Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 156 posts

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#31

Post by jackcosgrove »

tantalor wrote: post #9
garciansmith wrote: post #7

I've read so much knocking their appearance, which is so confusing to me. It's ultimately function over form in this case; who cares if you don't like how it looks? I can only dream that the visibility and safety of having features like such a low hood and large bumpers would be incorporated into other vehicles (i.e., every SUV ever).

> It's ultimately form over function in this case Doesn't "form over function" mean the opposite of your usage? Form = appearance Function = usefulness

I think it's a misquote of the phrase "Form ever follows function", commonly attributed to architect Louis Sullivan. It's an odd sentence structure, where the leader comes second in the phrasing, that trips people up.

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#32

Post by [deleted] »

dylan604 wrote: post #29
bryanlarsen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safety should be even more important than both, but it obviously isn't since only the USPS trucks have a pedestrian safe design.

If safety were more important than looks, the stilleto would be banned.

[deleted]

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#33

Post by matsemann »

schiffern wrote: post #22

Yes, It ‘Looks Like a Duck,’ but... ...but that means it's far safer for pedestrians than the currently-in-vogue "bulldozer" vehicle front ends. I for one welcome our new duck-shaped overlords.

Direct Vision Standards[0] should implemented as a mandatory requirement everywhere for large vehicles traveling in cities or residential areas where there's "soft road users"[1] (pedestrians, cyclists). Should be able to see straight to the side and know you're not running someone over.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Vision_Standard [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-motorist

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#34

Post by bdavbdav »

tantalor wrote: post #20
PittleyDunkin wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took this to mean that critiquing appearance is itself form over function.

Oh. What does that even mean? Saying something is "form over function" is not derogatory. Lots of great inventions prioritize form over function (iPod comes to mind).

I’m not convinced the iPod was. Everything else was pretty terrible at that time. The iPod did it right (and arguably still does)

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#35

Post by varikin »

hex4def6 wrote: post #18
smitelli wrote: post #3

Say what you will about the Grumman LLV, but every one of them you see on the road today is at least 30 years old, and some could be pushing 40. (The similar-looking Ford-Utilimaster FFV is ~25 this year.) As uncomfortable as it must be to sit in one for hours on end (I never had the privilege myself) you've got to respect their longevity. Here's hoping these new trucks make it to the 2050s and beyond.

"While the all-aluminum body of the LLV has resisted corrosion exceptionally well over the years, the main powertrain components have been replaced multiple times and now must be sourced through aftermarket manufacturing. This has significantly increased repair costs while reducing performance and reliability. In fact, the Postal Service had to contract an alternative supplier to reverse engineer and manufacture the…

I believe the LLV line was only suppose to be in service for 20 years, but the government gonna government and not find a replacement till it's almost too late. So yes it was a lot of scrounging and probably a lot of USPS mechanics needing to be creative, but the LLV lasted twice as long as it was designed for. I expect this same conversation will happen again in another 40 years.

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#36

Post by fencepost »

xnx wrote: post #10

I don't mind the appearance if it serves a function, but what's the function? An electric truck wouldn't need a traditional engine compartment.

They aren't/weren't all going to be EVs. Originally the USPS was looking at 10% EVs and 90% internal combustion but there were a bunch of challenges to that (including that ratio being based on incorrect environmental impact data). Now it's 75% EVs in the first order of 60,000 and future orders may be that high or higher (currently expected that it will be all EVs starting in 2026).

sources: article and wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_NGDV)

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#38

Post by agent281 »

xnx wrote: post #10

I don't mind the appearance if it serves a function, but what's the function? An electric truck wouldn't need a traditional engine compartment.

One benefit of a low hood is that it scoops up pedestrians that might get hit instead of hitting their torsos with the vehicle. It'll probably break your legs, but you are more likely to survive.

This is one of the reasons that SUVs and large trucks are deadly: it's basically hitting you directly in the chest cavity.

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#39

Post by m463 »

klik99 wrote: post #26
garciansmith wrote: post #7

I've read so much knocking their appearance, which is so confusing to me. It's ultimately function over form in this case; who cares if you don't like how it looks? I can only dream that the visibility and safety of having features like such a low hood and large bumpers would be incorporated into other vehicles (i.e., every SUV ever).

Probably in the minority, but I actually like the look of them. I find so many modern car designs indistinguishable from each other. Cars such a narrow range of design that's considered "good aesthetics" that everything looks so uniform.

I think when it comes to vans they've kind of let go of traditional designs.

like https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Dodge-Ra...

Now they've gotten the european influence to be very square:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/2015_For...

or like the european designed mercedes sprinter, very tall too:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Mercedes...

Re: Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck

#40

Post by tantalor »

phil21 wrote: post #23
tantalor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh. What does that even mean? Saying something is "form over function" is not derogatory. Lots of great inventions prioritize form over function (iPod comes to mind).

iPod was famously both though? The click-wheel was pretty unique and worked great to make an accessible UIx for the masses. It may have been somewhat limiting in edge cases, but for normal usage I don't recall anyone complaining about it outside of hardcore tech circles.

"No wireless? Less space than a Nomad? Lame"

Seriously though, the iTunes integration and cross platform compatibility kind of sucked. It would have been much more useful if you could just mount it like a hard drive without special library management software.

The click wheel was cool.

Post reply on HN