So the USPS is getting new trucks and they look like ducks and maybe that sucks… or maybe it wucks. Like “works,” if a duck said it. Just give me this one please.
Anyway.
I don’t know how mean I can be here – there has to be something said for objective journalistic integrity – but I have a feeling most people are going to have a rather sarcastic reaction to the new design. I’m not so sure I can blame them – it has a kind of stubby little nose with a shortened hood and a boxy frame and super tall windshield, which gives the wheels a disproportionately large look compared to the rest of the silhouette. It’s sort of like a Nissan Cube but less millennial cool, which A) is discontinued (so maybe not so cool), and B) is not the car that had those giant hiphop hamsters running around, but I’m still going to link to it anyway.
Elon Musk must be breathing a sigh of relief right now.
The contract was awarded to Oshkosh Defense (which I was thrilled to find out is NOT the adorable kid’s clothing company, even though I personally think that would be hilarious if there was a factory making overalls for tiny humans alongside tactical defense trucks) and officially announced on February 23rd, 2021 to the tune of $482 million. Seriously though, someone is going to mix those up for the rest of all time and eternity; I’d never not think about my own baby pictures if some contractor from Oshkosh Defense showed up.
The release mentions that, “The historic investment is part of a soon-to-be-released plan the Postal Service has developed to transform its financial performance and customer service over the next 10 years through significant investments in people, technology and infrastructure as it seeks to become the preferred delivery service provider for the American public.” It’s called the NGDV – Next Generation Delivery Vehicle, which I happen to adore, and will pronounce as Nugduv, and you can’t stop me anyway. The old one was called the Grumman, by the way.
Some credit this as a radical change, and keeping in mind that radical doesn’t necessarily denote positive or negative, it seems like the perfect word to use here. Then there are those who correctly identify “a mixed bag of responses,” sort of like when you get a bag of candy at Halloween that has at least one thing no one likes. Some call it strange, while others defend it as something every new big vehicle should look like (this is where – as one of many – I found it called a “duck” which oh man do I love, quack quack).
We can also hit up the ever fair public opinion of Twitter, because why wouldn’t we?
This is how I would draw a car. That is not a plus for this design
I really can’t get over that last one. But I mean, whoa. That’s quite the spectrum. There’s less disagreement on pizza toppings I think. But luckily I think we’re safe there – Domino’s makes people drive their personal cars.
Taking a step back and putting snide commentary away for a moment, there’s some areas that should be discussed. First – and what should probably be obvious – there was a laundry list of requirements and restrictions from the USPS, which made Nir Kahn – design director from custom carmaker Plasan – offer up his own tweets that give some insight on dimensions and design:
I was involved in an early proposal for the USPS truck so I know the requirements well. They pretty much dictated the proportions – this package sketch shows that to meet the ergonomic and size requirements, there wasn’t much freedom 1/2 #USPS pic.twitter.com/Fk35g98Z83
Kahn mentions that “there wasn’t much freedom,” but also that “it could have looked much better,” and this sort of underlines the entire discussion I think – there were goals in place, and possibly some more aesthetically pleasing ways to meet them, but the constraints won out and drove (hehe) the design more than style did.
Certainly, there are other concerns – the ability for USPS drivers to reach a mailbox while seated is paramount. Others have pointed out that this design – with its large windshield and shortened front – should help with safety around small children (all the better if they are wearing Oshkosh B’gosh, because that implies they are tiny and may not be at all concerned with the dangers of streets). The open field-of-vision will aid in making sure drivers can navigate places that might be frequented by any number of pedestrians, so that’s a plus.
Further, if you get struck by one of these, you’ll basically “just” get kneecapped versus taking it square to the torso. The duck article is the one making this call, and I think there’s some merit there (though it makes me question how the USPS fleet is going to do against the SUVs and big trucks out in the wild). It then goes on to point out that this design has more cargo space, fitting into the idea of “rightsizing,” where the form and function of the vehicle meet in a way that is downsized, but still punches above its weight.
“From smaller fire engines to nimbler garbage trucks, making vehicles better scaled to urban tasks can make a huge difference, not only for keeping other cars moving on narrow streets, but also to ensure that humans on those same streets can access the bike lanes, sidewalks, and curb cuts they need to get around.”
I didn’t try too hard to find stats on crashes in mail trucks, but seems like something that should be addressed.
Maybe the biggest point here is that we sort of have to get new trucks – they are outliving their 24 year expectancy and catching on fire. On FIRE. I mean a mail truck might be the worst place for a fire. I’m not even sure I can’t think up a better answer… Ok maybe toilets would be worse.
The new vehicles can be either petrol or electric powered, have 360 cameras, airbags, and automatic braking. Oh, and air conditioning, which the old vehicles did not have. So yes, literally the worst place to have a fire. But due to the taller vehicles, someone can stand in them now! So escape is even easier! Hooray!
A series of delays pushed back the introduction of new vehicles from their 2018 projected date, with poor initial prototypes and the pandemic being major setbacks. Aggressive bidding led to extended deadlines, which had been narrowed down to a small list of candidates that included Workhorse (who unfortunately suffered a large stock plunge following the announcement). It’s been in the works for at least six years.
In the end, I don’t think we can discount all the advantages here – more efficient vehicles that are safer and provide drivers with modern amenities. That’s a LOT of good. I think once the initial goofy shock is over, the design will be accepted. Everyone thought Nintendo’s Wii was a hilarious name (still pretty much is regardless of being in the public book of acceptable nomenclature), and Cybertruck sales are brisk, so I think we can set a lot of this aside. The Edsel these are not.
So hey, new USPS vehicles in 2023, like an exceedingly late birthday present. All I want to see is a bunch of baby ducks following one of them around oh please let that happen. The USPS kind of has an identity crisis in the modern era, so maybe a funny little cute silly boxmobile is just the right way to get some attention.
Sig
August 12, 2011 at 7:42 am
On the surface this "Theory" looks good. BUT. The journey between a good Government "Theory" and putting said "theory" into action always seems to be easier done if private industry does it. Look at the last time Government put "Theory" into action in the late 1980's and early 1990's via the infamous Resolution Trust fiasco. What a mess that turned out to be. It was a good 'theory" but very bad practice. Government needs to sell those homes to private companies who know how to rehab, and rent them. Government can help guarantee the financing and back the renters if they like but that should be the extent of Government involvement.
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 11:08 am
Sig, completely agree!!!
Roberta Murphy
August 12, 2011 at 9:35 am
Another lovely example of government inserting it$elf into private lives and enterprise. For the sake of all, get those foreclosed homes onto the open market and allow them to be bought by both by both homebuyers and private investors. This lessens chance and opportunity for graft and fraud, and will directly benefit local contractors, suppliers and allow for pride of ownership in blighted neighborhoods.
This is also a case of government competing against the private investor–and perhaps gaining a political/voting edge from those who benefit from government rentals.
Do not trust this government grab!
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 11:14 am
Roberta, Bingo! Seriously, if you haven't, read the Washington Post piece. It's a totally in-depth look at what can happen when there's zero accountability.
CJ Johnson
August 12, 2011 at 9:47 am
Who will pay for the property taxes, maintenance, collection of rent, insurance, etc? We will! Who will benefit when the rent is not paid? Evection attorneys! Who will pay to replace the stollen appliances, broken windows, and other damage tenants cause? You got it the taxpayers. Add to this all the neat new government jobs that will be created to administer this program. Can you say stupid idea?
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 11:17 am
CJ, excellent points, and probably ones no one is thinking about!
Liz Benitez
August 12, 2011 at 11:20 am
Such a bad bad bad idea.
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 3:20 pm
"Like"
ShortWoman
August 12, 2011 at 11:31 am
There are so many problems with the proposal that I don't even know where to start.
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 3:21 pm
And "Like +1"
Gena Riede
August 12, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Fannie, Freddie, Banks and the Government have no business in the business of rentals. The minute I heard this, my first thought was that of socialism and Russia. These properties should be sold and purchased by home buyers and investors.
There is another caviat to this where Fannie has been soliciating a back door entry into MLS systems statewide on the premise that if they have access to the MLS Fannie will offer access to their "Help Desk" for short sales.
This backdoor entrance into our MLS systems throughout the US and the prospect of them going into the rental business is NOT a good scenario for real estate.
If Fannie is allowed full access into our MLS systems, where does this stop? Are the banks next. Any MLS that agrees to this in my opinion is opening up Pandora's Box and we are on the way to a much different real estate platform that scares me.
Kathleen Cosner
August 12, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Gena, Agree. Investors with credit & cash to do so, or owner occs should be the ones to purchase, not some crazy mass buy.
Haven't heard of any MLS access thing in regards to Fannie. Is this a smaller MLS?
Gena Riede
August 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm
Oh, no Fannie Mae wants access to ALL MLS system. They want each MLS to provide a Fannie Mae Help button on the current MLS system where they supposedly the Short Sale agent will have access to help. However, I see this as an opportunity for Fannie Mae to have access to all the listings and as we know, it won't stop there.
The VP of Fannie Mae was interviewed on CDPE about a month ago where this was discussed and I called our MLS here in Sacramento who has NO INTENTION of providing access or a button for Fannie Mae. But, I have heard that there are states and areas who have done so.
I see a lot of issues… and there not good ones!
Kathleen Cosner
August 14, 2011 at 4:49 am
That's about one of the craziest things I've heard of in a while! Wouldn't most MLSs have to re-write their rules in order for that to happen? Not sure they're set up for that kind of thing, a whole 3rd party access deal.
Manhattan Beach Realtor
August 14, 2011 at 12:59 pm
What we're seeing is the initial phase of another bailout for GSE's; the feds need a good marketing pitch to the public of why they are going to transfer billions more. Stabilizing housing, making rent more affordable for low income, etc. it's all a nice way to dressing up the fact that billions, if not tens of billions, are soon to land into the accounts of GSE's.
Consequences?
Flooding rental market with "affordable" rentals will drive rental rates, and returns, down for landlords across the country. Worse, is that this will occur in severely distressed regions that need capital. Low ROI will drive much needed capital out of these areas.
sfvrealestate
August 15, 2011 at 12:37 pm
I agree that this is a bad idea for the Feds to get involved. I can see a limited role for a limited amount of properties through some kind of local city government (perhaps partnered with individual investors) situation. It would be kind of like Section 8 is now.