|
|
Post by billhammond on Oct 28, 2022 16:28:30 GMT -5
This thing makes the current LLV look like a Jaguar. I'm thinking PT Cruiser meets meat display case meets dumpster. Coming next year from Oshkosh Corp. (Photo from DRIVE website)  |
|
|
|
Post by howard lee on Oct 28, 2022 16:32:44 GMT -5
It says Ford will make the engines and transmissions. This one has a perfect registration number.
|
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Oct 28, 2022 16:34:39 GMT -5
Even worse when seen from the rear:  |
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Oct 28, 2022 16:43:55 GMT -5
Nice visibility, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Oct 28, 2022 16:47:19 GMT -5
Hope there are melanoma filters. |
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Oct 28, 2022 17:21:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Oct 28, 2022 18:22:54 GMT -5
To be technical (professional powertrain engineer personality flaw, sorry) they started off only producing 10% electric trucks, the rest traditional gas trucks, since electrics are clearly not suited for widespread (i.e.- nation wide) use. But then the usual climate creeps started making noise about that and the USPS reviewed its decision and, lo and behold, told everyone to shove it, that's what they were going to do. And the Biden sycophants entered the picture and I think they conceded to make a few more. And as ugly as it is, it's built for utility, not beauty. |
|
|
|
Post by RickW on Oct 28, 2022 19:11:41 GMT -5
And as ugly as it is, it's built for utility, not beauty. Exactly. That would be a great delivery truck. Having driven a regular van to do deliveries when younger, a vehicle you could walk into, and stand as you move and haul stuff about, would be wonderful. |
|
|
|
Post by Village Idiot on Oct 28, 2022 19:15:19 GMT -5
It looks to me like someone who has actually delivered mail had a hand in the design. I'm looking at that first picture, my rural mailbox, and the ease of reaching it when I have the doors off of my Jeep.
It reminds me of a duck somehow, but it looks like a great design.
|
|
|
|
Post by james on Oct 28, 2022 19:41:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Oct 28, 2022 22:17:54 GMT -5
Yeah, it looks functional. A good friend sent his career delivering mail. Within two years after he retired he had both knees replaced. I'll vote for whatever works, regardless of how it looks.
|
|
|
|
Post by millring on Oct 29, 2022 4:00:03 GMT -5
A billion here, a billion there. Pretty soon we're talking real money.
|
|
|
|
Post by millring on Oct 29, 2022 4:09:51 GMT -5
www.cbsnews.com/news/usps-truck-contract-oshkosh-fuel-efficiency-house-inquiry/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab#l36cmwo0aswzfe72n4iAt least they put "gas-guzzling" in quotes. I've been at the post office for only a couple of years now, but I can tell you that the pair of "L's" in the "LLV" should probably still be the first concern in the development of a replacement fleet. That is, if the Post Office is going to continue to exist as a government agency. Long Life (as in Long Life Vehicle) should probably be goal number one. Those who drive those LLVs may be the ones making the most pointed jokes about the condition of the current fleet, but make no mistake -- a fleet of trucks that has lasted 30-35 years and multiple hundreds of thousands of miles each is probably a pretty good use of whatever money is allotted us from the federal government. Additionally, as the Post Office is morphing into a parcel delivery service FIRST, and a mail delivery service SECOND, it might be heartening for a postal worker to read that the first concern in designing a new fleet is function -- not the fuel it's going to burn. For instance, perhaps, those developing a new fleet could consider consulting with the workers who use them every day and not listening only to the management/government types who, if they once used mail delivery trucks decades ago, nevertheless have never used them as parcel delivery trucks ALONG WITH the mail. We can have the public debate over the comparative environmental impact of mining for battery metals (and what to do with used up batteries) and fossil fuel used run an electric fleet vs. direct use of gas. That debate is worthwhile. But it needs to be a rational discussion that compares apples to apples. And the mileage cited as "gas-guzzling" is so unfair as to be ridiculous. The mileage cited -- and the person who wrote the above article knows, as does the editor who let the "gas-guzzling" pejorative slide by his/her red pen -- is utterly misleading. The writer of the article using gas-guzzling knows that the reader will only understand the mileage cited as compared to the mileage of the car they use every day. As such, that reader is bound to wonder why -- if the Post Office MUST use gas-powered vehicles -- can't they come up with one that gets 30 miles per gallon like their cars do. A mail delivery truck can't get the mileage that your car does, and it never will. The delivery truck is running almost non-stop during the day. If you drive your car 50 miles, it will take you less than 2 hours to do so. If you drive a 50 mile route, it may take you upwards of 4 hours to do so ... with the engine running most of the time. The stop-and-start driving of mail delivery is NEVER going to get the high mileage we've come to expect from our personal cars, and to imply the comparison is nothing short of deceitful. There's a high degree of conflicting information regarding Amazon's progress in developing an all electric fleet. At one point it was reported that they had committed to the purchase of 100,000 electric vehicles. Whatever the number, it does at least seem apparent that it is a direction Amazon intends to go. And its current contract with the Post Office for the delivery of its parcels in the mean time is certainly aiding in the capitalization of such a fleet. And maybe Amazon can pull it off. With the benefit of being allowed to profit from the distribution of the goods it sells (unlike the Post Office that is not allowed to profit), it can decide for any number of reasons (for instance, popular sentiment over practical function) what kind of fleet they want to develop. They will sink or swim on the wisdom of that decision. But the Post Office has constraints (and it always will) that Amazon does not, and to compare the two and judge the Post Office by a standard to which Amazon is not held is not realistic or fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Oct 29, 2022 8:24:25 GMT -5
Hope there are melanoma filters. I wonder what the sun visor looks like. |
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Oct 29, 2022 9:12:47 GMT -5
Billion trillion
|
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Oct 29, 2022 10:10:26 GMT -5
www.cbsnews.com/news/usps-truck-contract-oshkosh-fuel-efficiency-house-inquiry/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab#l36cmwo0aswzfe72n4iAt least they put "gas-guzzling" in quotes. I've been at the post office for only a couple of years now, but I can tell you that the pair of "L's" in the "LLV" should probably still be the first concern in the development of a replacement fleet. That is, if the Post Office is going to continue to exist as a government agency. Long Life (as in Long Life Vehicle) should probably be goal number one. Those who drive those LLVs may be the ones making the most pointed jokes about the condition of the current fleet, but make no mistake -- a fleet of trucks that has lasted 30-35 years and multiple hundreds of thousands of miles each is probably a pretty good use of whatever money is allotted us from the federal government. Additionally, as the Post Office is morphing into a parcel delivery service FIRST, and a mail delivery service SECOND, it might be heartening for a postal worker to read that the first concern in designing a new fleet is function -- not the fuel it's going to burn. For instance, perhaps, those developing a new fleet could consider consulting with the workers who use them every day and not listening only to the management/government types who, if they once used mail delivery trucks decades ago, nevertheless have never used them as parcel delivery trucks ALONG WITH the mail. We can have the public debate over the comparative environmental impact of mining for battery metals (and what to do with used up batteries) and fossil fuel used run an electric fleet vs. direct use of gas. That debate is worthwhile. But it needs to be a rational discussion that compares apples to apples. And the mileage cited as "gas-guzzling" is so unfair as to be ridiculous. The mileage cited -- and the person who wrote the above article knows, as does the editor who let the "gas-guzzling" pejorative slide by his/her red pen -- is utterly misleading. The writer of the article using gas-guzzling knows that the reader will only understand the mileage cited as compared to the mileage of the car they use every day. As such, that reader is bound to wonder why -- if the Post Office MUST use gas-powered vehicles -- can't they come up with one that gets 30 miles per gallon like their cars do. A mail delivery truck can't get the mileage that your car does, and it never will. The delivery truck is running almost non-stop during the day. If you drive your car 50 miles, it will take you less than 2 hours to do so. If you drive a 50 mile route, it may take you upwards of 4 hours to do so ... with the engine running most of the time. The stop-and-start driving of mail delivery is NEVER going to get the high mileage we've come to expect from our personal cars, and to imply the comparison is nothing short of deceitful. There's a high degree of conflicting information regarding Amazon's progress in developing an all electric fleet. At one point it was reported that they had committed to the purchase of 100,000 electric vehicles. Whatever the number, it does at least seem apparent that it is a direction Amazon intends to go. And its current contract with the Post Office for the delivery of its parcels in the mean time is certainly aiding in the capitalization of such a fleet. And maybe Amazon can pull it off. With the benefit of being allowed to profit from the distribution of the goods it sells (unlike the Post Office that is not allowed to profit), it can decide for any number of reasons (for instance, popular sentiment over practical function) what kind of fleet they want to develop. They will sink or swim on the wisdom of that decision. But the Post Office has constraints (and it always will) that Amazon does not, and to compare the two and judge the Post Office by a standard to which Amazon is not held is not realistic or fair. I wouldn't worry too much about about the insane media (even including "fanzines" like electrek and eenews) narrative. "Global Warming!" and the push for idiotic electrification has pretty much run its course and the preposterous nature of that whole thing is gradually dying as inflation, war, and international politics highlights the drastic shortcomings of it all and causes normal people to question why the heck anybody listened to those fraudulent boobs in the first place. Practicality across the entire range of environmental demands favors fossil fuels and the global warming apocalypse seems to continue to never show up despite the hysterical lying of its advocates. They're not going to go full on electric at the USPS anytime soon. |
|
|
|
Post by John B on Oct 29, 2022 11:46:45 GMT -5
Our Jeep doesn't get much more than twice that MPG on the highway. Anyone who only does short around-town driving, with plenty of stop signs/stoplights should realize that measuring efficiency for vehicles designed to do that type of driving has to be done with a different yardstick than highway vehicles. Other random comments: I hope those end up low enough so they can go under some of our county overpasses - I'd hate for mail routes to be changed because of a bridge built in the 20's. The vehicles Colonel Paul worked with had their efficiency measured in gpm instead of mpg. The design reminds me of Dr. Finkelstein in "Nightmare Before Christmas." Maybe they can call them Finkelsteins?  |
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Oct 29, 2022 14:18:45 GMT -5
It reminds me of a duck somehow, but it looks like a great design. But Todd, most things remind you of a duck somehow. After all, you were the inspiration for the Duck Band. (Don't tell Paul I said that, he still thinks it was his idea.) |
|
