Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Another tragic fatality with a semi in Florida. This time a Model 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

SMAlset

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2017
9,242
10,118
SF Bay Area
@MMBTUS, I know how you feel about it hitting close to home (BTW I had family living right in the same area of Lake Worth and know they drove that highway many times). Whenever we drive 101 here in Calif past the Mountain View 85 cutoff and the divider there, I think of Walter losing his life. Driving 101 South past Gilroy, there are many such areas of highway similar to the Lake Worth accident with side road intersections. When you are driving speed limit (and many drive over that there), having someone pull out from the side like that is always in the back of my mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OPRCE

S4WRXTTCS

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
5,852
7,029
Snohomish, WA

SMAlset

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2017
9,242
10,118
SF Bay Area
News reports about the accident are saying that the Tesla driver was going southbound and the trailer eastbound when the Tesla hit the trailer on the driver’s side of the semi. That would mean the driver of the trailer would have had a clear line of site of the car from his driver’s seat if he turned his head to the left to look for oncoming traffic, not having to look past the passenger side of the cab and thru that window.
 

Wildbill

Member
Sep 30, 2018
91
57
SF Bay Area
8cb4e302-695b-4062-b906-76d4dfe35640-jpeg.382185

@MMBTUS This is the first time I have seen this chart/information. This seems to be very strange to me. For Model 3 without EAP option and no TACC, why would automatic emergency breaking (AEB) only slow down the car by only 25 mph when traveling between 30 mph to 90 mph? If there is an emergency detected like a truck/trailer pulled in front of me and I am traveling at 65 mph, the car will only slow down to 40 mph. I would hit the truck at 40 mph. Why not just program the car so that the AEB forces the car to a full stop?

And what happens when a Model 3 with EAP but TACC not engaged is traveling between 30 mph and 90 mph? Does AEB slow the car down only by 25 mph also? (The chart does not show this info)

From the chart, It looks to me that Model 3 is safest only when it is equipped with EAP and with TACC engaged at all times. In this case, the car will come to a full stop in case of an emergency at ANY speed.

I don’t understand the engineer’s logic behind this protocol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OPRCE

S4WRXTTCS

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
5,852
7,029
Snohomish, WA
@MMBTUS This is the first time I have seen this chart/information. This seems to be very strange to me. For Model 3 without EAP option and no TACC, why would automatic emergency breaking (AEB) only slow down the car by only 25 mph when traveling between 30 mph to 90 mph? If there is an emergency detected like a truck/trailer pulled in front of me and I am traveling at 65 mph, the car will only slow down to 40 mph. I would hit the truck at 40 mph. Why not just program the car so that the AEB forces the car to a full stop?

And what happens when a Model 3 with EAP but TACC not engaged is traveling between 30 mph and 90 mph? Does AEB slow the car down only by 25 mph also? (The chart does not show this info)

From the chart, It looks to me that Model 3 is safest only when it is equipped with EAP and with TACC engaged at all times. In this case, the car will come to a full stop in case of an emergency at ANY speed.

I don’t understand the engineer’s logic behind this protocol.

Every single AEB system on the market works similar to that at speeds over 30mph. Google pretty much any AEB test results for various vehicles, and you'll see this. What's really frustrating is a lot of them are inconsistent not only between vehicles (with different AEB systems), but even between tests on the same vehicle.

They are largely crash mitigation systems when over around 30mph.

Read any review of them, and your faith in them will drop like a rock.

Keep in mind the Tesla also has FCW.

I personally can't wrap my head around why this accident happened. There is a user called verygreen who has posted videos of what the AP2.5 system detects, and I've never seen it fail to detect crossing traffic whether it was a car or a semi with trailer.

As to your comment about TACC. It's hard to say as the vast majority of accidents that have been reported are people on AP/TACC who have run into stopped cars. They do because they assume the car is going to stop for stopped objects, but it doesn't always. This has a lot to do with the fact that the radar has a hard time with localization, and for things that don't move. Like a tiny soda can on the road might have a large reflection. Obviously you don't want your car stopping for a soda can. So they try to do Radar+Camera.

In this case I really don't understand why Radar+Camera that's in the Model 3 didn't prevent or mitigate the accident.

I understood a couple years ago with AP1, but I find it completely unacceptable on a Model 3 with AP2.5.

But, I also know I have to allow time for more information to come out. Maybe the whole AEB/FCW/AP didn't have anything to do with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OPRCE

Garlan Garner

Banned
Mar 31, 2016
11,351
7,528
Chicagoland
Every single AEB system on the market works similar to that at speeds over 30mph. Google pretty much any AEB test results for various vehicles, and you'll see this. What's really frustrating is a lot of them are inconsistent not only between vehicles (with different AEB systems), but even between tests on the same vehicle.

They are largely crash mitigation systems when over around 30mph.

Read any review of them, and your faith in them will drop like a rock.

Keep in mind the Tesla also has FCW.

I personally can't wrap my head around why this accident happened. There is a user called verygreen who has posted videos of what the AP2.5 system detects, and I've never seen it fail to detect crossing traffic whether it was a car or a semi with trailer.

As to your comment about TACC. It's hard to say as the vast majority of accidents that have been reported are people on AP/TACC who have run into stopped cars. They do because they assume the car is going to stop for stopped objects, but it doesn't always. This has a lot to do with the fact that the radar has a hard time with localization, and for things that don't move. Like a tiny soda can on the road might have a large reflection. Obviously you don't want your car stopping for a soda can. So they try to do Radar+Camera.

In this case I really don't understand why Radar+Camera that's in the Model 3 didn't prevent or mitigate the accident.

I understood a couple years ago with AP1, but I find it completely unacceptable on a Model 3 with AP2.5.

But, I also know I have to allow time for more information to come out. Maybe the whole AEB/FCW/AP didn't have anything to do with it.

Do you know that TACC didn't try to prevent this and the driver overrode it?

Do you know that the driver wasn't depressed and did this intentionally?

Have you considered ALL possibilities?

Are there certain things that people won't do....just because they are in a Tesla?

You are making a lot of default assumptions in your post.
 

MMBTUS

Member
Sep 12, 2018
182
170
Palm Beach County Florida
I can’t speak for the engineering logic or decisions. I welcome anyone to correct my summary of AEB protocols if incorrect in any respect.

I sincerely hope this was a non-EAP M3 with no possibility of TACC involvement.

There’s a lot we need to know to assess properly.

It is absolutely feasible that the trailer was invisible to cameras or sensors in the circumstances. Nothing but focused human attention and instant reaction could have prevented the impact once the truck blocked all through lanes.
 

Az_Rael

Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Jan 26, 2016
5,667
8,962
Palmdale, CA
This is the first time I have seen this chart/information. This seems to be very strange to me. For Model 3 without EAP option and no TACC, why would automatic emergency breaking (AEB) only slow down the car by only 25 mph when traveling between 30 mph to 90 mph?

It is in the manual and it applies to any car that is driving without EAP/TACC enabled at the time. It actually looks like it was updated at some point, because now it says it will reduce your speed by 30mph, not 25mph.

If you haven’t read through all those sections on the automatic features, I highly recommend it because there are lots of caveats as to how they work that all of us should be mindful of.


9AA0432A-B5EF-4FC3-8C61-AD6AD08F346C.jpeg
 

pandam3

Member
Apr 23, 2018
193
160
Orange County
I can’t speak for the engineering logic or decisions. I welcome anyone to correct my summary of AEB protocols if incorrect in any respect.

I sincerely hope this was a non-EAP M3 with no possibility of TACC involvement.

There’s a lot we need to know to assess properly.

It is absolutely feasible that the trailer was invisible to cameras or sensors in the circumstances. Nothing but focused human attention and instant reaction could have prevented the impact once the truck blocked all through lanes.

I’ve noticed the cameras and sensors not picking up trailers next to me on the freeway.

The tractor it picks up, but the center portion of the trailers it disappears from my screen or shifts to one lane over.

Even with the turn signal on, the tractor lights up red then the trailer shifts over and doesn’t light up red then I get to the rear tires and it lights up red again.

My car sits about 2 inches lower than stock but that really shouldn’t make that big a difference with fov.

Also if a commercial truck cuts me off... the car sees it but doesn’t react to it. This especially happens when I am in the middle of a lane change and I get cut off... the car doesn’t react to the additional height from the commercial truck... where I need to take over and apply the brakes. This is in severe stop and go traffic where it just looks like the car is surrounded by cars on the center screen.

This seems to be the prevalent since the last software update. It’s like they turned down the sensitivity so the car changes lanes more smoothly instead of tip toeing into a lane.
 

pandam3

Member
Apr 23, 2018
193
160
Orange County
They should probably start implementing tests similar to the moose test... but for driving assist systems.

That way all cars with driving assist... not just Tesla’s have a standardized threshold as to how they perform.

They can do test like having a cardboard semi shoot across the road, or have cardboard cars cutting the car off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OPRCE

Wildbill

Member
Sep 30, 2018
91
57
SF Bay Area
If you haven’t read through all those sections on the automatic features, I highly recommend it because there are lots of caveats as to how they work that all of us should be mindful of.



9aa0432a-b5ef-4fc3-8c61-ad6ad08f346c-jpeg.382567


Thank you for pointing this out.

But this seems disturbing to me. "When frontal collision is considered unavoidable" why wouldn't anyone want to come to a complete stop, instead of just slowing down by 30 mph? Are there situations in which you wouldn't want to come to a complete stop?

But when the TACC is engaged, the car will come to a complete stop at any speed in a case a possible collision is detected. Why? What is the reasoning?

It seems to me that I should be engaging my TACC at all times when possible.

Should we request an option to have automatic emergency breaking force the car to a complete stop "When frontal collision is considered unavoidable" as a requested feature?
 

OPRCE

Member
Jun 16, 2018
861
1,000
Bern, CH
9aa0432a-b5ef-4fc3-8c61-ad6ad08f346c-jpeg.382567


Thank you for pointing this out.

But this seems disturbing to me. "When frontal collision is considered unavoidable" why wouldn't anyone want to come to a complete stop, instead of just slowing down by 30 mph? Are there situations in which you wouldn't want to come to a complete stop?

But when the TACC is engaged, the car will come to a complete stop at any speed in a case a possible collision is detected. Why? What is the reasoning?

It seems to me that I should be engaging my TACC at all times when possible.

Should we request an option to have automatic emergency breaking force the car to a complete stop "When frontal collision is considered unavoidable" as a requested feature?

Yes, it seems a particularly stupid way to program the car to only half destroy itself in an emergency ... the sole reason being to force people into paying extra for AP option as opposed to just being able to rely on AEB. However, this still leaves the dangerous gap for those who have paid that AP or TACC must be engaged in order to brake to a stop for any obstruction.

+1 for an option to activate AEB braking to zero [at least] for those with AP or FSD.
 
Last edited:

SammichLover

Banned
Dec 8, 2018
2,618
1,651
Yup
But this seems disturbing to me. "When frontal collision is considered unavoidable" why wouldn't anyone want to come to a complete stop, instead of just slowing down by 30 mph? Are there situations in which you wouldn't want to come to a complete stop?

If you could come to a full stop, assuming the object was a stationary or at least not moving towards you, it wouldn't be "unavoidable". I think?
 

SammichLover

Banned
Dec 8, 2018
2,618
1,651
Yup
I look forward to them performing the same test on the Model 3, given that the Model 3's EAP has tested as much better than the Model S's. I recall it being NHTSA testing but I can't find it right now to confirm. In that testing the Model S was basically in the pack with the rest of vehicles and Model 3 is a clear generation ahead.

However that was with an older Model S. I didn't see in the above what the details were for the Model S they used there?
 

VT_EE

Active Member
Apr 22, 2017
2,082
2,788
Maryland
Yes, it seems a particularly stupid way to program the car to only half destroy itself in an emergency ... the sole reason being to force people into paying extra for AP option as opposed to just being able to rely on AEB. However, this still leaves the dangerous gap for those who have paid that AP or TACC must be engaged in order to brake to a stop for any obstruction.

+1 for an option to activate AEB braking to zero [at least] for those with AP or FSD.
I believe the reason is safety. A phantom braking event that reduces you speed by 30mph on the Intetstate is a lot safer than one that does a hard stop. You’d pretty much guarantee rear-end accidents at high speeds anytime the system misidentified something.
 

OPRCE

Member
Jun 16, 2018
861
1,000
Bern, CH
If you could come to a full stop, assuming the object was a stationary or at least not moving towards you, it wouldn't be "unavoidable". I think?

This makes no sense either and is really just a semantic excuse for the user manual to disguise the fact that Tesla's AEB is designed to fail in an unexpected and illogical fashion during an emergency obstruction, solely in order to have the repair bill teach owners to not be so cheap as to skimp on the AP option.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: SageBrush

SammichLover

Banned
Dec 8, 2018
2,618
1,651
Yup
This makes no sense either and is really just a semantic excuse for the user manual to disguise the fact that Tesla's AEB is designed to fail in an unexpected and illogical fashion during an emergency obstruction, solely in order to have the repair bill teach owners to not be so cheap as to skimp on the AP option.
On the contrary, it is hard, cold logic. If it cannot be "unavoidable" if the vehicle was mechanically capable of coming to a full stop before contact with a stationary object.

This isn't just semantics, and it most certainly does NOT make the feature useless. Scrubbing speed from 60mph to <edit>35mph, for example, represents a 100% * (60^2 -35^2)/60^2 = 66% reduction in the energy of the crash. That's often in the range of lifesaving.

Why do this, why would you design the system to wait until it is "unavoidable" to kick in? Because you are keeping clear of the false positive zone, AKA "phantom braking". You're doing important, useful work without potentially creating by-product harm via braking when it isn't necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OPRCE and SageBrush
Status
Not open for further replies.

Products we're discussing on TMC...

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top