Ford Motor Co. bans bland vehicle design

[silvrsvt]

Where is J. Mays in all this? I thought he was the chief designer.

 

I think he's more of a figurehead for over all design for all of Ford's brands now...

[Harley Lover]

J Mays has become more of an administrator - but he's placed some serious talent with Ford design. I addition to moving Horbury to Ford, he moved over Moray Callum (Aston Designer Ian's brother) from Mazda as well. I think J Mays is now living in London, and exercising more oversight of FOE than in the past.

[Sizzler]

Speaking as someone that actually is a pilot, Sizzler, you have some serious misperceptions of avation and pilots as a whole, and about the reliability of in air avionics. If the aviation industry relied on electronic guidance to the extent you suggest, the results would make 9-11 look like a stubbed toe.

 

We used to have elevator operators.

We used to have switchboard operators.

We used to have train engineers.

Why do we still have pilots?

 

The elevator operator disappeared even before the advent of the computer. Today, probably a 100 MILLION elevator trips are taken every day without the aid of the creepy guy in the funny hat.

 

Switchboard operators were replaced by little boxes hung in some dark corner near the electrical service. And service is actually better now without them: always on, always there, capable of answering to spoken requests.

 

Train engineers. Every airport I go to nowadays seems to have an unmanned shuttle train between the station and outlying parking lots. Atlanta, Chicago. In London, I traveled to the Docklands on an elevated train that DID have an engineer...I don't think he put the paper down once as the train started, stopped, opened, closed on its own.

 

Pilots? How many planes have gone down lately it seems when some oxygen problem occurred on board? The plane kept flying. Kept flying its programmed course. Kept flying until it ran out of fuel. Just what good were those pilots? If there had been some sort of remote monitoring of those flights, would the people on board died?

 

Time to replace all these high-priced pilots with min-wage geeks who can sit in a jump seat and be there to twist a knob that's stuck or check a wiring problem identified from the ground. A grunt with muscles to be the final level or redundancy in the chain of failsafes in the piloting system.

 

Elevators go up and down. With no major problems. Trains are just horizontal elevators, and it seems they can be automated as well. A plane is just an elevator/train combo. No reason we can't automate it too.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Having a father that worked on commercial airliners for 33 years before he recently retired, I can say that I'd feel much safer with a pilot in the cockpit than without. While its true that computers will faithfully and reliably take you where you want to go, they are only as good as the information that they get. If someone goofs and puts the wrong approach altitude in for Denver's airport, you're going to be a smoking hole in the ground without a pilot in the cockpit that can realize what went wrong and take over. And don't tell me that there would be safeties to keep the plane from running into the ground. They'll only keep the plane at some preset altitude until it runs out of gas and craters elsewhere.

 

There is a real, valid reason that there are still pilots in commercial aircraft, and that remotely piloted or autonomous drones are still in very limited use. Computers have very little capability to handle what's referred to as fuzzy logic. They can weigh factors and come up with a plan that fits a series of criteria, but, there are severe limits to this. Live pilots are trained in situational awareness, improvising in emergencies, and making common sense judgements where a computer would likely fail.

 

I know what autopilots are capable of. They've been capable of executing a complete take-off to landing without a pilot ever touching the controls (witness the VC-10, a wonderful, though somewhat late design by the british aviation industry, doing just that in the mid to late 70s). But, they require everything to be working exactly right to be able to do so. And, when they fail, they very rarely fail gracefully. Its either on, or its off and hope the backup catches it quickly. Of course, a live pilot will know when this happens and can take over, but, without one, well, you know the end result.

 

Frankly, we are still a long way off before we can consider autonomous commercial aircraft. We need to come along a whole lot with artificial intelligences. There are big differences between small, high performance autonomous drones that have no regards for G-forces, attitude corrections, or even collision avoidance and commercial aircraft that are heavily G-limited, heavily maneuver limited, have a small power envelope, and have to be constantly wary of collisions.

 

So, talk to me about this in 10 to 20 years, but, for now, autonomous commercial aircraft are a pipe dream. They've been working on a semi-automatic collision avoidance system for over a decade and they still can't get it to quit giving false positives, not reporting genuine collision emergencies, and to stop giving pilots often inaccurate information about the problem. If that's the best they have to offer an AI piloting the plane, we'd all be dodging flaming aircraft wreckage constantly.

[silvrsvt]

Elevators go up and down. With no major problems. Trains are just horizontal elevators, and it seems they can be automated as well. A plane is just an elevator/train combo. No reason we can't automate it too.

 

Your being way too simplistic here...all the things you list are physcially limited in their travel (elevator in its shaft and a Train on its tracks), where as an Airplane isn't. Not to mention all the varitibles that happen with Weather that affect the airplane

[Edstock]

"We used to have elevator operators.

We used to have switchboard operators.

We used to have train engineers."

 

We used to have keypunch operators, linotype leadcaster/photo-headliner operators and film-emulsion strippers, too.

 

The last occupation disappeared with the advent of desk-top computers and DTP.

 

Film-emulsion stripping was used for 4-color process printing of things like Sears catalogs and promo mail pieces. Start with, say, a 4 x 5" transparency. Dissolve the film base, leaving the color emulsion, which crinkles up like a wad of colored cellophane. Smooth out on a mylar sub-sheet. Close-crop the picture of the towels, or whatever.

 

Do that to as many other transparencies as necessary, and arrange on the mylar, over a background transparency (if desired) appropriately cut-out.

 

Expensive, and the gang that did this in the 70's and 80's earned great bucks.

 

Why? Because 4-color separations, prior to the advent of digital, were done by camera, then contact-screened. All done by hand. Lots of time and lots of grief, and when big old-tech graphics job went sour in production, the experience gave rise to sayings like: "You think you have problems? Wait a couple of days, then you'll have problems." By paying the gang to assemble the transparencies, it becomes just 1 color separation, just 4 sheets of film, just 4 screenings. Grief control.

 

Then digital happened, and in 5 years, as paint software and image-setters and scanners improved, emulsion-stripping had disappeared, along with even more arcane specialties, like dot-etching process separations in hydrocyanide solution for color-correction.

[OAC_Sparky]

Elevators go up and down. With no major problems. Trains are just horizontal elevators, and it seems they can be automated as well. A plane is just an elevator/train combo. No reason we can't automate it too.

Put the joystick down and step back from the keyboard, this isn't Microsoft Flight Sim.

 

Until you can build a 3-dimensional track from O'Hare to Denver, flying a plane will never be like an elevator or a train. The statement is so preposterous I can only conclude that you're joking.

 

If you're serious, have you actually spent time in a real cockpit?

 

Honestly?

[Noah Harbinger]

Pilots? How many planes have gone down lately it seems when some oxygen problem occurred on board? The plane kept flying. Kept flying its programmed course. Kept flying until it ran out of fuel.

 

Um.... Zero, as far as I've ever heard.

[matthewq4b]

Reasons why I would not fly pilotless aircraft.

 

 

British Airways Flight 009

 

Gimli Glider

 

Air Transat Flight 236

 

Hapag-Lloyd Flight 3378

 

 

Computors can understand and deal with the expected it is when the unexpected happen that things fall apart and go to shit.

 

Also the elevator and single line comutor train has no unexpecteds to deal with. No bird strikes no lighting strikes (electronics love those) No micro bursts volcanoes or running outta fuel

 

no fuel = no engines = no computors + no pilot = Kiss your ass good bye.

 

Trains or elevators if things screw up they stop moving . When aircraft screw up you can have 30,000+ feet straight down to go befor things stop moving.

 

Think I will pass on that.

 

 

Matthew

Edited September 15, 2006 by matthewq4b

[Harley Lover]

Um.... Zero, as far as I've ever heard.

 

Do a search on Payne Stewart, professional golfer.

[Edstock]

Maybe they'll put a big red emergency re-set button on the door where the cockpit used to be . . . Ctrl-Alt-Delete at 300 feet approaching runway 24, as the landing computer has a sudden glitch . . . . do you feel lucky?

 

Then there's take-offs. Just wait til they run out of packages of moist lemon-scented finger wipes. The inventory computer will glitch and abort the take-off, but unlike the gang in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, this will happen 3/4 down the length of the runway, just after the flight computer has rotated the aircraft. Thank-you for flying Bits & Bytes, have a nice day.

[Sizzler]

Reasons why I would not fly pilotless aircraft.

British Airways Flight 009

 

Gimli Glider

 

Air Transat Flight 236

 

Hapag-Lloyd Flight 3378

Computors can understand and deal with the expected it is when the unexpected happen that things fall apart and go to shit.

 

Also the elevator and single line comutor train has no unexpecteds to deal with. No bird strikes no lighting strikes (electronics love those) No micro bursts volcanoes or running outta fuel

 

no fuel = no engines = no computors + no pilot = Kiss your ass good bye.

 

Trains or elevators if things screw up they stop moving . When aircraft screw up you can have 30,000+ feet straight down to go befor things stop moving.

 

Think I will pass on that.

Matthew

 

 

Luddites all.

 

Here's the way I see the progression, past and future:

 

1) elevators. Runs solely in a shaft. Constrained on 4 sides in a pathway that is fully enclosed and delineated. Its position is known at all times. Few outside forces act on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users).

 

2) trains. Runs solely on tracks. Constrained to its well delineated, but unenclosed pathway. Its movements are tracked and position (usually) known by the track controllers who need to adjust switching and the schedules of other trains using the tracks. Some outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, 'off-track' forces/users, weather).

 

3) planes. Runs solely in tunnels through the air. Constrained to well delineated, but unenclosed pathway. Its movements are tracked and position known by the air traffic controllers who monitor the paths and schedules of other aircraft. Some, more than with trains, outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, 'off-track' forces/users, weather).

 

4) trucks. Runs solely on roads along the ground. Constrained to well delineated, but unenclosed pathway.

Its movements are (more and more being) tracked and position known by dispatchers and route managers who monitor the paths and schedules of other trucks serving their market. Outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, other modes of transport which share the truck's pathway, weather).

 

5) cars. Runs on roads along the ground, may go 'off-road'. Few constraints, unenclosed pathway.

Its movements are (more and more being) tracked and position known by tax collectors and GPS-enabled service providers. Outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, other modes of transport which share the car's pathway, weather).

 

We have been progressing over the past century of so. We have been working up the transportation ladder from most easily controllable on up. We've done elevators, we've done trains, we're working on planes. The military is already sponsoring contests to develop self-guiding trucks (just finished one in a desert out west in fact). And then it'll be onto cars.

 

I'm sure there were the naysayers when the elevator operators went away.

I'm sure there were the naysayers when the trains and subways went automatic.

I'm hearing the naysayers bemoaning the end of pilots as more than just monitors.

I'm sure the naysayers will be in full cry when autopilot trucking looks to be imminent.

And I'm really sure that once control over individual automobiles goes away, that the breast-beating rhetoric will be loudest.

 

Just wait and watch...

[Sizzler]

We will.

 

We'll watch all the people on CNN refusing to get on the planes, and interviews at the crash sites.

 

 

why wait?

 

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2006/9/14/182814.html

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ss....xml&coll=6

 

http://www.klastv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5...mp;nav=168XDWn7

 

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/...=kentucky_state

 

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=53...mp;nav=0RaPI4tg

 

http://www.kptv.com/news/9839130/detail.html

 

.

.

.

.

.

and on and on and on, lots of pilot errors...same 'logic' used to defend keeping oilers, caboose tenders and elevator operators. Like I wrote, wait and see...

[matthewq4b]

Luddites all.

 

Here's the way I see the progression, past and future:

 

1) elevators. Runs solely in a shaft. Constrained on 4 sides in a pathway that is fully enclosed and delineated. Its position is known at all times. Few outside forces act on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users).

 

2) trains. Runs solely on tracks. Constrained to its well delineated, but unenclosed pathway. Its movements are tracked and position (usually) known by the track controllers who need to adjust switching and the schedules of other trains using the tracks. Some outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, 'off-track' forces/users, weather).

 

3) planes. Runs solely in tunnels through the air. Constrained to well delineated, but unenclosed pathway. Its movements are tracked and position known by the air traffic controllers who monitor the paths and schedules of other aircraft. Some, more than with trains, outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, 'off-track' forces/users, weather).

 

4) trucks. Runs solely on roads along the ground. Constrained to well delineated, but unenclosed pathway.

Its movements are (more and more being) tracked and position known by dispatchers and route managers who monitor the paths and schedules of other trucks serving their market. Outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, other modes of transport which share the truck's pathway, weather).

 

5) cars. Runs on roads along the ground, may go 'off-road'. Few constraints, unenclosed pathway.

Its movements are (more and more being) tracked and position known by tax collectors and GPS-enabled service providers. Outside forces can impose themselves on this mode of transportation (mechanical, structural, users, other modes of transport which share the car's pathway, weather).

 

We have been progressing over the past century of so. We have been working up the transportation ladder from most easily controllable on up. We've done elevators, we've done trains, we're working on planes. The military is already sponsoring contests to develop self-guiding trucks (just finished one in a desert out west in fact). And then it'll be onto cars.

 

I'm sure there were the naysayers when the elevator operators went away.

I'm sure there were the naysayers when the trains and subways went automatic.

I'm hearing the naysayers bemoaning the end of pilots as more than just monitors.

I'm sure the naysayers will be in full cry when autopilot trucking looks to be imminent.

And I'm really sure that once control over individual automobiles goes away, that the breast-beating rhetoric will be loudest.

 

Just wait and watch...

 

 

That is good and cheery but what computors can account for is mechanical failer and they them selves are pone to it. A plane is still a mecanical beast with moving parts Moving parts break and screw up.

 

Currently even unmaned aircraft are still over seen my some one the are not totally autonmous.

 

A computor is a diffreantial machine some time the obvous choice or logical choice is not always the right one.

 

 

And tell me just how would an autonomous aircraft deal with the Gimly scenario ?

 

 

 

Matthew

[Edgey]

Excuse me while I jump back on topic... Ford needs to ban ugly designs, not bland designs. The new Navigator, Expedition, E-Series, and Super Duty are hideous!

[Hemiman]

Excuse me while I jump back on topic... Ford needs to ban ugly designs, not bland designs. The new Navigator, Expedition, E-Series, and Super Duty are hideous!

 

Thanks!

[addeled]

Photos of recent Ford concept vehicles flanked him, including the boxy wagonlike Fairlane, one of the first projects he oversaw

 

 

This is not good, just plain downright UGLY..... rectangle with a square on top like many of the 80 model fords..... this will not appeal to the masses or even close to the 50% he's hoping for.

 

Their still needs to be changes in their design division.

 

Brand identity, using a like grille on every vehicle, is a big part of the problem. It gets old real fast. If they were serious about designing vehicles that appeal to 50% and disgust 50% this idea needs to be scrapped ASAP!!

 

Uniqueness, in all their offerings, is what will turn this company around, THEY STILL DON'T GET IT!!!!

[Edgey]

This is not good, just plain downright UGLY..... rectangle with a square on top like many of the 80 model fords..... this will not appeal to the masses or even close to the 50% he's hoping for.

 

Their still needs to be changes in their design division.

 

Brand identity, using a like grille on every vehicle, is a big part of the problem. It gets old real fast. If they were serious about designing vehicles that appeal to 50% and disgust 50% this idea needs to be scrapped ASAP!!

 

Uniqueness, in all their offerings, is what will turn this company around, THEY STILL DON'T GET IT!!!!

 

The production model will look much more like the Edge than the Fairlane concept (Thankfully).

[ebritt]

 

 

 

I Love It!!! Where can I buy One of those????

[Noah Harbinger]

Do a search on Payne Stewart, professional golfer.

 

Here I thought you were talking about 747's...

 

... still pretty scary.

[J-150]

I'm very hopeful!

 

If his work at Volvo is any indicator, then we're in for some major improvements at Ford.

 

Volvo defined bland on wheels for almost three decades. Anyone remember Robin Williams line, "Volvo, boxy but good" can't remember the name of the movie. Todays Volvos are the best styled ever, (maybe with the exception of the P-1800).

 

I'm looking foreward to seeing his influence in Ford design.

 

 

 

That was Dudley Moore in "Crazy People" Funny you mentioned that movie... there was one slogan from that movie concerninging airplanes...

"fewer people died on ourt planes last year than anyone else"

 

 

Just thought that was funny given the plane talk

[Hemiman]

That was Dudley Moore in "Crazy People" Funny you mentioned that movie... there was one slogan from that movie concerninging airplanes...

"fewer people died on ourt planes last year than anyone else"

Just thought that was funny given the plane talk

 

 

I guess this explains why I couldn't find any reference to this Robbin Williams movie in Google.

 

 

As for planes, just think what the ads would look like for these drones. "Zero on the job deaths for our crew members".

[Harley Lover]

Uniqueness, in all their offerings, is what will turn this company around, THEY STILL DON'T GET IT!!!!

 

In fairness, we haven't seen any of Peter Horbury's work for the Ford line, so we don't know yet. I expect to see examples in concept form starting at LA in December, and of course at NAIAS in January.

[bri719]

That was Dudley Moore in "Crazy People" Funny you mentioned that movie... there was one slogan from that movie concerninging airplanes...

"fewer people died on ourt planes last year than anyone else"

Just thought that was funny given the plane talk

 

 

you're right it was Dudley Moore - I remembered the quote but not the actor or name of the movie. my memory is good but not that good! even IMDB didn't have the quote, but I found it elsewhere online.

 

really all this time I thought it was Steve Martin. wow, good job! :happy feet:

 

 

here's a few more for kicks:

"Porsche. It's a little too small to get laid IN it, but you get laid the minute you get out of it! "

"You may think phone service stinks since deregulation, but don't mess with us, because we're all you've got. In fact, if we fold, you'll have no damn phones. AT&T - we're tired of taking your crap!"

"Paramount Pictures presents 'The Freak.' This movie won't just scare you, it will f*** you up for life."

 

pretty funny movie, I'd say rent it but I doubt it's available on DVD from Netflix or Blockbuster

Edited September 19, 2006 by bri719

[Sizzler]

That is good and cheery but what computors can account for is mechanical failer and they them selves are pone to it. A plane is still a mecanical beast with moving parts Moving parts break and screw up.

 

Currently even unmaned aircraft are still over seen my some one the are not totally autonmous.

 

A computor is a diffreantial machine some time the obvous choice or logical choice is not always the right one.

And tell me just how would an autonomous aircraft deal with the Gimly scenario ?

Matthew

 

 

Unmanned car in congested city traffic contest