IDW # 232 : FedEx Truck of the Future

[Pixie Trick]

FedEx Truck of the Future
Deadline: Sunday, March 24

There's nothing quite as iconic as a courier service truck, whether it be FedEx, UPS, etc. You are to pick a courier service and design the package/mail delivery truck of the future. Your aim is to transfer elements of current design into the future model to keep it identifiable as having that purpose before any labeling ever occurs. Remember, in many places all that differentiates the FedEx guy from the UPS guy is a magnetic tag on his truck.

Brief:
1. Design and draw the FedEx Truck of the Future.
2. That's it... now draw!

[z01ks]

Oh, sweet topic! I used to be an intern at UPS and drove one of those old-school trucks sometimes. Spier P-36, if I remember correctly

[Dayle]

I'm in!

[EricaZann]

In the future the "truck" will be a mobile receiving and distribution center. ...that is if the future contains solar powered, anti-grav vehicles.
Fleets of floating Fedex carriers crossing the globe. Two points in a supply chain reduced to one saves time and money. The consumer simply
sends a request over a communication network to receive a properly sized receptacle for shipping, loads their item(s) and pushes send... the
rest is handled by Fedex.

The front and back of the vehicle receive the incoming packages passing them through sorting and into the "body" which is largely storage; when
the location is near the package then leaves storage, passing through a second layer of sorting and into the ejection wheels. Each package is sent
out in a container relative to its size, powered by similar anti-grav tech. The empty package returns to the nearest Fedex ship after a certain amount
of time. Solar panels line the top surfaces. The living space for the pilots/crew/workers are on top of the center storage space, as the "truck" only
returns to ground for supplies and periodic maintenance.

[Dayle]

EricaZann - Interesting concept, I like the function and design so far.

Here is my start. I tried to justify how Fedex could work on Mars, but it's mainly cos I think it'd be cool to design. Next I'll mix up some concepts / ideas and think of an actual design.

[AdamStolterman]

I will not have time to do this one, but i will definitely join again after this weekend. Love the IDOW!

[ToddBushman]

After many sketches, I decided to just go the far fetched route. Great sketches/ideas above. Looking forward to seeing the finals.

The future has had many advances in technology but the biggest change is in the aesthetics. It's all about function. This little baby is self-programmed, just call the toll free hotline and it will be there within the hour. The arm will pick up your package, the glass dome will open and insert your package. It'll scan and prepare its route for delivery. (comments welcome)

[Flame_Unquenchable]

Robots, check. Hover car, check. I think it's the future.

[Dayle]

I decided to go with a cylinderical all terrain delivery vehicle. I'm gonna do a quick model to get my scale and perspective, then want to do a full on Mars environment with this driving around.

[matias]

Heya guys, trying to push myself to practice across all areas, I'm bad at usually sticking to just character stuff, so I thought I jump in this one. I was just trying to keep that basic boxy van style, nothing too out there, it hovers... cause its the future.. and stuff there hovers. Right?

[EricaZann]

Found some time to work on this today, so heres a WIP.

Hope to have the final done by tomorrow or Friday at the latest.
...if I don't get obsessive with mazes of piping or other unnecessary
details. You can't really see it in this WIP but the windowed cylinder
to the right of the vents and overlooking the closest rotating ejector
has a chair and detailed computer panels for the imaginary monitoring
system; don't ask me why. lol

I'm liking the other ideas being posted here, looking forward to seeing
the finished posts. =)

[Dayle]

Here is an update. Not sure I'll get time to post again before the final. Good luck all.

[EricaZann]

New WIP

[Flame_Unquenchable]

Dayle: Looking good man, I like that concept. Try to keep those edges a bit cleaner, use the lasso tool to get a really crisp edge. I think you'll find that you can keep the shadows and such much sharper that way. Keep going, I'm excited to see the finished product.

Matias: Awesome man, I'm really digging that design. I think it's a really good extrapolation of what a Fedex truck could be. I'd love to see that sketch in the back turned into a cut-away of the interior, that would kick ass.

EricaZann: Getting pretty complex there, which is fine, just be mindful of the topic, don't get so complex that you forget it's a Fedex truck for deliveries.

[Pixie Trick]

Really nice work guys! The finals thread is up and I'm going to do some super fast crits!

ToddBushman: I love this drawing! One thing I've noticed is that most of the mechanical thingies sticking out are arranged roughly in rows, and those rows are roughly the same width- I think this is a smart move on your part to keep things from looking "thrown on". One thing further that could happen is that one or more rows could become wider and give a little more active design and interest. For example, there could be a panel where the jet engine thingie attaches that defines the width of that row, and a slightly different scale of mechanical could be attached in alignment for that strip. Not sure if any of that made sense...

matais: I can totally imagine yours existing fairly soon. You've done a good job of keeping the fundamentals of what makes the courier truck what it is but admittedly it's a bit flat. You have detail in minor volumes (panels for example) but otherwise it's extremely rectangular. For example, you have an axle-y, engine-y thing at the back underside and there is a bit of shaping there already. Why not push that thinner strip out and make a lip for a human worker to pull things out of the storage? Also, why is there glass at the foot well of the cab? Where is all the mechanical crap involved with driving hide? Does the cab even need to be that big? These are little things that let to legitimately add detail. If the driver sits to one side, the driving mechanics only need to be on the one side and you have a bit less symmetry and more interest happening.

FlameUnquenchable: You've got perspective issues my dear. I feel like you're aiming for a cool slanty roof while using ortho perspective (parallel), but you're going to be a bit more accurate for it to read correctly. Good job on the research- its clearly visible in your design, though you could take a few points from matais' crit as well. I would also take a second look at the proportions of the snub nosed front of an existing truck and compare it to your own. You have the shape down to the top angle and bumper, but yours is a bit thin and deep to be covering mechanics as well as the driver's feet. And as a last point- you have a very strong shadow happening below, but not on the truck. It doesn't matter much either way which you choose to adjust, but making them consistent will help.

EricaZann: I'm gonna go a bit technical on you here- apologies beforehand. This looks epic but rather non-mobile, particularly due to it's sheer size. The scale of the parts aren't indicative of its purpose is another way to put it. To explain: a package as a unit size is generally smaller than a person, therefore any machinery used in relation to the packages will be at a similar unit scale in order to operate in relation to that unit. This can all change if you conglomerate unit sizes into something like shipping container which is more what I'm getting from yours. Now, if that container is the basis of the truck, and this is the processing plant, it all makes sense scale-wise. I realize this is rather unhelpful in furthering your design, but I'd need a bit more background to go any further.


Dayle: I love the tripod wheels. I wish they were on more things. But.... within reason. There are two ways this current system could work I think- they would work better as a single pair in their current form. For both sets to see any use, the entire truck would have to tumble/flip or be able to hang freely between the two to a certain extent which doesn't work well with two points, vs. one. If that wasn't the case, the only other way I could see this working would be as a strider which would be an extraordinarily bumpy ride as you essentially have three rotating legs, instead of round wheels. I see this system working as an all terrain vehicle better if the vertical wheels simply weren't there and the two remaining somehow where on independent suspension. I may be totally reading the system wrong however, in which case a drawing with the wheels in action (ie, not in the most stable, symmetrical state as you have them now) would help.

Anyway, take what I say with grain of salt. I'm excited to see what shows up in the finals!

[EricaZann]

Thx for the crits Pixie and Flame.
I agree that scale and complexity are the two potentially problematic areas here.

I started with the premise that if the receiving center itself were mobile then the current platform of distribution which
we refer to as the "truck" would be redefined. This futuristic "truck" would retain it's standard functions of "mobility" and
"distribution", while gaining an additional function of "receiving".

Perhaps I'm pushing the concept of "truck" to far beyond a common definition? If "mobility" and "distribution" are
considered to be the defining functions of "truck" then I think I am okay (if I can find a better way of communicating
these functions). If "size" or "shape" are the more relevant definitions for "truck" then I have major problems lol.

Getting back to the point of scale though... That's the thing that is frustrating me the most with my design. In the
end I plan on adding some inbound/outbound packages near the appropriate locations, but I am not certain that it will
convey that my "truck" is the size of building; and handles everything from personal packages to shipping containers.

I thought about doing a cut away with an internal view to give an idea of process and scale from inside the building
but that seemed risky (possibly confusing). I would have also liked to have done it in a way that more clearly showed
its ability to extend and retract certain areas for increasing productivity. My finished piece will have some arrows to
show the direction that the hydraulics operate, but once again (like showing the scaling of the operation); it doesn't
seem optimal. Oh well, I still had a lot of fun designing this so.

I hope my final clears up some of the concerns raised, if not, feel free to make suggestions on how I could have better
represented the scale and complexity; knowing that the "truck" is the size of a building and handles a wide scale of packages.

[Flame_Unquenchable]

Exploring a different direction, sometimes you just gotta deliver that package to Thunderdome...

Thanks for the crits Pixie, fixed the perspective issues! Still working on lighting.

[Pixie Trick]

Erica: This is a great discussion!

This futuristic "truck" would retain it's standard functions of "mobility" and "distribution", while gaining an additional function of "receiving".

You've found the key points of this topic, except for, truck ironically, and important to your topic, warehousing, as what you've labelled receiving. Mobility: it moves. Distribution: how things move from a point to another- Receiving is simply the reverse. Truck: essentially irrelevant. Warehousing: ordered collection of stuff at one point.

What you are trying to achieve is storage/organization and movement in one sweep. They are not opposites and mutually exclusive, but they aren't the same. This is why in the current day we have to stages of transport- freight to warehouse (mass storage movement), and truck (fracturing of the organized storage). Can this change? Definitely! Does it take a lot of work to figure out how? Yes. You are approaching a much larger topic than I think you realize, which is not to say a bad think- it's fantastic! - it's a truly conceptual task.

As I said, I think it's fantastic that you're pushing the boundaries of what we think of as a truck- I think we don't do it enough. There are a few ways to approach the idea that makes things easier- it is best to acknowledge a) scale as previously mentioned b) the laws of physics and c) a hierarchy of design. Even if they would never work in real life, give a nod to physics and you will have a much smoother path. This is another reason why yours is not reading as mobile -something that large requires a great deal of propulsion which one would assume takes up a great deal of space. If this got moving, the brakes alone required to stop it would be immense because it's just going to want to keep going. Even if the average person doesn't think about it, they live surrounded by it and instinctively have a grasp of what does and doesn't work. Dump on some legs if it floats so it can land, or a connector port, or some big ass clamp type things for brakes and you have an impetus for design- make them a feature and paint them red if it's important! Or case them in something and make is slick and cool. This is pretty much a rule, lol, no matter what design field you're in. A hierarchy of design is essentially where you pick the important things you don't want to/cannot loose or compromise on- keep this in mind and you will have a more unified end product.

This is dependent on how far into the future we travel in regards to where things will be delivered to homes and offices and what the "roads", whatever they may be, are that connect them, and how vehicles traverse them. The other unit for scale in this topic is the road which is in essence defined by the buildings that line it. If we're in the near future, is the single or two family home neighbourhood going to disappear? If we live in huge skyscrapers with tracts of land between, or massive sky highways, then what is essentially a mobile processing plant works. Is it efficient? That's another point I'm not going to touch.

Again, take this with a grain of salt, but I have to say I love discussions that make you think, so thank you for this.

[ToddBushman]

Nice work everyone. And great discussions! I won't be able to finish this one. Maybe next time.

Pixie Trick - Thanks for the feedback too.