The health or safety was never a big concern, much less comfort. One carrier put a thermometer in his llv, it registered 20 degrees hotter than outside.
You're not going to like this but misuse of A/C in a vehicle can make you sick and possibly even kill you. I know because of doing deliveries in Florida. I would strongly suggest using powerful fans and open windows instead. The reason is because of getting in & out the vehicle frequently. hotcoldhotcoldhotcoldhotcold, that is what will kill you.
@@kmg501 The AC does not necessarily need to be set to "cold" - in many cases 75 degrees would still be a massive improvement. Besides, many carriers are already driving vehicles (ford transit, etc) that have AC. And the same is true of other carriers.
City postal carrier here: I am INCREDIBLY excited about the NGDV, especially for the reasons why it’s so oddly designed. The forward visibility is a godsend, and the ability to stand up inside as well. A/C, a backup camera, and other niceties are just cherries on top for me ahah
I am not at all related to USPS but I'm super excited for these. Safety, ergonomics, and effectiveness all together. It may by kind of goofy looking to some but I find it charming and unique. Can't wait for them to be a typical part of the American landscape as they roll out. The existing trucks are already pretty iconic and these absolutely will be too!
The USPS having it's own millage testing plan makes sense. There's a lot more stop-and-go while delivering mail then there is even for EPA standard city driving.
@blurglide What's the infrastructure impact for charging a small fleet of vehicles at an existing facility where there are no current charging stations? Installation cost, physical location space, draw, and load all need to be considered as well. What is the impact of charging 30 plus vehicles in the neighborhood? I do not think those aspects of this has even been considered by the omnipotent powers that be running the post office let alone other impacts that I haven't even thought of.
@@blurglide I disagree. While it sounds great, battery technology is not good enough to make real sense in normal passenger vehicles at this time. It makes even less sense in something that has to charge and be used every day. The only reason ANY carriers are changing to them is because of bs government mandates based on activist nonsense. Gas engines aren't going to get great mpg because of all the stop and go for sure. But in the long run, battery powered vehicles don't make sense when considering that they are designed to throw the whole vehicle away considering replacement costs often far exceed the cost of a brand new one.
@@onlylivingicon It's going to be a significant cost to outfit some of these offices with all that. Consider this: my office would need to have its entire parking lot ripped apart to put in the lines. It would need to be upgraded enough to carry all that current because I doubt it was originally intended for that amount of draw. You would need 19 chargers minimum. You have some routes in the office that approach or exceed 80 miles per day. You have Amazon days where only packages are delivered. On those days one can often exceed 100 miles. And just a few months ago I had a day where I pulled over 160 miles (that was a long day) because we had so many packages and not enough people. Now my gas tank can handle that. Can a battery powered vehicle? What happens when a carrier is told they have to get it all done and they don't have enough battery to do it? What about those tow bills when the carrier inevitably runs out somewhere out in the county? What about when a carrier forgets to plug it up overnight? What about when a carrier doesn't plug it in good enough (that already happens with scanners, but luckily scanner batteries are small enough that a couple hours on the cradle in the morning can get you enough to run a whole day)? What happens when one of those chargers malfunctions and doesn't get the vehicle charged overnight and no one discovers it until the next morning? No one has considered these questions. I can guarantee you that.
@ram89572 Exactly. I didn't pose the questions you answered, but those are some of the concerns about the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order ramifications about feel-good decisions that few have actually considered. Environmental concerns as far as weather or power outages that can affect the start of the day, let alone human errors. The size of the vehicles affects parking due to the size of our lot. There are about 30 vehicles in my oceanside office in Massachusetts. Don't know if I want to be handling a charging cable in a downpour.
When I was at the post office they warned us about kids in the street. My first time out doing deliverys a kid was right in front. Thank god I walked out and checked. His mother came and pulled him out the street. That front end is designed for visibility.
Riding my bike to high school one day with a buddy (no hands on the handlebars, of course) who smacked right into the back of a stopped postal vehicle. Stationary, flasihing lights, big white thing on dark asphalt, it didnt' matter. Unbraced impact messed him up hard. It look me years to maybe figure out what had happened to this normally alert friend. Perhaps he trusted me to warn him. In addition to "not being there" much of the time, they come to different conclusions about a situation. I'm not sure pedestrian warnings will cover all cases, but it won't hurt. I suggest taking one step further with pedestrian warnings abd alert both driver and pedestrian. If the vehicle is on-duty (lights flashing), the warning also goes to the outside. Sometimes, we just need that wake-up call.
2 kids were playing in a big grocery store parking lot. When I was about to back out of my parking spot, I checked the mirrors and could see one kid but not the other. So, I got out and walked toward the rear of my car all the while scanning for the other kid. There she was, crouched down behind my car hiding from her brother!! Can't be too careful.
As a postman and deliveryman myself, this thing is glorious and beatiful. Being able to just stand in the truck like that and not hit the roof, the WIDE doors, this is just perfect for this job.
Absolutely! If you spend a significant amount of your workday hunched over picking up packages, it's going to add up over time as a physical liability.
There's a lot of good solid facts debunking a lot of disinfo here. One thing I'd add is the reason the post office doesn't go by EPA "City" numbers is because they know their own typical duty cycle and can replicate it, and with all its' stops and starts it returns a much lower number than the commuter-oriented EPA cycle.
@@zzoinks UPS and amazon try to figure their routes without left turns. It improves speed and safety which help with gas use which helps the bottom line.
Slow speeds with a lot of stops, is actually more efficient for an EV over an ICE vehicle too. Breaking usually puts some power back into the battery, and no extra idling energy wasted just to prevent the engine from idling.
Like to add to this on debunking disinformation The pentagon wars was based on a book that was basically the memoirs of a pathological liar. Lazer pig has an excellent 28min video on it.
The EPA tests are also pretty poor for EV passenger vehicles. People really only care about range when they go on a long trip, 95% on the highway at high speeds. So long as you can charge at home you really don't care about range day to day.
@mark123655 true, for me even the early sub 100 mile range EVs would be fine for 90% of my needs. I'd happily replace the daily with a small EV with average range, I have a truck for truck stuff, a fun car for fun things and if I decide to take a thousand mile road trip I'd probably rather rent something than rag out my own vehicles. I often scroll listing's to see if I can score a car with a degraded battery for super cheap, unfortunately they are still their own thing ant tend to get snapped up by enthusiasts or shops for their own needs rather than sit on the used market for long.
Postal Carrier here: No, your post office is not using Promasters or Metrises in any majority capacity. We're all still using the LLV because it continues to reign king in exactly the role it was designed for.
I live in an apartment complex, and the postal worker shows up in a promoter every weekday. They are becoming quite prevalent in dense area where mail is walked.
@@mrbillybob444makes sense for an apartment though. They are not delivering to individual mailboxes. There are communal mailboxes where they take out a crate of mail and put in in the right slots. So for that case, yeah it makes sense to use a van because there is no reason to use the LLV
Its ugly but I think after 5 or 10 years this truck will be iconic like the current trucks. Ive also heard that postal workers don't like transit/metris vans because the sitting height isn't at mailbox height like the LLV and makes delivery uncomfortable, so even if these trucks are a little more expensive then a off the shelf van I think it could be worth it.
What "Pentagon Wars" missed is the fact that the M2 Bradley is an amazingly effective troop transport and combat vehicle that 50 years after its inception is still dominating the battlefield. To be honest this new postal vehicle looks like it's going to be a real winner. It looks like a great mail hauler for intracity transport with a wide view for drivers to safely see everything around them. I think the vehicle is a real winner.
This was mentioned before the credits scroll the government spent another billion (with a 'b') on fixing the Bradley abd that it went on to get more kills in the Gulf War than even the Abrams.
@@paulmoscatt6529 The premise of the movie is that the Pentagon has a process that produces expensive weapons that don't work. That's not true. The past 30 years have shown that the process produces amazing weapons that work. The high cost reflects their real worth.
Just an FYI for everyone: the pentagon wars is a completely ficticious retelling of the Bradley's development. It did not start as a battlefield taxi that had stuff added on later like cannons. It was designed from the get go to be an infantry support vehicle as a response to the soviet BMP. The idea of an aluminum box to carry infantry was not what the army sought.
"Pentagon Wars" is from the Spurlock/Moore school of sociopolitical documentaries. Tell a lie, support the lie with good production values, sell a million copies.
Yes, the Bradley is complimented a lot by Ukrainians currently fighting with it so the vehicle turned out have a long good track record. Of course it shouldn't take away one of the lessons of engineering/procurement which is to beware of mission creep.
@@Hard_Right why? Are they not performing the role they were designed to perform, infantry support? What makes the bradley a uniquely flawed design when compared to all other IFV's, BMP, Puma, Marder, boxer...
The Bradley may have had a convoluted development process but it was worthwhile in the end, as it is highly effective in combat, as proven by its record in the first Gulf war, where it destroyed more tanks than the Abrams, and 30 years later it is still proving it's worth everyday in Ukraine. If you're looking for an example of failure by design by committee, I would suggest the m249 Sergeant York SPAAG, and the infamous Pontiac Aztek. The Sergeant York is famous for pointing its weapons at the reviewing stand when placed in automatic mode
I don't think the Bradley's record in the Gulf War counts for much..... it's not like the US was fighting against a world class military. As far as Ukraine, well, it hasn't really made a difference there. Bradley's are being destroyed in Ukraine about as fast as we can send them.
Bradley was never combat tested against a near-peer in the types of situations it was designed for. Namely, fighting Russia in eastern Europe. Ukraine is using them now, but with a different doctrine than that of the US. They're doing fairly well, but I'd bet my left nut that in a real major war, the Bradley would be too costly to keep replacing. It's a great vehicle to scout for spearhead armored assaults, that's about it though.
Sgt. York was killed because the program discovered the biggest snag in more modern systems: it's not the steel that's expensive; it's the *_SILICON_* (i.e., all the electronics) that is expensive (and not just in the installation but also in the debugging). That and from my readings, the Sgt. York was a victim of post-WW2 penny pinching (it was discovered that quite a few barrels from the stocks were actually worn-out instead of actually viable), the FCS being a buggy mess, the hydraulics they had weren't up to the task (which were going to be replaced with 5kPSI variants in the production prototypes as the 3kPSI units would break in certain scenarios), and the M48 being the chassis of choice instead of something like the M60 (though, this is understandable as the M48 was being retired and the M60 was the frontline tank until the M1 showed up a while later). I've got a bit from a tester where he says the system was better than you would think: Tom Farrier Retired USAF rescue helicopter pilot; current aviation safety contractor (UAS) said: In 1982 I participated in both cooperative and non-cooperative tests at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland, flying an Air Force CH-3E helicopter against a Sergeant York. I would have been dead many times over had it been shooting live rounds at us instead of just video. The Sergeant York was the front-runner in a program intended to provide the Army with a sorely needed “division air defense” (DIVAD) weapon system. It was based on a novel concept: re-purposing M48 Patton tank chassis’ with a new turret incorporating twin Swedish Bofors 40mm cannons and two radar systems - one for area surveillance (the rectangular antenna) and one for targeting (the conical antenna, an off-the-shelf application of the F-16′s radar). A firing control system integrated the two radars, with on-board software prioritizing targets based on the threat they were assessed to pose to the system itself. (For the late ’70s /early ’80s, this was cosmic.) If the operator elected to allow the system to engage targets hands-off, it would slew the turret around at a nauseatingly rapid rate, taking on each in turn automatically. On the next-to-last day of the test, my aircraft was joined by an Army AH-1 Cobra and OH-58 Kiowa and two Air Force A-10s. My H-3 was part of the test profile because its radar signature was essentially the same as that of an Mi-24 HIND assault helicopter of the day, which was heavily armed with both anti-tank missiles and rockets. We all converged on it simultaneously from about 6000 meters. My aircraft was the first to die, followed by the two A-10s, then the Cobra, and finally the Kiowa. It took less than 15 seconds to put plenty of hypothetical rounds into each of us. I spent a depressing amount of that week watching myself get tracked and killed on video. Trying to “mask” behind anything other than rising terrain simply didn’t work; the DIVAD radar got a nice Doppler return off my rotor system if any part of it was within its line of sight, and it burned right through trees just fine. I couldn’t outrun or out-maneuver it laterally; when I moved, it tracked me. I left feeling pretty convinced that it was the Next Big Thing, especially since I’d come into the test pretty cocky thanks to having had a lot of (successful) exercise experience against current Army air defense systems. So, what happened to the program itself? I think it was a combination of factors. First, the off-the-shelf concept was cool as far as it went, but the Patton design already was a quarter-century old; the DIVAD was awfully slow compared with the M1 Abrams tanks it was supposed to protect. It would have had a lot of trouble keeping up with the pack. Second, The Atlantic Monthly published a really nasty article (bordering on a hatchet job) purporting to show the program was a complete failure and a ruinous waste of money. One of its most impressive bits of propaganda was an anecdote about a test where the system - on full automatic - took aim at a nearby trailer full of monitoring equipment. Paraphrasing, “It tracked and killed an exhaust fan,” chortled the author. (See The Gun That Shoots Fans for a recounting of this.) Yeah, it did. It was designed to look for things that rotate (like helicopter main rotor systems) and prioritize them for prompt destruction. If any bad guys were on the battlefield in vehicles with unshrouded exhaust fans, they might have been blown away rather comprehensively. (My understanding at the time was that said fan was part of a rest room in one of the support vehicles and not a “latrine,” but why mess up a good narrative, right?) To my knowledge, neither ventilated latrines nor RVs full of recording devices are part of a typical Army unit’s table of allowance, so I really doubt there was much of a fratricide threat there. However, the bottom line was that this particular piece of partisan reporting beat the crap out of a program that I believe the Army needed, but already was facing a few developmental issues, and helped hasten its cancellation. (The New York Times opinion piece linked to above was equally laden with innuendo and assumptions. It made a fair point about possible anti-radiation attacks it might have invited… but there are radars on every battlefield, and there are means of controlling emissions. It compared a late-Fifties era Soviet system - the ZSU-23-4 - with one fully twenty years newer in design. It asserted that it couldn’t hit fixed-wing aircraft, which to my mind and personal observation was arrant nonsense. The only issue it raised that I agree with was possible NATO compatibility problems with the unique 40mm caliber shells the Sergeant York’s guns fired. Funny - the Times pontificated that it wouldn’t be cancelled, too. Oops.) Third, the hydraulics that were used in the prototype were a 3000 psi system that really couldn’t handle the weight of the turret in its Awesome Hosing Things mode. One of the only times I actually got a score on the system was when I cheated; I deliberately exploited that vulnerability. I flew straight toward the system (which would have blown us out of the sky about twenty times over had I tried to do so for real) until directly over it, then tried to defeat the system from above. If memory serves, the system specifications called for the guns to elevate to more than 85 degrees if something was coming up and over; it then would lower them quickly, slew the turret 180 degrees around, and raise the guns again to re-engage. It was supposed to be able to do that in perhaps ten seconds (but I’m here to tell you it did it a lot faster than that). So, I had my flight engineer tell me the moment the guns dropped, at which point I did a course reversal maneuver to try to catch it pointed the wrong way. What the video later showed was: Helicopter flies over. Traverse/re-acquire movement starts. Helicopter initiated hammerhead turn (gorgeous, if I say so myself). Guns started to elevate to re-engage. Clunk. Guns fall helplessly down; DIVAD crew uses bad language. The hydraulics hadn’t been able to support the multiple close-on, consecutive demands of movement in multiple axes and failed. Like I said, I cheated. The Army and the contractors already knew about this problem and were going to fit out production models with a 5000 psi system. That might have had some survivability issues of its own, but the Army was perfectly happy that we’d done what we did - it proved the test wasn’t rigged and underscored the need for the production change. Finally, the Army itself honestly appraised the system based on its progress (and lack of progress) versus their requirements. Wikipedia provides a passage that encapsulates this end-game well: “The M247 OT&E Director, Jack Krings, stated the tests showed, ‘...the SGT YORK was not operationally effective in adequately protecting friendly forces during simulated combat, even though its inherent capabilities provided improvement over the current [General Electric] Vulcan gun system. The SGT YORK was not operationally suitable because of its low availability during the tests.’ ” I guess I’m forced to conclude that the Sergeant York was a really good concept with some definite developmental flaws - some recognized and being dealt with, perhaps one or two that would have made it less than fully effective in its intended role - that was expensive enough for bad PR to help bring it down before it fully matured. The Army was under a lot of political pressure to get it fielded, but to their credit they decided not to potentially throw good money after bad. On balance, a lot of the contemporaneous criticisms mounted against the M247 really don’t hold up very well over time. Short-range air defense currently is provided by the latest generation of the AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel system. Radar emitting on the battlefield? Check. Target prioritization capabilities? Check. Towed (which equals “slow”) versus self-propelled? Check. I’m glad we never wound up in the position of needing it but not having it. My personal judgment was and is that it probably could have wound up a heck of a lot more capable and useful than its developmental history might suggest, but its cancellation probably was justified given other acquisition priorities at the time. Bottom line: I repeatedly flew a helicopter against it over the course of many hours of testing, including coming at it as unpredictably as I knew how, and it cleaned my clock pretty much every time.
Thanks. I used to work in USPS Engineering. We worked on an earlier version of this. Ergonomic requirements are taken very seriously there, as are COTS requirements. The engineering and analysis that occurs within the USPS is no joke. It's an awesome place for an engineer to work.
@@mike27356 Yes we did. Not as many as we would have liked. There was generally a political blocker and some sort of labor union restriction that restricted access to users. We had to work with what we had in that situation.
I’m not gonna say that this is an attractive vehicle, but it’s better looking than the last one, and it’s kind of weirdly cute. I also think they did a nice job of taking all these awkward proportions and unifying them into one design. This design at least flows from one place to another. It looks like something that might come out of a Disney cartoon, or maybe one of those Cartoon Network cartoons where everybody’s bodies really tiny and their heads really big. This design does not offend me
The great Dieter Rams said "Good design is honest" and that's what this is: it's honest about its purpose. The huge forehead, tiny nose, squat stance - that's all to make it so many types of people can effectively deliver mail.
Just pointing out: The Promasters aren't for mail delivery. They aren't right hand drive at all. They are used by "park ands loop" routes, but more often they are just package delivery vans. Most offices will only have one and they are usually only used for packages during high volume times, like around Christmas. The Gruman LLV is (currently) the most common vehicles, but because they are so old, they are slowly being phased out for the Metris while offices wait for the NGDV. Additional: At 7:00 you mention a 70 mile range. To my knowledge, not many routes exceed this range. My office has only two, and that out of 2 dozen routes. Those routes are also POV (personally own vehicle) routes and pay milage, rather than using a USPS vehicle. All of the other routes in my office would be just fine in this range, enough to finish the entire route and still make it back to charge overnight for the next day's useage.
And that 70 mile range is a minimum after years of expected battery degradation and use of climate controls, very unlikely to see that range anytime soon barring some horrible mistakes in manufacturing
@@det_tf2 And theres no way there would be any of those, but I'm being told I'll be having to deal with everything that goes wrong which will be interesting... Apparently these aren't coming with much of any warranty available, I think I was told basically the engine and frame, and I'm terrified they're going to be something at the level of the Metris for 'reliability'...
There are lights in the cargo area immediately rear of the side cargo door. They're in the ceiling at the level of the rear rollup door. Not sure why they weren't on during your demo though
I drive a 2023 Ford e-transit for work. While it has "Ford issues" (mostly a lack of attention to detail on comfort and useability issues), the power train is awesome. Summertime range is about half-again as high as cold-weather range. Im a huge fan of the post office using off-the-shelf vehicles. It means better parts availability (and lower costs) than when they use proprietary vehicles. This parts availability also means longer life and better resale value when they eventually reach EOL. To the extent these new vehicles are based on an existing platform (other than the body, anyway), they will benefit the same way.
I was wondering if there was a requirement in the design parameters that the vehicle be visually pleasant? We're talking about working vehicles, not show cars. Frankly, I don't give a F&@% how it looks. Can the employees use it? Will it be reliable? Will it get the job done? Anything else is irrelevant.
@@Khronogi mail is a complete waste of resources. All my bills are paid online. When I do have to mail something it’s typically overnight via UPS or FedEx. When I receive packages it’s typically delivered via UPS or an LTL carrier.
Thanks for the review. This couldn’t be any worse than what I’ve driven for the last 40 years. The jeep batteries would die if you ran the heater and lights at the same time, underpowered alternator. The FFVs had good ventilation but the flat, short seating position was painful and rear bumpers are no step. The LLVs are ok but the top of my head is scarred from the short parcel area height. Also each generation has gotten wider turning circles. I look forward to trying the new NGDVs despite their looks and obvious flaws. The higher roofs will require the customers to trim their trees higher. There’s no left side window opening, so no flow through ventilation means more ac use. The 5 second before and after accident recording time is insufficient. Don’t get me started on the size. It must be maneuverable around parked cars without the tear end clipping them or the mailboxes. Washington is determined to make us a package delivery service despite our mandate being to deliver the mail. I was hoping the electric units would be phased in slowly as originally planned so that the latter models would have improved battery technology but it’s all got to be NOW if not sooner. Just sitting here waiting on the future to arrive. Not sure that it will be delivered by the USPS though.
I drove the Jeep for a year or two, finally getting used LLVs with lots of miles on them. I have to say, though, the LLV is basically a great design that needs further refinement. Due to the lack of a lot of first class mail we experience when the internet took off, we are getting less mail. When Amazon quit the USPS, we got fewer packages. Retrofitting the LLV with better engines, slightly redesigned body interior to prevent your head from be bruised, would fix it all. You can use the current platforms for retrofitting and not spend a ton of money. The USPS really doesn't need to spend billions when it spends more than it makes. And why in the world does the USPS deliver 6 days a week, not 5, giving every regular employee a weekend off?
@@bondgabebond4907 Because business and life runs 7 days a week now. The six day week is from our Judeo-Christian heritage of honoring one day as the Sabbath. Nothing to do with giving people consecutive days off.
@@bondgabebond4907 You have made the comment I wanted to do.Absolutely correct,because I figure NOBODY asked the people that have to USE these vehicles day in day out in all kinds of weather
They were incredibly practical. One pedal driving, maneuverable, easy to load and unload. But the committees couldn't make money faffing around for years "designing". Divco-Wayne made them by the hundeds. THey were repurposed by many many people.
I can't understand why this wasn't a series hybrid from the start (all electric drive, engine just generates electricity). Given all the design parameters, that's the most obvious solution as soon as you're allowed to make a clean-sheet design. Then the option is either a 20-mi electric range plus a gas engine, or 70-mi range all battery, and you could even swap the engine for a battery pack down the road.
part of the requirement was drivers seat height, the carriers that are using the Metris hate them as the seat is higher than the old LLV and it makes it harder to put mail in standard height mail boxes, the transit based EV could not be used on mounted routes (where the carrier puts mail in the box while in the vehicle) they are just too high
RE vehicles catching on fire. NHTSA stats show that Hybrids are most likely to catch on fire (2 drive systems under one crowded hood=heat), followed by gas vehicles, with all electric vehicles least likely to catch on fire.
That’s because an EV fire isn’t a regular fire. It is more dangerous and toxic to the environment. Harder to extinguish. Burns hotter. The fumes produced can be fatal to first responders or anyone else involved. These are not just normal car fires. They are more serious and need more scrutiny. There clearly needs to be bans on them in or around any structure, etc.
@@ohhhface619 So what about the 3.3 million Hyundai/Kia gas vehicles so likely to catch fire that mahe maker told owners NOT to park them in buildings? I understand that EV fires are hotter, harder to put out, etc. However, the number of EV fires is miniscule compared to hybrid and gas vehicle fires. See data below. A fire department somewhere in the mid-west had a brain storm and came up with an answer for EV (and other vehicle fires). A fire blanket, a freaking enormous fire blanket, about 20 feet wide and 30-40 feet long. Two fire fighters wearing full protective gear (including oxygen) simply pull the blanket over the vehicle on fire, and it goes out due to lack of oxygen. They they leave the blanket on, while cooling it with water until it is cool enough that the lithium will not catch fire spontaneously. Here is the vehicle fire data from NHTSA: Vehicle Fuel Fires (per 100K vehicle) Total Fire 1. Hybrid 3474.5 16,051 2.Gas 1529.9 199,533 3.Electric 25.1 52 I know this may be hard to read, but here it is: Per 100,000 vehicles of each type, Hybrids had 3,474 fires, gas vehicles had 1,529, and electrics had 52, again all per 100,000 vehicles of that type. The news media has become fixated on EV fires, and love to run video's of it. But the data is clear, they don't catch on fire frequently. Source: www.carjunkya.com/electric-car-fire-statistics/#:~:text=Hybrid%2Dpowered%20vehicles%20are%20at,and%203.4%25%20for%20hybrid%20vehicles. Data on leading cause of vehicle fires: The top cause of vehicle fires is rotted fuel lines that leak gasoline or diesel onto hot engine parts. From: guerrallp.com/practice-areas-old-page/automotive-defects/what-makes-a-car-catch-on-fire#:~:text=The%20top%20cause%20of%20vehicle,fire%20from%20a%20simple%20spark.&text=Electrical%20system%20failures%20are%20the,of%20car%20fires%20in%20America. So, in essence, EV's fire are blown way out of proportion.
While obviously fires are bad, and we'd like to have them less frequently, the _severity_ of the fire matters! An EV battery fire is a metal fire, and contains all 3 points of the Fire Triangle: Fuel, Oxygen, Heat. I'd rather get bit weekly by mosquitoes than a highly venomous snake once. I had dinner with the fire chief at the local airport a few months back. Lithium fires are what they fear most. We discussed on-board aircraft fires, EVs in the garage, etc., and this was right before the Luton fire. There currently aren't any good ways to deal with EV / large lithium battery fires.
For those curious the reason the LLV is being retired is even when it was first built the engine known as the Iron Duke and was already a 30 year old design and has the reservoir for the windshield wiper fluid directly over the wire harness and the fluid does eat wire insulation and is flammable so this is a major upgrade
The reason the LLV is being retired doesn't have to do with anything you mentioned. The LLV is being retired because of when the LLV was brought into service this was before internet shopping became a thing, and so the overwhelming majority of the mail the LLV would be carrying were letters, and it was designed for that. Once relatively heavy packages became the norm guess what little van got overloaded on a regular basis? Relocating a windshield wiper fluid reservoir is easy. The Iron Duke is the perfect engine for the LLV, it is arguably the most durable small engine ever made, Iron block, timing gears, horribly understressed, etc.
The Iron Duke was NOT a 30 year old design when these LLV were first produced. The Iron Duke, which was a Pontiac engine, was introduced in the late 70's.
The battery will last MUCH longer if they use level 2 chargers and do NOT top the battery up each time (maybe 80%) they charge it and charge enough to keep about 20% at the end of day. Fast charging is only needed on long trips. Also, Sodium-Sulphur batteries are being tested right now that offer much longer useful life and more energy density. Also, batteries with built in fire suppression are now being tested. The lithium itself is not what burns, but the coolant fluid in the battery. If these vehicles are well cared for, they will last far longer than the LLV. If they drive them with one pedal driving, even the brake pads will last much longer.
Thanks for this video with in-depth info on the new Postal Vans. The specs look good for successfully fielding a BEV fleet. However they will be expensive, and I am glad USPS is also buying COTS BEV alternatives.
This is a great summary of this issue! I would add that Ford bowed out of the partnership with Oshkosh quite a while ago - around the time I retired from Ford in 2017 - though Oshkosh did retain a Ford engine for their ICE version. Though it seems to me that it would be way more economical to purchase and use a lightly modified BEV such as the E-Transit or electric versions of the Metro or Ram vans. A 6'-2" person can easily stand in a high-roof Transit van without hitting their head. All three vehicles are made in RHD versions for various markets, so no new engineering or tooling is even required.
At first glance, yes it makes more sense to use COTS vehicles that already come in RDH variants but when you actually dig into the the implementation it's becomes obvious why they didn't. The Metris is the only one of the 3 that is currently available in the US as RHD. But you can't stand up in the back, it doesn't have the package capacity the USPS wanted, and the doors are notorious for breaking off their hinges. Add that to the fact that Mercedes isn't interested in expanding the US market because no one other than USPS buys them. On to the ProMaster and Transit. While they are available in other markets in RHD configuration (the ProMaster is called the Fiat Ducato in Europe) they are not currently sold in the US. There's all sorts of finicky rules you need to deal with to import cars less than 25 years old, mainly crash testing which is extremely expensive. But it might be worth it considering the number of vehicles that will be purchased, but they you remember that they're not built in America. Which for a US government contract of this magnitude and visibility is a non-starter. And you can't just force them to be made in America either because then Ford and Stellantis have to spend the money up front to get them certified for sale in the US and change their manufacturing lines for a share of vehicles that is very small compared to their other US market share. It just wouldn't make a ton of business sense for them to do all that bespoke work to supply vehicles to a single customer. So there is some logic to the decision and you have to remember that the situation is often not as clear cut as it seems.
@@Jelly452527 I worked on this proposal to the postal service when I was at Ford. We would have been more than happy to build the RHD versions at Kansas City Assembly. Even with the added engineering and tooling, it would still be way more economical than designing and manufacturing an all-new vehicle as they are doing. The real issue was that the postal service did not want to compromise on their specifications - at all. A big issue was the "driver's" door - it had to be a full-heigh sliding door. Yeah, that right there was a non-starter.
@@dperreno can you blame them for not wanting to compromise? If I was buying 100k vehicles that are expected to last 20+ years (which for the Transit is questionable) I would want it to be exactly to my specifications
@@Jelly452527 It's the specifications that push the cost to $100k+. The RHD Metros that they are currently using only cost them probably $20k. Even an electric version of the Metro/Ram/Transit would be under $40k. Just sayin.
As a person who worked for USPS, all of the new vehicles was supposed to be electric. Than something shady happened behind doors and it turned into mostly ICE vehicles. The longest postal route is about 160+ miles. The Post master told me to spend 120,000+ USD on 2 suitable delivery vehicles after they cut my pay and hours. My take home pay after taxes, insurance, and Union dues was 0 USD.
Yup, there is still no reason to believe the Oshkosh truck will ever enter mass production. Oshkosh admits they don't have the required EV expertise and will need to contract out core EV functionality.
@@funkijote Workhorse does. They have the factory, staff and expertise now. Oshkosh is/was a joke. th-cam.com/video/vY9UcT_evYk/w-d-xo.htmlsi=R1Acx5XX5HkvVGSV th-cam.com/video/RyqUwpNRcfw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=llOVCrJfaPoJdcXK th-cam.com/video/9ES0AhZkzaQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=j2ZgvcN2K7yFMg-Y th-cam.com/video/DRFxfePFm3s/w-d-xo.htmlsi=8EvllfKQTMSH7XSv
They try electric vehicles, and when they start running out of batteries on the road, it becoems a nightmare. Never mind the cold. And they want these new ones to have air conditioning.
How much does the windshield on this new vehicle cost? What is the shipping cost for a replacement windshield. In many places in the snow belt these windshields risk being broken faster than they can be replaced.
Have to point out that COTS is used everywhere, we use it in tech and I don't think it's a government acronym. The decision is to either roll your own solution or go COTS.
Everyone complaining about the Bradley comparison because it’s ugly and feature-bloated but undeniably effective, seem to be missing the point that that’s exactly what you say your expectations for the NGDV are!
I'd rather have a heated bumper then a rough textured surface, of which becomes even more slippery then a smooth surface under heavy snow & freezing conditions.
The ghost of Grumman remains on Long Island! And they used to have such a huge footprint. Aluminum body, I'll bet. Grumman stopped making canoes decades ago but you can still run across them pretty frequently. They simply don't wear out. OK, hardly a good comparison - but quality aluminum is damn durable. What's the chassis bases on?
I've only seen the USPS use the old school ones that are on life support... I've never seen a mini van USPS like these, or the plastic ford one you showed there.... The only ones I've seen is the Grumman LLV. I am in the Phoenix area. The only USPS "vans" i've seen are just plane grey looking minivans (they look just like a soccar mom mini van) and they only deliver to very rural areas of the valley. Where I live, in North Peoria AZ, its all brand new housing/roads/commercial/etc... I have mountains and desert hiking litterally walking 5 minutes any direction from my house... so I may be semi rural, yet still the Grumman LLV here too... These things are on life support. My mailman at my old house in Phoenix, he shut it down and started up at each mail box... restarting the truck every 30 seconds. that thing rattled and grunted and sounds like a bag of cats being beaten with a baseball bat. just bad. but that LLV kept going and going and the 13 years I owned that house, every single day, i heard it coming down the street house by house and went out and chatted with him.
Im excited, i like the overall looks and EV platforms. I appreciate you explaining reasons they did certain things as they have told us absolutley nothing. More excited than anything for AC.
Using the Bradley Fighting Vehicle asa bad example is way off base. The Bradley is the best in the world, the Ukrainian Army absolutely loves them and they say it is far superior to the Russian AFVs they were using. I’d suggest your otherwise excellent technical comparison should use something better than a comedy film as a source of info.
@@popuptoaster Feature creep just wasn’t an issue with the Bradley. The thing was from the get go a reaction to the BMP. The Bradley had no lineage with the troop transports designs that just had machine guns, it from the start had an turreted auto cannon.
EPA standards don’t take into account things like the postal service because well legally they can’t. Technically the post office is a higher authority than the EPA.
I wonder if the public can buy one of these? I mean if its underpinnings are a ford transit I’d imagine it’s 50 state legal emissions. Supposedly one of these is costing the post office around $60,000 per unit.
The public will likely never have the opportunity. The only reason there are a few LLVs in private hands is because Grumman made a few too many in excess of the USPS order, and they weren't explicitly disallowed to sell them to the public. I'm pretty sure that loophole no longer exists
This is what form before function looks like. Huge windshield for high visibility, low hood so that no one gets run over, huge trunk because people are shipping more packages. I'm sure there are more items that I am missing, but this is a vehicle that was designed to deliver mail and be *safe,* which isn't a bad thing.
So many complaints about what they LOOK LIKE. But the biggest improvement I see is the ability to STAND UPRIGHT in the back -- that is such a huge improvement and a good thing for health and ergonomics and productivity. No more lower back pain from stooping over and no more banging heads on the door frame or roof. YAY.
I like it a lot! We have LLVs in my area, because we are a rural town with under 10000 people. The NGDV reminds me of the LLV, but it also looks like a little duck! It'll be a long time before we get them, and the LLVs will be soldiering on!
When it comes to the USPS Transit vans, the thing that bugs me the most is that empty #^&%ing lighted license plate holder on the back. FFS couldn't they use it for a plate with the vehicle ID#, or else a plain USPS logo decorative plate, or... SOMETHING lol?
@@BoomBap75 It just seems like such a simple thing for them to put SOMETHING on it, right? I hadn't even thought about the people who didn't realize postal vehicles don't get registered and don't need license plates lol.
they put numbered decals onto the bodywork likely to save money on making plates. oddly, some of their support vehicles do use actual plates but most of them will go without. if they're seen using plates,it will say "US government" and the text on it will be the decal written on the bodywork.
@marcberm Remember,we're talkn about da PostalService....Where Common Sense NEVER EXISTED!!!They told me at the Carrier Academy back in 1997,"If you see sumthin that doesn't make sense,it's NOT YOU,it's their intention!!"-😂..It's even WORSE NOW than back then..They still send us LLVs that barely runs good as Loaners,when repairing a current vehicle..When asked why do we even still keep the broke down LLVs in the fleet,My postmaster replied, "We can't get rid of em as long as the wheels are still good,and the engine is running!!"He even acknowledged that the BigWigs Downtown(Philly)knows the LLVs are a FIRE HAZARD,but they still won't take them out of service bcuz they wanna wait until they're OFFICIALLY DEAD...
Thank you for all of the details. Knowing the ugly duckbill front is there for pedestrian safety makes it a lot less ugly. A lot of stuff about his vehicle makes a lot of sense - it does have pretty specialized needs. The initial 10% of the buy being BEVs was criminally stupid. Everyone's known for years, even decades, that package/postal delivery vans are the perfect use case for a BEV. Such a vehicle in ICE adds up an absurd amount of idling. Automatic engine cutoff and restart has its own problems, and the worst part of emissions happens at engine start. Imagine the number of cycles per week!
Now the problem is the post offices don't have enough electricity to charge all of the trucks at the same time. This is going to take a decade to phase in.
Do you really think they will replace ALL of these existing trucks in a single year? Do you really feel they all need to charge every night when the average postal route is in the area of 25 miles or less? Yes, there are always exceptions, but they can work it out.
I dunno. Amazon went from zero electric vans 2 years ago to me seeing at least 8 of 10 vans around here being electric. I think they can get the post office distribution centers with chargers as fast as they can produce the vehicles. I mean, it's only level 2. Level 2 is like a clothes dryer or household oven.
@@rupe53 No I said its going to take a decade to phase in. Some post offices have 20 or 30 trucks. Ok so maybe half of them charge each night. A lot of electrical work will have to be done at each PO. At their pace... 10 years, bidding process etc etc.
@@greenfire919 our government may have some issues, but when the chips are down, I see a bid process that's maybe 90 days and less than 90 days to complete work. BTW, the post office is only regulated by the feds. It's actually a stand-alone deal, although I see federal funding involved to pull this off. The only thing I see taking longer is if they decide to prioritize WHERE this happens first.
Chargers run on 240 V. Installing a charging stand takes most of the time for the construction work. And they can power various lines of vehicles at a time to limit the load.
We're talking about a lot of money. Research is necessary. The LLV was a good purchase that they will end up using for 35+ years by the time these new vehicles are fully supplied. Hopefully, this purchase will end up being good as well.
@@robj2704 crap!!!! its just another way for the government to waste tax money! all those mail delivery vans could have been odered to be make by Rivian, Ford or GM they have enough tech in house to bring more safety and integrate more features and finally using parts from millions of other vehicles they makes will ensure those will last even longer than 35 years! look at the b-52 bomber with new engines.
@robj2704 it looks like some good improvements. Parcel delivery has really picked up over the last 10 years. Being able to stand in the back is great. It was never fun to work kneeling or hunched over in the llv. Air-conditioning would be fabulous if it is allowed. The usps was known to disable it in the leased vehicles. Management thought we would waste time trying to cool off in the summer.
It’s clear that a true box-like structure would hold the most mail , however, there has to be some aesthetic trick to add some curvature or tumblehome to the sides. In addition, what’s with the 1970’s style bumper car bumpers?
the rivian van is more than good enough for the job they dont need to complicate things, i dont get it! OEM manufacturers have more than enough safety features and better integrated options for a fleet vehicle for example.
@@carholic-sz3qvthe Rivian doesn't come in RDH in America, so you can't deliver to mailboxes with it. You're also sitting way too high for mailbox deliver anyway
Since when did a utilitarian need to be anything but exactly that. NO styling necessary, best functional design. Consider UPS or FedEx delivery trucks Maybe complainers need to be required to pay special mail rail, just to get mail, to pay to have stylish delivery vehicles. EV is the ideal vehicle for the stop and go, with engine shutoff on ICE vehicles,. and really not very many miles a day. Put in chargers and end of fuel cost issues. They are not heavy load units, ideal in every way from a man that has 45 years in truck and this type special vehicles. Loved to have had the opportunity before retiring.
I've been climbing into and out of cab-over trucks for weeks and months several times in my life, doing odd jobs, and it didn't hurt me one bit. What it did was increase my physical fitness. Which is a very good thing for a driver that otherwise just sits around all day behind the wheel.
it's kind of goofy but it's fucking adorable. it's a just whimsical little guy! the first time you see it IRL you'll laugh out loud, a year later it'll very slightly brighten your day when you see one drive by, and by the time it's phased out for some more conventional design you'll be sad to see it go.
Thankfully CCS and NACS are just different shapes for the same protocol and wires, so it should be easy enough to retrofit if it ends up being a problem. That being said, these are fleet vehicles that will likely go through there whole lives charging at one home lot after each run, so compatibility with anything other than the chargers at that specific lot probably won’t matter too much. A heat pump definitely wouldn’t go amiss though, especially since between the large exterior size, window, and how frequently the door and window need to be opened compared to how short a typical route is, heating load is liable to be a lot more of a drain on the battery compared to driving than it would be for a regular EV. That extra 2 to 3 times the energy consumption in cold weather is something that probably is worth adding an reversing valve to the AC for.
Pendagon Wars is a perfect allegory for this process. Once they finally deliver production models, you'll see the best of 15-year-old technology finally available to postal workers!
Pentagon Wars may have been a funny movie, but not very factual. The Bradley Fighting Vehicle is a solid system with a good reputation and is being used in Ukraine now very well.
Letter Carrier here, delivered to neighborhoods in Oregon for 40 years, had my own LLV truck for 20 of those years, a great delivery vehicle. Its weaknesses were rear wheel drive, light rear-end in snow but other than those weather issues it was amazing! The issues I see with this new truck is height, in Oregon and many other states there are trees we have to deal with as in to get to the boxes we need to get under the tree branches. Surely the designers know this so how did they plan for that? If I was given one of these new trucks I can imagine getting out of the truck a lot to deliver to boxes under obstructions. The old LLV's we aluminum bodies mounted on Chevy Blazer trucks, easy to fix and replace. How costly will these new trucks be to repair?
I'm sure _someone_ else must have brought this up by now, but when thing X is "preceded by" thing Y, it means that thing Y came _before_ thing X. You're either looking for "succeeded by" in its much rarer usage, or the more approachable "followed by."
@@andrewdiamond2697 just remember that with any new vehicle you have reduced maintenance for the first few years anyway, which is partially offset by the purchase price. We know the power source will be cheaper. The unknown here is the cost of installing / upgrading electrical at any given facility... and of course, there will be some maintenance needed on that gear over time. I'd say 3-5 years overall for cost break even on the whole ball of wax.
@@rupe53 I saw a spreadsheet on this once. It was an astoundingly quick payback. At scale, installing a Level 2 charger can be done for about $700 in materials and $600 in labor per spot. Then the electric company needs to provide service to the site. Not sure if the power company pays that or the USPS, but that certainly costs some money. Bottom line, the way these vehicles suck down gas with their constant start-stop-start-stop, it was measured in months and not years. I was pretty stunned.
@@andrewdiamond2697 I was basing my call on privately owned EVs and cutting it on half. I think we're both on the right track that it will be quicker than most people know.
Every requirement makes sense in isolation, all coming together to make a surreal vehicle that looks like it came out of a Richard Scarry book. This is peak government contract, just absolutely outstanding work.
Possibly due to higher upfront costs of the changeover, but also likely for political reasons during the Trump administration. City/suburban delivery over fixed routes based from a central depot is a near-ideal use case for electrification.
@@NextNate03 Donald Trump - he was recorded asking for a billion dollar “campaign contribution” from oil companies to cancel the current administration’s policies.
I think the new mail truck prototype looks comical, as if a cartoon writer created it. I don't have a problem having a smile on my face every time it shows up to my house lol.
It's nice to see a company doing its own research rather than relying on the same government that pays for environmental studies that always favor drastic climate related taxes and regulation while not funding those that don't. Bravo Oshkosh. Take a bow. 😊
Thanks for the video. It is the first time I have heard much about it, & and work for a Postal Contractor and even the Postal Carriers don't know much about them. Well, except that they will have A/C; trust me when I say that they are looking forward to that feature.
I feel like it needs to be repeated... but that whole pentagon wars book and film is based on the absolute fantasy of its author :) Anyho, thanks for the indepth video on the postal vans :D
Good to see some thought has gone in to designing a vehicle to suit the job. Here in UK, the Royal Mail uses standard production vans of various makes (probably buying from the manufacturer that offers the best deal at the time). We don't even have the driver on the kerb side- our posties have to exit into traffic every time !
As a postal mail carrier, i can tell you all right now we are not built to support or maintain electric vehicles. We will bleed money that way. The initial 90/10 gas to electric was perfect. Also, we don't drive far but the vehicles rarely turn off. On a 12 hr day that vehicle is on 6 hours.
I'm just glad it has air conditioning. Those poor guys have it bad enough sorting mail in a very hot vehicle.
The health or safety was never a big concern, much less comfort. One carrier put a thermometer in his llv, it registered 20 degrees hotter than outside.
@fredbecker607 yes, I bring one during the hottest parts of the summer and I've seen it top out around 135 in the cab.
You're not going to like this but misuse of A/C in a vehicle can make you sick and possibly even kill you. I know because of doing deliveries in Florida. I would strongly suggest using powerful fans and open windows instead. The reason is because of getting in & out the vehicle frequently. hotcoldhotcoldhotcoldhotcold, that is what will kill you.
@@kmg501 The AC does not necessarily need to be set to "cold" - in many cases 75 degrees would still be a massive improvement. Besides, many carriers are already driving vehicles (ford transit, etc) that have AC. And the same is true of other carriers.
@@kmg501 Citation needed.
City postal carrier here: I am INCREDIBLY excited about the NGDV, especially for the reasons why it’s so oddly designed. The forward visibility is a godsend, and the ability to stand up inside as well. A/C, a backup camera, and other niceties are just cherries on top for me ahah
I am not at all related to USPS but I'm super excited for these. Safety, ergonomics, and effectiveness all together. It may by kind of goofy looking to some but I find it charming and unique.
Can't wait for them to be a typical part of the American landscape as they roll out. The existing trucks are already pretty iconic and these absolutely will be too!
This video made me think "shouldn't all trucks/cars be designed so a woman can see over the hood"?
This is what matters. If the postal carriers love it, then who cares if it's ugly?
I'm a carrier near Phoenix AZ, the AC is not a nicety, it's a necessity lol.
@@darthsirrius Oh my god, yeah, I’d imagine. I’m up in Washington so I don’t have it nearly as bad
The USPS having it's own millage testing plan makes sense. There's a lot more stop-and-go while delivering mail then there is even for EPA standard city driving.
Yeah, which is actually perfect for a battery or hybrid vehicle.
@blurglide What's the infrastructure impact for charging a small fleet of vehicles at an existing facility where there are no current charging stations? Installation cost, physical location space, draw, and load all need to be considered as well. What is the impact of charging 30 plus vehicles in the neighborhood? I do not think those aspects of this has even been considered by the omnipotent powers that be running the post office let alone other impacts that I haven't even thought of.
@@blurglide I disagree. While it sounds great, battery technology is not good enough to make real sense in normal passenger vehicles at this time. It makes even less sense in something that has to charge and be used every day. The only reason ANY carriers are changing to them is because of bs government mandates based on activist nonsense. Gas engines aren't going to get great mpg because of all the stop and go for sure. But in the long run, battery powered vehicles don't make sense when considering that they are designed to throw the whole vehicle away considering replacement costs often far exceed the cost of a brand new one.
@@onlylivingicon It's going to be a significant cost to outfit some of these offices with all that. Consider this: my office would need to have its entire parking lot ripped apart to put in the lines. It would need to be upgraded enough to carry all that current because I doubt it was originally intended for that amount of draw. You would need 19 chargers minimum. You have some routes in the office that approach or exceed 80 miles per day. You have Amazon days where only packages are delivered. On those days one can often exceed 100 miles. And just a few months ago I had a day where I pulled over 160 miles (that was a long day) because we had so many packages and not enough people. Now my gas tank can handle that. Can a battery powered vehicle? What happens when a carrier is told they have to get it all done and they don't have enough battery to do it? What about those tow bills when the carrier inevitably runs out somewhere out in the county? What about when a carrier forgets to plug it up overnight? What about when a carrier doesn't plug it in good enough (that already happens with scanners, but luckily scanner batteries are small enough that a couple hours on the cradle in the morning can get you enough to run a whole day)? What happens when one of those chargers malfunctions and doesn't get the vehicle charged overnight and no one discovers it until the next morning? No one has considered these questions. I can guarantee you that.
@ram89572 Exactly. I didn't pose the questions you answered, but those are some of the concerns about the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order ramifications about feel-good decisions that few have actually considered. Environmental concerns as far as weather or power outages that can affect the start of the day, let alone human errors. The size of the vehicles affects parking due to the size of our lot. There are about 30 vehicles in my oceanside office in Massachusetts. Don't know if I want to be handling a charging cable in a downpour.
When I was at the post office they warned us about kids in the street. My first time out doing deliverys a kid was right in front. Thank god I walked out and checked. His mother came and pulled him out the street. That front end is designed for visibility.
Riding my bike to high school one day with a buddy (no hands on the handlebars, of course) who smacked right into the back of a stopped postal vehicle. Stationary, flasihing lights, big white thing on dark asphalt, it didnt' matter. Unbraced impact messed him up hard. It look me years to maybe figure out what had happened to this normally alert friend. Perhaps he trusted me to warn him.
In addition to "not being there" much of the time, they come to different conclusions about a situation. I'm not sure pedestrian warnings will cover all cases, but it won't hurt. I suggest taking one step further with pedestrian warnings abd alert both driver and pedestrian. If the vehicle is on-duty (lights flashing), the warning also goes to the outside. Sometimes, we just need that wake-up call.
Bullschitt no kids have been hit by mail trucks
@@harrybaulz666 That's the point of warning people BEFORE a kid or anyone else is hit....duh.
2 kids were playing in a big grocery store parking lot. When I was about to back out of my parking spot, I checked the mirrors and could see one kid but not the other. So, I got out and walked toward the rear of my car all the while scanning for the other kid. There she was, crouched down behind my car hiding from her brother!! Can't be too careful.
the electric USPS van from Canoo is way better then this POS. check it out.
As a postman and deliveryman myself, this thing is glorious and beatiful. Being able to just stand in the truck like that and not hit the roof, the WIDE doors, this is just perfect for this job.
Absolutely! If you spend a significant amount of your workday hunched over picking up packages, it's going to add up over time as a physical liability.
The window isn't great
There's a lot of good solid facts debunking a lot of disinfo here. One thing I'd add is the reason the post office doesn't go by EPA "City" numbers is because they know their own typical duty cycle and can replicate it, and with all its' stops and starts it returns a much lower number than the commuter-oriented EPA cycle.
Post office can't even make left turns because left turns cause a lot of idling and waiting. At least I've heard that
@@zzoinks UPS and amazon try to figure their routes without left turns. It improves speed and safety which help with gas use which helps the bottom line.
Slow speeds with a lot of stops, is actually more efficient for an EV over an ICE vehicle too. Breaking usually puts some power back into the battery, and no extra idling energy wasted just to prevent the engine from idling.
Like to add to this on debunking disinformation
The pentagon wars was based on a book that was basically the memoirs of a pathological liar.
Lazer pig has an excellent 28min video on it.
What are the other examples of "disinfo"
“The EPA tests aren’t good enough for them.” No, they aren’t, because postal vans aren’t driven like passenger cars. Don’t be daft.
I just watched the entire video and you did roast him lol
EPA is totally useless agency anyway, they wont do jack sh*t.
Looks better that the prototype
The EPA tests are also pretty poor for EV passenger vehicles.
People really only care about range when they go on a long trip, 95% on the highway at high speeds.
So long as you can charge at home you really don't care about range day to day.
@mark123655 true, for me even the early sub 100 mile range EVs would be fine for 90% of my needs. I'd happily replace the daily with a small EV with average range, I have a truck for truck stuff, a fun car for fun things and if I decide to take a thousand mile road trip I'd probably rather rent something than rag out my own vehicles. I often scroll listing's to see if I can score a car with a degraded battery for super cheap, unfortunately they are still their own thing ant tend to get snapped up by enthusiasts or shops for their own needs rather than sit on the used market for long.
Seeing actual, real-life examples, the design is actually kind of cute. I like it.
There was an episode of "30 Rock" where they try to design the perfect microwave oven. Instead, they end up designing the Aztec SUV.
Sounds like fiction following the thought process at GM back in the day.
"Three kinds of Heat!'
@@nicklappos Four doors and cup holders.
Postal Carrier here: No, your post office is not using Promasters or Metrises in any majority capacity. We're all still using the LLV because it continues to reign king in exactly the role it was designed for.
I live in an apartment complex, and the postal worker shows up in a promoter every weekday. They are becoming quite prevalent in dense area where mail is walked.
@@mrbillybob444makes sense for an apartment though. They are not delivering to individual mailboxes. There are communal mailboxes where they take out a crate of mail and put in in the right slots.
So for that case, yeah it makes sense to use a van because there is no reason to use the LLV
What? That’s not true, I live in a regular suburb and half our mail trucks are Metrises
I'm a rural carrier, and I drive a metris.
My mail carrier drives a Dodge Caravan, if I’m not mistaken. But I live in a large apartment building.
Its ugly but I think after 5 or 10 years this truck will be iconic like the current trucks. Ive also heard that postal workers don't like transit/metris vans because the sitting height isn't at mailbox height like the LLV and makes delivery uncomfortable, so even if these trucks are a little more expensive then a off the shelf van I think it could be worth it.
Worker compensation and sick days are damn expensive. That has to be taken into consideration by anyone criticizing the expense.
This vehicle is absolutely perfect for its intended purpose.
I'm sure if it isn't there will be full accountability 😂
What "Pentagon Wars" missed is the fact that the M2 Bradley is an amazingly effective troop transport and combat vehicle that 50 years after its inception is still dominating the battlefield. To be honest this new postal vehicle looks like it's going to be a real winner. It looks like a great mail hauler for intracity transport with a wide view for drivers to safely see everything around them. I think the vehicle is a real winner.
This was mentioned before the credits scroll the government spent another billion (with a 'b') on fixing the Bradley abd that it went on to get more kills in the Gulf War than even the Abrams.
True. But the Pentagon Wars remains a must see! It is both funny and informative.
@@paulmoscatt6529 The premise of the movie is that the Pentagon has a process that produces expensive weapons that don't work. That's not true. The past 30 years have shown that the process produces amazing weapons that work. The high cost reflects their real worth.
@@paulmoscatt6529 Funny sure, informatative not so much.
@@paulmoscatt6529”informative” 😂
Just an FYI for everyone: the pentagon wars is a completely ficticious retelling of the Bradley's development. It did not start as a battlefield taxi that had stuff added on later like cannons. It was designed from the get go to be an infantry support vehicle as a response to the soviet BMP. The idea of an aluminum box to carry infantry was not what the army sought.
"Pentagon Wars" is from the Spurlock/Moore school of sociopolitical documentaries. Tell a lie, support the lie with good production values, sell a million copies.
Yes, the Bradley is complimented a lot by Ukrainians currently fighting with it so the vehicle turned out have a long good track record. Of course it shouldn't take away one of the lessons of engineering/procurement which is to beware of mission creep.
@justinh.7846 not only that but it performed exceptionally well in the gulf war scoring more tank kills than the abrams
they shouldn't be in ukraine and they shouldn't have ever been in iraq ... when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail
@@Hard_Right why? Are they not performing the role they were designed to perform, infantry support? What makes the bradley a uniquely flawed design when compared to all other IFV's, BMP, Puma, Marder, boxer...
The Bradley may have had a convoluted development process but it was worthwhile in the end, as it is highly effective in combat, as proven by its record in the first Gulf war, where it destroyed more tanks than the Abrams, and 30 years later it is still proving it's worth everyday in Ukraine. If you're looking for an example of failure by design by committee, I would suggest the m249 Sergeant York SPAAG, and the infamous Pontiac Aztek. The Sergeant York is famous for pointing its weapons at the reviewing stand when placed in automatic mode
I don't think the Bradley's record in the Gulf War counts for much..... it's not like the US was fighting against a world class military. As far as Ukraine, well, it hasn't really made a difference there. Bradley's are being destroyed in Ukraine about as fast as we can send them.
Bradley was never combat tested against a near-peer in the types of situations it was designed for. Namely, fighting Russia in eastern Europe. Ukraine is using them now, but with a different doctrine than that of the US.
They're doing fairly well, but I'd bet my left nut that in a real major war, the Bradley would be too costly to keep replacing. It's a great vehicle to scout for spearhead armored assaults, that's about it though.
Sgt. York was killed because the program discovered the biggest snag in more modern systems: it's not the steel that's expensive; it's the *_SILICON_* (i.e., all the electronics) that is expensive (and not just in the installation but also in the debugging).
That and from my readings, the Sgt. York was a victim of post-WW2 penny pinching (it was discovered that quite a few barrels from the stocks were actually worn-out instead of actually viable), the FCS being a buggy mess, the hydraulics they had weren't up to the task (which were going to be replaced with 5kPSI variants in the production prototypes as the 3kPSI units would break in certain scenarios), and the M48 being the chassis of choice instead of something like the M60 (though, this is understandable as the M48 was being retired and the M60 was the frontline tank until the M1 showed up a while later).
I've got a bit from a tester where he says the system was better than you would think:
Tom Farrier Retired USAF rescue helicopter pilot; current aviation safety contractor (UAS) said:
In 1982 I participated in both cooperative and non-cooperative tests at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland, flying an Air Force CH-3E helicopter against a Sergeant York. I would have been dead many times over had it been shooting live rounds at us instead of just video.
The Sergeant York was the front-runner in a program intended to provide the Army with a sorely needed “division air defense” (DIVAD) weapon system. It was based on a novel concept: re-purposing M48 Patton tank chassis’ with a new turret incorporating twin Swedish Bofors 40mm cannons and two radar systems - one for area surveillance (the rectangular antenna) and one for targeting (the conical antenna, an off-the-shelf application of the F-16′s radar).
A firing control system integrated the two radars, with on-board software prioritizing targets based on the threat they were assessed to pose to the system itself. (For the late ’70s /early ’80s, this was cosmic.) If the operator elected to allow the system to engage targets hands-off, it would slew the turret around at a nauseatingly rapid rate, taking on each in turn automatically.
On the next-to-last day of the test, my aircraft was joined by an Army AH-1 Cobra and OH-58 Kiowa and two Air Force A-10s. My H-3 was part of the test profile because its radar signature was essentially the same as that of an Mi-24 HIND assault helicopter of the day, which was heavily armed with both anti-tank missiles and rockets. We all converged on it simultaneously from about 6000 meters. My aircraft was the first to die, followed by the two A-10s, then the Cobra, and finally the Kiowa. It took less than 15 seconds to put plenty of hypothetical rounds into each of us.
I spent a depressing amount of that week watching myself get tracked and killed on video. Trying to “mask” behind anything other than rising terrain simply didn’t work; the DIVAD radar got a nice Doppler return off my rotor system if any part of it was within its line of sight, and it burned right through trees just fine. I couldn’t outrun or out-maneuver it laterally; when I moved, it tracked me. I left feeling pretty convinced that it was the Next Big Thing, especially since I’d come into the test pretty cocky thanks to having had a lot of (successful) exercise experience against current Army air defense systems.
So, what happened to the program itself? I think it was a combination of factors. First, the off-the-shelf concept was cool as far as it went, but the Patton design already was a quarter-century old; the DIVAD was awfully slow compared with the M1 Abrams tanks it was supposed to protect. It would have had a lot of trouble keeping up with the pack.
Second, The Atlantic Monthly published a really nasty article (bordering on a hatchet job) purporting to show the program was a complete failure and a ruinous waste of money. One of its most impressive bits of propaganda was an anecdote about a test where the system - on full automatic - took aim at a nearby trailer full of monitoring equipment. Paraphrasing, “It tracked and killed an exhaust fan,” chortled the author. (See The Gun That Shoots Fans for a recounting of this.)
Yeah, it did. It was designed to look for things that rotate (like helicopter main rotor systems) and prioritize them for prompt destruction. If any bad guys were on the battlefield in vehicles with unshrouded exhaust fans, they might have been blown away rather comprehensively. (My understanding at the time was that said fan was part of a rest room in one of the support vehicles and not a “latrine,” but why mess up a good narrative, right?)
To my knowledge, neither ventilated latrines nor RVs full of recording devices are part of a typical Army unit’s table of allowance, so I really doubt there was much of a fratricide threat there. However, the bottom line was that this particular piece of partisan reporting beat the crap out of a program that I believe the Army needed, but already was facing a few developmental issues, and helped hasten its cancellation.
(The New York Times opinion piece linked to above was equally laden with innuendo and assumptions. It made a fair point about possible anti-radiation attacks it might have invited… but there are radars on every battlefield, and there are means of controlling emissions. It compared a late-Fifties era Soviet system - the ZSU-23-4 - with one fully twenty years newer in design. It asserted that it couldn’t hit fixed-wing aircraft, which to my mind and personal observation was arrant nonsense. The only issue it raised that I agree with was possible NATO compatibility problems with the unique 40mm caliber shells the Sergeant York’s guns fired. Funny - the Times pontificated that it wouldn’t be cancelled, too. Oops.)
Third, the hydraulics that were used in the prototype were a 3000 psi system that really couldn’t handle the weight of the turret in its Awesome Hosing Things mode. One of the only times I actually got a score on the system was when I cheated; I deliberately exploited that vulnerability. I flew straight toward the system (which would have blown us out of the sky about twenty times over had I tried to do so for real) until directly over it, then tried to defeat the system from above.
If memory serves, the system specifications called for the guns to elevate to more than 85 degrees if something was coming up and over; it then would lower them quickly, slew the turret 180 degrees around, and raise the guns again to re-engage. It was supposed to be able to do that in perhaps ten seconds (but I’m here to tell you it did it a lot faster than that). So, I had my flight engineer tell me the moment the guns dropped, at which point I did a course reversal maneuver to try to catch it pointed the wrong way. What the video later showed was:
Helicopter flies over.
Traverse/re-acquire movement starts.
Helicopter initiated hammerhead turn (gorgeous, if I say so myself).
Guns started to elevate to re-engage.
Clunk. Guns fall helplessly down; DIVAD crew uses bad language.
The hydraulics hadn’t been able to support the multiple close-on, consecutive demands of movement in multiple axes and failed. Like I said, I cheated. The Army and the contractors already knew about this problem and were going to fit out production models with a 5000 psi system. That might have had some survivability issues of its own, but the Army was perfectly happy that we’d done what we did - it proved the test wasn’t rigged and underscored the need for the production change.
Finally, the Army itself honestly appraised the system based on its progress (and lack of progress) versus their requirements. Wikipedia provides a passage that encapsulates this end-game well: “The M247 OT&E Director, Jack Krings, stated the tests showed, ‘...the SGT YORK was not operationally effective in adequately protecting friendly forces during simulated combat, even though its inherent capabilities provided improvement over the current [General Electric] Vulcan gun system. The SGT YORK was not operationally suitable because of its low availability during the tests.’ ”
I guess I’m forced to conclude that the Sergeant York was a really good concept with some definite developmental flaws - some recognized and being dealt with, perhaps one or two that would have made it less than fully effective in its intended role - that was expensive enough for bad PR to help bring it down before it fully matured. The Army was under a lot of political pressure to get it fielded, but to their credit they decided not to potentially throw good money after bad.
On balance, a lot of the contemporaneous criticisms mounted against the M247 really don’t hold up very well over time. Short-range air defense currently is provided by the latest generation of the AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel system. Radar emitting on the battlefield? Check. Target prioritization capabilities? Check. Towed (which equals “slow”) versus self-propelled? Check.
I’m glad we never wound up in the position of needing it but not having it. My personal judgment was and is that it probably could have wound up a heck of a lot more capable and useful than its developmental history might suggest, but its cancellation probably was justified given other acquisition priorities at the time.
Bottom line: I repeatedly flew a helicopter against it over the course of many hours of testing, including coming at it as unpredictably as I knew how, and it cleaned my clock pretty much every time.
@@greyfells2829If it was, why are we still using it.
Yea cmon, how many tanks has an aztek destroyed, none!
Thanks. I used to work in USPS Engineering. We worked on an earlier version of this. Ergonomic requirements are taken very seriously there, as are COTS requirements. The engineering and analysis that occurs within the USPS is no joke. It's an awesome place for an engineer to work.
Who is held accountable if these things start dropping like flies?
@@The_Ballo The prime contractor.
@@farmcat3198 haha, I doubt it
Current USPS VMF TECH here. Did you guys EVER consult with any end users?
@@mike27356 Yes we did. Not as many as we would have liked. There was generally a political blocker and some sort of labor union restriction that restricted access to users. We had to work with what we had in that situation.
I’m not gonna say that this is an attractive vehicle, but it’s better looking than the last one, and it’s kind of weirdly cute. I also think they did a nice job of taking all these awkward proportions and unifying them into one design. This design at least flows from one place to another.
It looks like something that might come out of a Disney cartoon, or maybe one of those Cartoon Network cartoons where everybody’s bodies really tiny and their heads really big.
This design does not offend me
The great Dieter Rams said "Good design is honest" and that's what this is: it's honest about its purpose. The huge forehead, tiny nose, squat stance - that's all to make it so many types of people can effectively deliver mail.
I don't understand why everyone cares so much about making this thing look attractive. STOP SPENDING MY TAXES ON YOUR OPINIONS
Just pointing out: The Promasters aren't for mail delivery. They aren't right hand drive at all. They are used by "park ands loop" routes, but more often they are just package delivery vans. Most offices will only have one and they are usually only used for packages during high volume times, like around Christmas.
The Gruman LLV is (currently) the most common vehicles, but because they are so old, they are slowly being phased out for the Metris while offices wait for the NGDV.
Additional: At 7:00 you mention a 70 mile range. To my knowledge, not many routes exceed this range. My office has only two, and that out of 2 dozen routes. Those routes are also POV (personally own vehicle) routes and pay milage, rather than using a USPS vehicle. All of the other routes in my office would be just fine in this range, enough to finish the entire route and still make it back to charge overnight for the next day's useage.
And that 70 mile range is a minimum after years of expected battery degradation and use of climate controls, very unlikely to see that range anytime soon barring some horrible mistakes in manufacturing
@@det_tf2 And theres no way there would be any of those, but I'm being told I'll be having to deal with everything that goes wrong which will be interesting...
Apparently these aren't coming with much of any warranty available, I think I was told basically the engine and frame, and I'm terrified they're going to be something at the level of the Metris for 'reliability'...
Honestly after looking at it for 12 minutes, I think I'm used to it. It's kinda cool, actually.
There are lights in the cargo area immediately rear of the side cargo door. They're in the ceiling at the level of the rear rollup door. Not sure why they weren't on during your demo though
I drive a 2023 Ford e-transit for work. While it has "Ford issues" (mostly a lack of attention to detail on comfort and useability issues), the power train is awesome. Summertime range is about half-again as high as cold-weather range.
Im a huge fan of the post office using off-the-shelf vehicles. It means better parts availability (and lower costs) than when they use proprietary vehicles. This parts availability also means longer life and better resale value when they eventually reach EOL. To the extent these new vehicles are based on an existing platform (other than the body, anyway), they will benefit the same way.
I was wondering if there was a requirement in the design parameters that the vehicle be visually pleasant? We're talking about working vehicles, not show cars. Frankly, I don't give a F&@% how it looks. Can the employees use it? Will it be reliable? Will it get the job done? Anything else is irrelevant.
How much it’s going to cost the tax payers?
@robertstanley980 hasn't the USPS been self funded since the 1970s?
@@robertstanley980 Do you like mail? Do you like your country?
@@warrensteel9954 😂😂😂😂
@@Khronogi mail is a complete waste of resources. All my bills are paid online. When I do have to mail something it’s typically overnight via UPS or FedEx. When I receive packages it’s typically delivered via UPS or an LTL carrier.
Thanks for the review. This couldn’t be any worse than what I’ve driven for the last 40 years. The jeep batteries would die if you ran the heater and lights at the same time, underpowered alternator. The FFVs had good ventilation but the flat, short seating position was painful and rear bumpers are no step. The LLVs are ok but the top of my head is scarred from the short parcel area height. Also each generation has gotten wider turning circles. I look forward to trying the new NGDVs despite their looks and obvious flaws. The higher roofs will require the customers to trim their trees higher. There’s no left side window opening, so no flow through ventilation means more ac use. The 5 second before and after accident recording time is insufficient. Don’t get me started on the size. It must be maneuverable around parked cars without the tear end clipping them or the mailboxes. Washington is determined to make us a package delivery service despite our mandate being to deliver the mail.
I was hoping the electric units would be phased in slowly as originally planned so that the latter models would have improved battery technology but it’s all got to be NOW if not sooner.
Just sitting here waiting on the future to arrive. Not sure that it will be delivered by the USPS though.
I drove the Jeep for a year or two, finally getting used LLVs with lots of miles on them. I have to say, though, the LLV is basically a great design that needs further refinement. Due to the lack of a lot of first class mail we experience when the internet took off, we are getting less mail. When Amazon quit the USPS, we got fewer packages. Retrofitting the LLV with better engines, slightly redesigned body interior to prevent your head from be bruised, would fix it all. You can use the current platforms for retrofitting and not spend a ton of money. The USPS really doesn't need to spend billions when it spends more than it makes. And why in the world does the USPS deliver 6 days a week, not 5, giving every regular employee a weekend off?
That last sentence is pure literary genius! XD
@@bondgabebond4907 Because business and life runs 7 days a week now. The six day week is from our Judeo-Christian heritage of honoring one day as the Sabbath. Nothing to do with giving people consecutive days off.
@@bondgabebond4907 You have made the comment I wanted to do.Absolutely correct,because I figure NOBODY asked the people that have to USE these vehicles day in day out in all kinds of weather
USPS drivers are going to get tired of hearing those parking sensors going of all the time and might ignore them when it's important.
My old Divco milk truck style would still function as a mail truck.
They were incredibly practical. One pedal driving, maneuverable, easy to load and unload. But the committees couldn't make money faffing around for years "designing". Divco-Wayne made them by the hundeds. THey were repurposed by many many people.
I can't understand why this wasn't a series hybrid from the start (all electric drive, engine just generates electricity). Given all the design parameters, that's the most obvious solution as soon as you're allowed to make a clean-sheet design. Then the option is either a 20-mi electric range plus a gas engine, or 70-mi range all battery, and you could even swap the engine for a battery pack down the road.
part of the requirement was drivers seat height, the carriers that are using the Metris hate them as the seat is higher than the old LLV and it makes it harder to put mail in standard height mail boxes, the transit based EV could not be used on mounted routes (where the carrier puts mail in the box while in the vehicle) they are just too high
Maybe that is why the post offices near me still use the LLV? Almost all mounted mailboxes.
RE vehicles catching on fire. NHTSA stats show that Hybrids are most likely to catch on fire (2 drive systems under one crowded hood=heat), followed by gas vehicles, with all electric vehicles least likely to catch on fire.
That statistic really surprised me. I had to verify it the first time I heard it. The press does like to hype some things like ev fires.
That’s because an EV fire isn’t a regular fire. It is more dangerous and toxic to the environment. Harder to extinguish. Burns hotter. The fumes produced can be fatal to first responders or anyone else involved. These are not just normal car fires. They are more serious and need more scrutiny. There clearly needs to be bans on them in or around any structure, etc.
@@ohhhface619 So what about the 3.3 million Hyundai/Kia gas vehicles so likely to catch fire that mahe maker told owners NOT to park them in buildings?
I understand that EV fires are hotter, harder to put out, etc. However, the number of EV fires is miniscule compared to hybrid and gas vehicle fires. See data below.
A fire department somewhere in the mid-west had a brain storm and came up with an answer for EV (and other vehicle fires). A fire blanket, a freaking enormous fire blanket, about 20 feet wide and 30-40 feet long. Two fire fighters wearing full protective gear (including oxygen) simply pull the blanket over the vehicle on fire, and it goes out due to lack of oxygen. They they leave the blanket on, while cooling it with water until it is cool enough that the lithium will not catch fire spontaneously.
Here is the vehicle fire data from NHTSA:
Vehicle Fuel Fires (per 100K vehicle) Total Fire
1. Hybrid 3474.5 16,051
2.Gas 1529.9 199,533
3.Electric 25.1 52
I know this may be hard to read, but here it is: Per 100,000 vehicles of each type, Hybrids had 3,474 fires, gas vehicles had 1,529, and electrics had 52, again all per 100,000 vehicles of that type. The news media has become fixated on EV fires, and love to run video's of it. But the data is clear, they don't catch on fire frequently.
Source: www.carjunkya.com/electric-car-fire-statistics/#:~:text=Hybrid%2Dpowered%20vehicles%20are%20at,and%203.4%25%20for%20hybrid%20vehicles.
Data on leading cause of vehicle fires: The top cause of vehicle fires is rotted fuel lines that leak gasoline or diesel onto hot engine parts. From: guerrallp.com/practice-areas-old-page/automotive-defects/what-makes-a-car-catch-on-fire#:~:text=The%20top%20cause%20of%20vehicle,fire%20from%20a%20simple%20spark.&text=Electrical%20system%20failures%20are%20the,of%20car%20fires%20in%20America.
So, in essence, EV's fire are blown way out of proportion.
@@ohhhface619 Are you trying to have a conversation or just inject a narrative, because you are not even on subject.
While obviously fires are bad, and we'd like to have them less frequently, the _severity_ of the fire matters! An EV battery fire is a metal fire, and contains all 3 points of the Fire Triangle: Fuel, Oxygen, Heat. I'd rather get bit weekly by mosquitoes than a highly venomous snake once.
I had dinner with the fire chief at the local airport a few months back. Lithium fires are what they fear most. We discussed on-board aircraft fires, EVs in the garage, etc., and this was right before the Luton fire. There currently aren't any good ways to deal with EV / large lithium battery fires.
For those curious the reason the LLV is being retired is even when it was first built the engine known as the Iron Duke and was already a 30 year old design and has the reservoir for the windshield wiper fluid directly over the wire harness and the fluid does eat wire insulation and is flammable so this is a major upgrade
The reason the LLV is being retired doesn't have to do with anything you mentioned.
The LLV is being retired because of when the LLV was brought into service this was before internet shopping became a thing, and so the overwhelming majority of the mail the LLV would be carrying were letters, and it was designed for that. Once relatively heavy packages became the norm guess what little van got overloaded on a regular basis?
Relocating a windshield wiper fluid reservoir is easy. The Iron Duke is the perfect engine for the LLV, it is arguably the most durable small engine ever made, Iron block, timing gears, horribly understressed, etc.
The windshield wiper fluid is flammable 😂
The Iron Duke was NOT a 30 year old design when these LLV were first produced. The Iron Duke, which was a Pontiac engine, was introduced in the late 70's.
@@Rokomarn Proper windshield wiper fluid has alcohol in it, so it is mildly flammable.
Who cares what it looks like? Does it delivery my mail on time?
The problem that causes late delivery will still be present in the new model
The battery will last MUCH longer if they use level 2 chargers and do NOT top the battery up each time (maybe 80%) they charge it and charge enough to keep about 20% at the end of day. Fast charging is only needed on long trips. Also, Sodium-Sulphur batteries are being tested right now that offer much longer useful life and more energy density. Also, batteries with built in fire suppression are now being tested. The lithium itself is not what burns, but the coolant fluid in the battery. If these vehicles are well cared for, they will last far longer than the LLV. If they drive them with one pedal driving, even the brake pads will last much longer.
Hybrid would do this automatically.
the idea that your charging dicipline is so incomprehensibly inept that you need fast charge in a fleet is laughable
@@Thesupremeone34 True. The vehicle is going to sit for 2/3 of the day at worst.
Thanks for this video with in-depth info on the new Postal Vans. The specs look good for successfully fielding a BEV fleet. However they will be expensive, and I am glad USPS is also buying COTS BEV alternatives.
I think the body looks cool, like a third generation civic stretched into a box truck
In the summer of 1970, I delivered mail and was assigned a new AMC Hornet. Although it was ugly, it was a great little car.
Not as ugly as the Gremlin! However, the engine of the latter survived many more years as the Jeep 4.0 L. six. It was virtually indestructible.
hornets were not ugly, you should take that back.
That was the Mazda GLC (literally Great Little Car). And yes Hornets were ugly.
I just hope they’re more comfortable for the workers
The FFVs, whether of the Grumman or Ford variety, have been on the road FAR beyond their design lives.
Beauty is I'm the eye of the beholder. Great video, very interesting.
This is a great summary of this issue! I would add that Ford bowed out of the partnership with Oshkosh quite a while ago - around the time I retired from Ford in 2017 - though Oshkosh did retain a Ford engine for their ICE version.
Though it seems to me that it would be way more economical to purchase and use a lightly modified BEV such as the E-Transit or electric versions of the Metro or Ram vans. A 6'-2" person can easily stand in a high-roof Transit van without hitting their head. All three vehicles are made in RHD versions for various markets, so no new engineering or tooling is even required.
At first glance, yes it makes more sense to use COTS vehicles that already come in RDH variants but when you actually dig into the the implementation it's becomes obvious why they didn't.
The Metris is the only one of the 3 that is currently available in the US as RHD. But you can't stand up in the back, it doesn't have the package capacity the USPS wanted, and the doors are notorious for breaking off their hinges. Add that to the fact that Mercedes isn't interested in expanding the US market because no one other than USPS buys them.
On to the ProMaster and Transit. While they are available in other markets in RHD configuration (the ProMaster is called the Fiat Ducato in Europe) they are not currently sold in the US. There's all sorts of finicky rules you need to deal with to import cars less than 25 years old, mainly crash testing which is extremely expensive. But it might be worth it considering the number of vehicles that will be purchased, but they you remember that they're not built in America. Which for a US government contract of this magnitude and visibility is a non-starter. And you can't just force them to be made in America either because then Ford and Stellantis have to spend the money up front to get them certified for sale in the US and change their manufacturing lines for a share of vehicles that is very small compared to their other US market share. It just wouldn't make a ton of business sense for them to do all that bespoke work to supply vehicles to a single customer.
So there is some logic to the decision and you have to remember that the situation is often not as clear cut as it seems.
@@Jelly452527 I worked on this proposal to the postal service when I was at Ford. We would have been more than happy to build the RHD versions at Kansas City Assembly. Even with the added engineering and tooling, it would still be way more economical than designing and manufacturing an all-new vehicle as they are doing. The real issue was that the postal service did not want to compromise on their specifications - at all. A big issue was the "driver's" door - it had to be a full-heigh sliding door. Yeah, that right there was a non-starter.
@@dperreno can you blame them for not wanting to compromise? If I was buying 100k vehicles that are expected to last 20+ years (which for the Transit is questionable) I would want it to be exactly to my specifications
@@Jelly452527 It's the specifications that push the cost to $100k+. The RHD Metros that they are currently using only cost them probably $20k. Even an electric version of the Metro/Ram/Transit would be under $40k. Just sayin.
@@dperreno where are you seeing $100k because it's not accurate. Looks like they're going to be in the ballpark of $60k
Just looking at this truck without the postal paint job you would know what kind of job this truck is designed for.
This is such a great point!
As a person who worked for USPS, all of the new vehicles was supposed to be electric.
Than something shady happened behind doors and it turned into mostly ICE vehicles.
The longest postal route is about 160+ miles.
The Post master told me to spend 120,000+ USD on 2 suitable delivery vehicles after they cut my pay and hours.
My take home pay after taxes, insurance, and Union dues was 0 USD.
Yup, there is still no reason to believe the Oshkosh truck will ever enter mass production. Oshkosh admits they don't have the required EV expertise and will need to contract out core EV functionality.
@@funkijote Workhorse does. They have the factory, staff and expertise now. Oshkosh is/was a joke.
th-cam.com/video/vY9UcT_evYk/w-d-xo.htmlsi=R1Acx5XX5HkvVGSV
th-cam.com/video/RyqUwpNRcfw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=llOVCrJfaPoJdcXK
th-cam.com/video/9ES0AhZkzaQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=j2ZgvcN2K7yFMg-Y
th-cam.com/video/DRFxfePFm3s/w-d-xo.htmlsi=8EvllfKQTMSH7XSv
They try electric vehicles, and when they start running out of batteries on the road, it becoems a nightmare. Never mind the cold. And they want these new ones to have air conditioning.
@@gregorymalchuk272 EVs are a proven technology. There is no reason to believe they will "run out of batteries on the road".
The article says 75% EV. Did I miss something?
Do they come with blue underglows?
Yes, that is a official requirement.
should get some sick rims and maybe a lowrider hydraulics system too while we're at it
How much does the windshield on this new vehicle cost? What is the shipping cost for a replacement windshield. In many places in the snow belt these windshields risk being broken faster than they can be replaced.
Have to point out that COTS is used everywhere, we use it in tech and I don't think it's a government acronym. The decision is to either roll your own solution or go COTS.
Everyone complaining about the Bradley comparison because it’s ugly and feature-bloated but undeniably effective, seem to be missing the point that that’s exactly what you say your expectations for the NGDV are!
If they made the "slip warning" labels on the bumper with a rough textured surface they wouldn't need to put a warning about slipperiness.
I'd rather have a heated bumper then a rough textured surface, of which becomes even more slippery then a smooth surface under heavy snow & freezing conditions.
Long island, New York still uses the Grumman!
Quite the little backwater there in NY, huh?
@@cbotten106 oh yeah!
The paint on the hoods are faded through and you can see the spray gun lines
The ghost of Grumman remains on Long Island! And they used to have such a huge footprint.
Aluminum body, I'll bet. Grumman stopped making canoes decades ago but you can still run across them pretty frequently. They simply don't wear out. OK, hardly a good comparison - but quality aluminum is damn durable.
What's the chassis bases on?
I've only seen the USPS use the old school ones that are on life support... I've never seen a mini van USPS like these, or the plastic ford one you showed there.... The only ones I've seen is the Grumman LLV. I am in the Phoenix area. The only USPS "vans" i've seen are just plane grey looking minivans (they look just like a soccar mom mini van) and they only deliver to very rural areas of the valley. Where I live, in North Peoria AZ, its all brand new housing/roads/commercial/etc... I have mountains and desert hiking litterally walking 5 minutes any direction from my house... so I may be semi rural, yet still the Grumman LLV here too... These things are on life support. My mailman at my old house in Phoenix, he shut it down and started up at each mail box... restarting the truck every 30 seconds. that thing rattled and grunted and sounds like a bag of cats being beaten with a baseball bat. just bad. but that LLV kept going and going and the 13 years I owned that house, every single day, i heard it coming down the street house by house and went out and chatted with him.
My post office still uses primarily LLVs. They have a few of the Mercedes vans, but you still see mostly LLVs
Im excited, i like the overall looks and EV platforms. I appreciate you explaining reasons they did certain things as they have told us absolutley nothing.
More excited than anything for AC.
ease of use is so important that function over form is well justified
Using the Bradley Fighting Vehicle asa bad example is way off base. The Bradley is the best in the world, the Ukrainian Army absolutely loves them and they say it is far superior to the Russian AFVs they were using. I’d suggest your otherwise excellent technical comparison should use something better than a comedy film as a source of info.
The issue with the Bradley as used here is not it's competence but what is often known as "feature creep" during it's design.
The issue with the Bradley is that it gets used for stuff it wasn't designed for. More like mission creep.
@@popuptoaster Feature creep just wasn’t an issue with the Bradley. The thing was from the get go a reaction to the BMP. The Bradley had no lineage with the troop transports designs that just had machine guns, it from the start had an turreted auto cannon.
"loosely" based on the development of the Bradley is the most generous way to describe Pentagon Wars possible XD
It looks like an overgrown Johnny Cab!
Arnold?
EPA standards don’t take into account things like the postal service because well legally they can’t. Technically the post office is a higher authority than the EPA.
I wonder if the public can buy one of these? I mean if its underpinnings are a ford transit I’d imagine it’s 50 state legal emissions. Supposedly one of these is costing the post office around $60,000 per unit.
yes,some postal vehicles can be found in government surplus auctions although most get crushed after service.
The public will likely never have the opportunity. The only reason there are a few LLVs in private hands is because Grumman made a few too many in excess of the USPS order, and they weren't explicitly disallowed to sell them to the public. I'm pretty sure that loophole no longer exists
"Your post office is probably using..." No, they've still got LLVs!
1st vid of yours I watched. Good info, interesting, good pace. Good job!
This is what form before function looks like. Huge windshield for high visibility, low hood so that no one gets run over, huge trunk because people are shipping more packages. I'm sure there are more items that I am missing, but this is a vehicle that was designed to deliver mail and be *safe,* which isn't a bad thing.
The moment he mentioned The Pentagon Wars I immediately had really low expectations for this video.
Pentagon Wars is criminally underrated. Last I checked it’s available on HBO to those who haven’t seen it!
They wouldnt need dc fast charging.
So many complaints about what they LOOK LIKE. But the biggest improvement I see is the ability to STAND UPRIGHT in the back -- that is such a huge improvement and a good thing for health and ergonomics and productivity. No more lower back pain from stooping over and no more banging heads on the door frame or roof. YAY.
I like it a lot! We have LLVs in my area, because we are a rural town with under 10000 people. The NGDV reminds me of the LLV, but it also looks like a little duck! It'll be a long time before we get them, and the LLVs will be soldiering on!
When it comes to the USPS Transit vans, the thing that bugs me the most is that empty #^&%ing lighted license plate holder on the back. FFS couldn't they use it for a plate with the vehicle ID#, or else a plain USPS logo decorative plate, or... SOMETHING lol?
I've been stopped 3Xs this year alone by other drivers tellin me that my plate was missing 😂
@@BoomBap75 It just seems like such a simple thing for them to put SOMETHING on it, right? I hadn't even thought about the people who didn't realize postal vehicles don't get registered and don't need license plates lol.
they put numbered decals onto the bodywork likely to save money on making plates. oddly, some of their support vehicles do use actual plates but most of them will go without. if they're seen using plates,it will say "US government" and the text on it will be the decal written on the bodywork.
@marcberm Remember,we're talkn about da PostalService....Where Common Sense NEVER EXISTED!!!They told me at the Carrier Academy back in 1997,"If you see sumthin that doesn't make sense,it's NOT YOU,it's their intention!!"-😂..It's even WORSE NOW than back then..They still send us LLVs that barely runs good as Loaners,when repairing a current vehicle..When asked why do we even still keep the broke down LLVs in the fleet,My postmaster replied, "We can't get rid of em as long as the wheels are still good,and the engine is running!!"He even acknowledged that the BigWigs Downtown(Philly)knows the LLVs are a FIRE HAZARD,but they still won't take them out of service bcuz they wanna wait until they're OFFICIALLY DEAD...
Thank you for all of the details. Knowing the ugly duckbill front is there for pedestrian safety makes it a lot less ugly. A lot of stuff about his vehicle makes a lot of sense - it does have pretty specialized needs.
The initial 10% of the buy being BEVs was criminally stupid. Everyone's known for years, even decades, that package/postal delivery vans are the perfect use case for a BEV. Such a vehicle in ICE adds up an absurd amount of idling. Automatic engine cutoff and restart has its own problems, and the worst part of emissions happens at engine start. Imagine the number of cycles per week!
Now the problem is the post offices don't have enough electricity to charge all of the trucks at the same time. This is going to take a decade to phase in.
Do you really think they will replace ALL of these existing trucks in a single year? Do you really feel they all need to charge every night when the average postal route is in the area of 25 miles or less? Yes, there are always exceptions, but they can work it out.
I dunno. Amazon went from zero electric vans 2 years ago to me seeing at least 8 of 10 vans around here being electric. I think they can get the post office distribution centers with chargers as fast as they can produce the vehicles. I mean, it's only level 2. Level 2 is like a clothes dryer or household oven.
@@rupe53 No I said its going to take a decade to phase in. Some post offices have 20 or 30 trucks. Ok so maybe half of them charge each night. A lot of electrical work will have to be done at each PO. At their pace... 10 years, bidding process etc etc.
@@greenfire919 our government may have some issues, but when the chips are down, I see a bid process that's maybe 90 days and less than 90 days to complete work. BTW, the post office is only regulated by the feds. It's actually a stand-alone deal, although I see federal funding involved to pull this off. The only thing I see taking longer is if they decide to prioritize WHERE this happens first.
Chargers run on 240 V. Installing a charging stand takes most of the time for the construction work. And they can power various lines of vehicles at a time to limit the load.
Oshkosh NGDV from cartoon network to reality.
Leave it to the US government to overly complicate (and overly politicize) buying a delivery truck.
We're talking about a lot of money. Research is necessary. The LLV was a good purchase that they will end up using for 35+ years by the time these new vehicles are fully supplied. Hopefully, this purchase will end up being good as well.
@@robj2704 crap!!!! its just another way for the government to waste tax money! all those mail delivery vans could have been odered to be make by Rivian, Ford or GM they have enough tech in house to bring more safety and integrate more features and finally using parts from millions of other vehicles they makes will ensure those will last even longer than 35 years! look at the b-52 bomber with new engines.
@robj2704 it looks like some good improvements. Parcel delivery has really picked up over the last 10 years. Being able to stand in the back is great. It was never fun to work kneeling or hunched over in the llv. Air-conditioning would be fabulous if it is allowed. The usps was known to disable it in the leased vehicles. Management thought we would waste time trying to cool off in the summer.
@@fredbecker607 Yep. I was a city letter carrier, also. I remember all the junk we had to put up with. I've been retired 16 years now.
@@fredbecker607 Well thankfully they haven't disabled it in the Metris vans that I've seen.
Not gonna like, both those early Jeeps actually look pretty good!
That blue stands out nicely.
It’s clear that a true box-like structure would hold the most mail , however, there has to be some aesthetic trick to add some curvature or tumblehome to the sides. In addition, what’s with the 1970’s style bumper car bumpers?
the rivian van is more than good enough for the job they dont need to complicate things, i dont get it! OEM manufacturers have more than enough safety features and better integrated options for a fleet vehicle for example.
@@carholic-sz3qvthe Rivian doesn't come in RDH in America, so you can't deliver to mailboxes with it. You're also sitting way too high for mailbox deliver anyway
bumpers is for the kids, someone explained it well in comments
I just saw my first utilimaster last week. Around me, they still use the good old, long life vehicle. True to its name.
Since when did a utilitarian need to be anything but exactly that. NO styling necessary, best functional design. Consider UPS or FedEx delivery trucks Maybe complainers need to be required to pay special mail rail, just to get mail, to pay to have stylish delivery vehicles. EV is the ideal vehicle for the stop and go, with engine shutoff on ICE vehicles,. and really not very many miles a day. Put in chargers and end of fuel cost issues. They are not heavy load units, ideal in every way from a man that has 45 years in truck and this type special vehicles. Loved to have had the opportunity before retiring.
Nobody talkin about how cool that Mahindra looks considering its a postal vehicle....
I've been climbing into and out of cab-over trucks for weeks and months several times in my life, doing odd jobs, and it didn't hurt me one bit. What it did was increase my physical fitness. Which is a very good thing for a driver that otherwise just sits around all day behind the wheel.
Fun fact about the FFV, it was originally internally called the CRV but Honda threatened to sue the Postal Service if the acronym wasn't changed
it's kind of goofy but it's fucking adorable. it's a just whimsical little guy! the first time you see it IRL you'll laugh out loud, a year later it'll very slightly brighten your day when you see one drive by, and by the time it's phased out for some more conventional design you'll be sad to see it go.
CCS? We are into NACS, CCS is gone in the US. Level II for overnight charging is the way to go. Use a Heat Pump?
Right on 👍..don’t need DC fast charging..
Level 2 J1772 plug should be fine 🤑
They will probably transition to NACS at some point.
Thankfully CCS and NACS are just different shapes for the same protocol and wires, so it should be easy enough to retrofit if it ends up being a problem.
That being said, these are fleet vehicles that will likely go through there whole lives charging at one home lot after each run, so compatibility with anything other than the chargers at that specific lot probably won’t matter too much.
A heat pump definitely wouldn’t go amiss though, especially since between the large exterior size, window, and how frequently the door and window need to be opened compared to how short a typical route is, heating load is liable to be a lot more of a drain on the battery compared to driving than it would be for a regular EV. That extra 2 to 3 times the energy consumption in cold weather is something that probably is worth adding an reversing valve to the AC for.
i honestly think the look will grow on people, also makes them very recognizable
This video should be retitled as "How I was brainwashed into likeing something that sux"
LFP makes so much sense for these. These vehicles don't need maximum range, they need maximum safety and charging cycles.
Pendagon Wars is a perfect allegory for this process. Once they finally deliver production models, you'll see the best of 15-year-old technology finally available to postal workers!
Pentagon Wars may have been a funny movie, but not very factual. The Bradley Fighting Vehicle is a solid system with a good reputation and is being used in Ukraine now very well.
@@rogerd777 BFV is the best that San Jose, CA can produce!
Letter Carrier here, delivered to neighborhoods in Oregon for 40 years, had my own LLV truck for 20 of those years, a great delivery vehicle. Its weaknesses were rear wheel drive, light rear-end in snow but other than those weather issues it was amazing! The issues I see with this new truck is height, in Oregon and many other states there are trees we have to deal with as in to get to the boxes we need to get under the tree branches. Surely the designers know this so how did they plan for that? If I was given one of these new trucks I can imagine getting out of the truck a lot to deliver to boxes under obstructions. The old LLV's we aluminum bodies mounted on Chevy Blazer trucks, easy to fix and replace. How costly will these new trucks be to repair?
I hope they make the engine easy to replace because the ford ecoboosts are... not known for their reliability.
I'm sure _someone_ else must have brought this up by now, but when thing X is "preceded by" thing Y, it means that thing Y came _before_ thing X. You're either looking for "succeeded by" in its much rarer usage, or the more approachable "followed by."
The money that will need to be spent to upgrade all the post office electrical supplys will be huge
the money they save on gas will also be huge, even if it takes a few years.
Meh. They'll make it up in gas savings and reduced maintenance in under a year.
@@andrewdiamond2697 just remember that with any new vehicle you have reduced maintenance for the first few years anyway, which is partially offset by the purchase price. We know the power source will be cheaper. The unknown here is the cost of installing / upgrading electrical at any given facility... and of course, there will be some maintenance needed on that gear over time. I'd say 3-5 years overall for cost break even on the whole ball of wax.
@@rupe53 I saw a spreadsheet on this once. It was an astoundingly quick payback. At scale, installing a Level 2 charger can be done for about $700 in materials and $600 in labor per spot. Then the electric company needs to provide service to the site. Not sure if the power company pays that or the USPS, but that certainly costs some money. Bottom line, the way these vehicles suck down gas with their constant start-stop-start-stop, it was measured in months and not years. I was pretty stunned.
@@andrewdiamond2697 I was basing my call on privately owned EVs and cutting it on half. I think we're both on the right track that it will be quicker than most people know.
Every requirement makes sense in isolation, all coming together to make a surreal vehicle that looks like it came out of a Richard Scarry book. This is peak government contract, just absolutely outstanding work.
Usps is so far behind they didnt even consider electrifying? 🤦 Gald some one stepped in
Possibly due to higher upfront costs of the changeover, but also likely for political reasons during the Trump administration.
City/suburban delivery over fixed routes based from a central depot is a near-ideal use case for electrification.
An EV version is on order now. 66,000 of them for delivery in 2028.
Originally, all of the new vehicles was supposed to be electric.
Then something shady happened behind doors.
I worked for USPS.
@@NextNate03 Donald Trump - he was recorded asking for a billion dollar “campaign contribution” from oil companies to cancel the current administration’s policies.
Electrifying a fleet is a compromise rather than an improvement at this point. Maybe in future EVs will be an improvement but for now they are not
I think the new mail truck prototype looks comical, as if a cartoon writer created it. I don't have a problem having a smile on my face every time it shows up to my house lol.
Flint Lockwood was a visionary
I think it's actually cool as hell and really cute, just like the LLV.
i REFUSED to accept this was not a car designed for a pixar style animated movie before clicking on the video.
Why would the Louis DeJoy run Post Office not want electric vehicles? 🤔 A real head scratcher
It's nice to see a company doing its own research rather than relying on the same government that pays for environmental studies that always favor drastic climate related taxes and regulation while not funding those that don't. Bravo Oshkosh. Take a bow. 😊
Thanks for the video. It is the first time I have heard much about it, & and work for a Postal Contractor and even the Postal Carriers don't know much about them. Well, except that they will have A/C; trust me when I say that they are looking forward to that feature.
Bet that windscreen is expensive to replace.
Turns out the Bradley perfectly fit action requirements.
I feel like it needs to be repeated... but that whole pentagon wars book and film is based on the absolute fantasy of its author :) Anyho, thanks for the indepth video on the postal vans :D
Good to see some thought has gone in to designing a vehicle to suit the job. Here in UK, the Royal Mail uses standard production vans of various makes (probably buying from the manufacturer that offers the best deal at the time). We don't even have the driver on the kerb side- our posties have to exit into traffic every time !
As a postal mail carrier, i can tell you all right now we are not built to support or maintain electric vehicles. We will bleed money that way. The initial 90/10 gas to electric was perfect. Also, we don't drive far but the vehicles rarely turn off. On a 12 hr day that vehicle is on 6 hours.
For some reason, my town still uses the Grumman LLV.
Form should always follow function and in this way, it’s actually fuggin awesome!