Good point about the license plate. Years ago, Mercedes was embarrassed when they were demonstrating the new Distronic Plus in front of a group of automotive journalists. Inclement weather made them move the demonstration from outside to a long aircraft hangar. It involved an engineer climbing into the back seat and having the car stop itself. The metal hangar threw off the system and the poor engineer in the back could only watch as the car rear-ended another Benz at 30 mph.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Do you mean that the TACC display goes blue at some point when you roll up on a stopped car that doesn't move at all? I've never seen that happen, but perhaps I always bail out and press the brake before that. I'm going to find out how much risk I'm willing to experience in the name of science on the way home this afternoon.
JimmyAZ
Member
If there's enough distance mine always 'locks' on the car in front. I've been especially interested when the car in front of me changes lanes how long it takes for the new car ahead to be found and locked onto. If there's not enough room, yes, I've chickened out and braked manually.
Not sure how that is different. I go around things that are dead ahead but the road curves around them.
The point is it seems the camera is slow to sense that the "thing" (won't call it "obstacle" if that confuses you) ahead isn't a jersey wall on a curved road or tree in a median strip and is actually a car in lane which you may want to come up on and stop behind rather than drive around.
Yes. If you're approaching slowly enough it will eventually register it. If you have the collision alert on it may even sound when it finally sees the car in front. But with TACC on it will brake hard the moment it realizes. It's done this since before 6.2/Emergency Braking stuff, also. You can also engage TACC while behind a stopped car and it will recognize it.
Definitely don't try it in any situation you're not comfortable with. I only tried it where I knew I could bail to the side or brake enough to stop in time just as a test to see if it would do it.
As a general rule, if the car ever does anything I wouldn't normally do, I take over. A benign example being that the car will usually continue to slow for a second or so after the car in front turns off the road. I always just tap the accelerator to override this behavior.
Then, by extension, we may as well abolish all driver assistance features including the good old "cruise control" until the point where the driver can safely take a nap while driving. After all, TACC (like regular cruise control) is not intended to relieve the driver from having to intervene when necessary. Whether on the freeway or not. Whether at 65mph, 45mph or 5mph.
This is the exact same thing that any car yet with active cruise control would have done . Crashed. Different cars may warn you in time and pre pump the brakes so when you hit the brakes you get max braking power to stop in time, that's what MB distronic would do. But it would not stop by itself on a stationary car if your going at 40+ mph. Tesla didn't highlight this point nor did mb. But it is deep in the manual. It takes 1000s of miles to learn the limitations which are only a few. Sadly the 100km driven by op was not enough of a learning curve.
I haven't read the entire thread but from what I've gathered there's some confusion among owners. Sorry if this was repeated elsewhere..
The way how the car is currently setup and enabled from factory, the cruise control is basically ACC.. Adaptive Cruise Control.. it only uses the forward facing radar unit, not the camera to sense speed or "look" for cars. At least not at the moment. A car that is stopped with ACC enabled is hard (not impossible) to detect as it could be no different than running into a wall with a car parked in front of it that's why the system is used where you normally would use cruise control.. on the highway / freeway. ACC has been around for the past decade and has been refined over time, I had it on my Porsche Cayenne Turbo and it would speed up and slow down on the freeway. I find it most convenient when in crawling traffic, the stop and go. I just keep the vehicle pointed in the right direction heh. I've tested it on the streets as well.. like some other users on here have enabled it to "lock" onto the car in front of you while stopped.
The "viewing window" that the forward radar unit is designed to detect a vehicle directly in front of you is very narrow, the reason is so it doesn't mistaken cars that are either slower or faster to the lane over to the left or the lane over to the right. I have used the adaptive cruise control on my P85D extensively to test where the "current" limitation is for the system. I've had it lose track of vehicle that was about to go over a hill.. when following cars on windy roads.. etc.
The system locks on to the vehicle in front of me fairly quickly but if someone "cuts you off" on the freeway, your better off stepping on the brakes since the "viewing angle" of the forward radar is pretty narrow.
I'm waiting until the "FULL" auto pilot package comes out to see how well it works with the forward camera. It seems as that the forward camera is currently only used to detect speed limit signs.
Larry
The way how the car is currently setup and enabled from factory, the cruise control is basically ACC.. Adaptive Cruise Control.. it only uses the forward facing radar unit, not the camera to sense speed or "look" for cars. At least not at the moment. A car that is stopped with ACC enabled is hard (not impossible) to detect as it could be no different than running into a wall with a car parked in front of it that's why the system is used where you normally would use cruise control.. on the highway / freeway. ACC has been around for the past decade and has been refined over time, I had it on my Porsche Cayenne Turbo and it would speed up and slow down on the freeway. I find it most convenient when in crawling traffic, the stop and go. I just keep the vehicle pointed in the right direction heh. I've tested it on the streets as well.. like some other users on here have enabled it to "lock" onto the car in front of you while stopped.
The "viewing window" that the forward radar unit is designed to detect a vehicle directly in front of you is very narrow, the reason is so it doesn't mistaken cars that are either slower or faster to the lane over to the left or the lane over to the right. I have used the adaptive cruise control on my P85D extensively to test where the "current" limitation is for the system. I've had it lose track of vehicle that was about to go over a hill.. when following cars on windy roads.. etc.
The system locks on to the vehicle in front of me fairly quickly but if someone "cuts you off" on the freeway, your better off stepping on the brakes since the "viewing angle" of the forward radar is pretty narrow.
I'm waiting until the "FULL" auto pilot package comes out to see how well it works with the forward camera. It seems as that the forward camera is currently only used to detect speed limit signs.
Larry
Other sources say that tacc does currently use the camera for the acc part -- not just radar. I forget my source. What is your source that it doesn't?
I think It just isn't perfectly dialed in.
Also, camera is obviously used for lane keeping not just speed limit signs.
I think It just isn't perfectly dialed in.
Also, camera is obviously used for lane keeping not just speed limit signs.
If Emergency Braking knows you are coming up on a stationery object in order to engage the brakes to minimize a collision, why doesn't TACC? If TACC sees a stationary object in front of the car (i.e., the radar shows the distance closing rapidly), then TACC should brake. The car can and does sense imminent collision with stationary object for Emergency Braking, so that information should also be used by TACC. No?
This! I do the same and as soon as I let go off the pedal, it resumes what it was doing. Nanny it a little bit and the experience is great.
I also like that the car errs on the side of not stopping if its not sure what is in front. I can think of a few scenarios in my daily drive where the car could abruptly apply the brakes and possibly get me into a rear-end accident with drivers behind me. The emergency brakes algorithm of minimizing impact only at the last possible second is good enough for me. At this point, I am not expecting the car to be very autonomous.. just a friend who helps out here and there.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
We don't have lane keeping yet. LittoDevil was pretty clear in saying "currently setup", "at the moment" and "currently." Looks like you missed all of those.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
favo
P3D+ owner
[Addressing the part in bold above.] Not necessarily. There are ambiguous situations due to the fact that the human driver is still controlling the steering. Consider the case of a fork in the road (or lane split or exit ramp, etc.), which is apparently the situation the OP encountered. Maybe there is a straight ahead branch of the fork with stopped traffic and a slight right branch with no traffic. You have TACC enabled and are following a vehicle that TACC has locked onto. That vehicle bears right at the fork. The car has no way of knowing whether you plan to follow the moving car or take the other branch with the stopped traffic. If it's the former, slamming on the brakes would be a bad idea. If it's the latter, the car may not have enough distance to avoid a collision, even if Automatic Emergency Braking kicks in (which it should at some point when it detects the collision is unavoidable--unless there isn't even enough time for that). There are any number of scenarios where AEB will not be able to avoid a collision (different fork angles, speeds, following distances, road/tire conditions, etc.).
Smarter features incorporating more sensor inputs will be added over time. More/better sensors will be added to get even smarter functionality. Mobileye EyeQ and NVIDIA Drive PX have some impressive demos. The driver will still be responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle and understanding how the driver assistance features work.
The real issue here is that if the OP was successful in suing Tesla, that would be the end of TACC in our cars. It would effectively stop any development in autonomous driving in the car industry. Who would dare progressing this technology if it meant that that they could be held responsible for a driver's lack of due care and attention?
In the UK rear ending the car in front is virtually always the fault of the driver behind. To my mind, TACC is irrelevant and the driver will always be at fault in this situation. A harsh opinion as far as the OP is concerned but he took a risk with his young family that is frankly unforgivable.
In the UK rear ending the car in front is virtually always the fault of the driver behind. To my mind, TACC is irrelevant and the driver will always be at fault in this situation. A harsh opinion as far as the OP is concerned but he took a risk with his young family that is frankly unforgivable.
"You can never Trust a computer."
Can you always trust a human beeing?
Rationaly, the reliability, the speed of reaction are not in favor of human beeings.
The years of experiences of Google cars driving millions of miles shows good results.
We should avoid word like "never" and "always". The reality is more complex then that.
Can you always trust a human beeing?
Rationaly, the reliability, the speed of reaction are not in favor of human beeings.
The years of experiences of Google cars driving millions of miles shows good results.
We should avoid word like "never" and "always". The reality is more complex then that.
+1 Wish all the drivers around me had tacc and auto pilot. (With better trainig on how it works.) Bet the pax in the asiana plane into SFO that crashed because landing assistance wasn't on wished the technology landed the plane instead of the pilots. Eventually the Luddite ("no nanny drivng assistance!") generation will die off (probably because they arent wearing their seat belts) as they will never change their minds.
Yeah, I don't get that attitude (i.e. manual or go home). For one thing about 98% of all driving is BORING. It's more tiring to have to micromanage driving on long routes than to have some assistance.
Similar threads
