive about 1.22-horsepower,and when the electric motor delivered the power to the transfer case,power would be down to about 1.15- HP,after mechanical losses within the transfer case,you could deliver about 1.1-HP to the driveshaft,and after the rear differential,about 1.04-HP could be layed down on the road.I think that at 800-rpm,the alternator could probably do full current,at full field exitation,so that's not a problem.If the alt.is not 100% duty-cycle rated,it could melt down though.If voltage has to be stepped up for a high voltage battery pack,there would be additional losses,and the truck would still require at least one dedicated 12-V battery.If you could home charge,with off-peak electricity,that would give you a hot pack,without relying on the engine-driven generator,although no on-road charging.Many challenges.On paper,the onboard re-charging capability seems to be the deciding factor as for how much electric potential can be harvested from the Dakota's electrics.Remember too,that while in neutral,while there is no "mechanical" road load on the engine,it will still have to produce an equivalent amount of power in the form of electricity,a task it was not originally designed and optimized for.A dedicated gen-set,designed for efficient electric generation might outdo the Dakota's engine for this task.It becomes some sort of Rube Goldberg device at some point,as you pile on device after device.