-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Another tragic fatality with a semi in Florida. This time a Model 3
- Thread starter Az_Rael
- Start date
- Status
Huh??? It's not enabled yet ...
Read a little further down from my post to when someone says the same thing as you, and then read my reply.
Then read this thread.
Model 3 Interior camera feed is included as part of “crash snapshots”
Apparently one has to do lots of homework to be a Tesla owner.
It's not an analogy. It's what the word autopilot means. I'm answering the question of why Tesla chose the word - they chose the word that already means exactly what their system does: autopilot.
The problem is that most people don't know the definition of autopilot. They think it's self-driving.
They think autopilot is an inflatable pilot who flies for them, like in Airplane!
I don't particularly care for the name. But, there is a huge difference between most people, and an initiated Tesla driver.
The media is really to blame more than the name. The reason is even when an author of some article knows the Tesla isn't self driving they still pretend as if it is.
They'll say something like "We don't know if the self-driving feature was on in the car".
Where I'd say "We don't know if the driver-assistance option was engaged at the time".
Where the user manual for the Tesla clearly spells out what it is, and when you initially enable it. I do think Tesla should go a bit further with even signed agreements before turning it on.
Just to make absolutely clear that at this time it's not self-driving.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Yeah where would the media get these crazy ideas???
“Well, we already have Full Self-Driving capability on highways. So from highway on-ramp to highway exiting, including passing cars and going from one highway interchange to another, Full Self-Driving capability is there. In a few weeks, we’ll be pushing an update that will allow the option of removing stalk confirm (for Navigate on Autopilot) in markets where regulators will approve it, which would be the case in the US, for example.“
Elon Musk
SomeJoe7777
Marginally-Known Member
Avionics autipilot has no safety aspect to it at all. It has one strict purpose: keep the airplane on a heading and at an altitude. It has no collision avoidance or warning functions. It's not warranted to call it "safer". The only reason that aircraft collisions are so much lower than automobile collisions is the volume of traffic (many fewer aircraft) and amount of space (vastly more sky than road, and 3-dimensional spacing is available).
There are other systems in some aircraft, notably transport-level aircraft, that do serve collision warning and avoidance functions, such as TCAS, GPWS/EGPWS, and others. But these are not part of the Autopilot.
And yes, there have been several mid-air collisions of aircraft who were on autopilot. Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907 is a rather notable example. A Boeing 737 collided mid-air with a brand new Embraer Legacy 600 while at 37,000 feet over the Brazilian rainforest. The Embraer had some wing tip and horizontal stabilizer damage, and was able to land safely. The Boeing 737 broke apart in flight and crashed.
Both aircraft were on autopilot at the time. The root cause of the accident was that while the flight plan of the Embraer called for an altitude during its cruise that would have been safe, the Embraer crew requested (and was granted by air traffic control) clearance to fly a different altitude for the cruise phase due to turbulence. The requested altitude matched the altitude assigned to the Boeing, which was flying on the same airway in the opposite direction. Air traffic control did not notice the discrepancy and failed to notify either plane. One air traffic controller did see the two planes approaching each other on radar and tried to call the Embraer several times to tell them to switch altitude, but they were out of radio range.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I think it's safer if the casualty rate is lower. It's just inherently safer because as you said there's almost never anything to run into. It sounds like if Tesla autopilot was as safe as airplane autopilot it would be a Level 4 self-driving system
That's not how I read that ... can anybody confirm re: interior camera being enabled for crash recordings?
It might be useful to add some detail.
What happened is I responded the way you did to a post a long time ago. Where I said the interior facing camera wasn't activated.
Then verygreen corrected me, and said that it's part of the crash snapshot and is logged. Verygreen is a hacker, and is well known in the community for being a reputable source of info.
Then Az_Rael created that thread because she had concerns over privacy.
Cinematechs
Member
I drove by the scene of this accident last week. I’m a 6 year Tesla owner. Started with an S I currently drive an X with gen 2 ap. I was heading sb on 441 and came upon the 18 wheeler first. There are plenty of farms on the west side of this road, so 18 wheelers crossing 441 is a common occurrence. The 18 wheeler at that point was moved to the median that separates 3 lanes Northbound and three lanes southbound. The 18 wheeler was crossing southbound to turn onto northbound. The accident occurred between 7:00 -8:00 in the morning. Debris was all over the road as I passed the 18 wheeler, but there was no sign of a second vehicle, so I had assumed that the other car had already been towed. I passed the accident scene and the traffic congestion stopped until ONE MILE later where there was another traffic jam. At first, I thought we were passing a second accident. This is where I encountered the model 3 with a torn off roof. All the airbags were deployed and the gar had stopped in the grassy median over a mile after the scene of impact. As Tesla drivers off of ap, we know that as soon as our foot is taken off of the accelerator, the regenerative breaking kicks in an the car starts deceleration. For it to continue over a mile after impact, I can firmly say, That the chances of autopilot being on at the time of impact is extremely high. How else could the 3 have stayed in its lane for over a mile until it finally reached its stopping point.
SomeJoe7777
Marginally-Known Member
Once the roof was torn off, there was no primary AP camera available to the system. I agree that it's probably likely that AP was engaged at the time of the accident, but I find it highly unlikely that AP would have kept operating after the accident. The fault sensing logic would have detected that the camera was not available on the CAN network, and AP would have immediately disengaged.
That's wild, thank you for sharing.
One can wonder whether we should expect a car to drive on for a mile, or something different to be programmed. Especially as all airbags were apparently deployed. At some point you just need to pull over and let rescue come to the vehicle rather than mount a chase. That's what lights and horns are for, indicate traffic that something is up.
One can wonder whether we should expect a car to drive on for a mile, or something different to be programmed. Especially as all airbags were apparently deployed. At some point you just need to pull over and let rescue come to the vehicle rather than mount a chase. That's what lights and horns are for, indicate traffic that something is up.
But we also know the second an airbag goes off the pyro fuse is blown disconnecting the HV battery. So you can neither accelerate or regen after the airbags blow. And as @Cinematechs says with the roof gone there are no cameras for AP to even try to continue steering.
If the car was that far down the road after impact it does not sound like autopilot. I don’t know how to say this lightly but it sounds like the drivers foot was still on the pedal after they died.
With this accident and the other similar accident there is no expectation that a Tesla can save you when the other driver is 100% at fault and fails to yield the right of way.
Just read the post above. I didn’t realize the HV power was cut. I guess it just rolled that far.
With this accident and the other similar accident there is no expectation that a Tesla can save you when the other driver is 100% at fault and fails to yield the right of way.
Just read the post above. I didn’t realize the HV power was cut. I guess it just rolled that far.
There is still good view of the road side from the various other cameras. I would expect there to be redundancy. Else, how can a FSD prevent huge carnage when a wet leaf hits the windshield just wrong?
From high speed with no traffic ahead apart from the truck that cut off the roof, slowing down with hazards on is the way to go, ideally pulling over. The car will need to figure this out when there is no driver present as well as a deceased driver. There's no time like the present to take on such eventualities.
Of course, not overlooking 18 wheelers is a higher priority.
Going 70mph after impact seems doable and rolling that far on kinetic energy alone, on a flat road, seems very realistic.
A car taking over should IMO use the still functioning brakes to come to a relatively safe halt to not be in a different county than the responders. Random passers by a mile from the scene of the accident might not recognize the occupants still need assistance on a road where traffic continues as usual.
The report from the NHTSA said the Model 3 "came to a rest three-tenths of a mile south of the collision".
Cinematechs
Member
Cinematechs
Member
Second federal agency to probe fatal Tesla crash
Second federal agency to probe fatal Tesla crash
Look at the helecopter shot on the scene. Can’t even get to the Tesla down the road. 3/10 my ass
- Status
Similar threads
