Agreed, FedEx is the leader in in-flight fire safety and have many in-fire prevention systems. Blankets above haz can, fire extinguishers systems, etc. Even on the aircraft that do not have the new system every aircraft has a fire supression system that is connected to a haz can and is hooked up only after it is inspected by the crew.
In my mind it is related to cost and FedEx is willing to spend the bucks in the prevention of in-flight fires. Not to say there will never be one, in aviation never is a word not spoken. But FedEx does and will continue their R&D for this all important problem. And for us who do not enjoy the luxury to work for a top notch airline that can afford such an expenditure, lets hope they do have the desire to adopt the work of others.

Right, Do you know what a STC is and how valuable it is if marketable?

One side of the coin.

Also take in mind what FedEx's insurance cost's are after recent hull losses and the insurance savings they gain by producing and operating with this system...

Guppy, respect you for being a realist on this issue.

FedEx would not allow that cargo configuration regardless of the IATA rules And the hull loss at Narita had nothing to do with cargo.

That's incredibly bad practice.

Whoever loaded that pallet needs a word.