-
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
So if the trailer truck didn't even make it past the intersection but only let's say halfway given where the car hit it, we're looking at let's say 4 seconds or less then. The truck would have had forward momentum across the intersection as well even after impact. So not much time to react to a vehicle pulling out in front of you if you are going highway speed. It's also possible I suppose that the driver was in the right hand lane driving southbound, saw the truck pulling out in front of him and instinctively tried moving to the left lane (anything to the right would have been the bulk of the truck moving across the road at that point), struck the truck and got pulled left passing under it and into the median. Whether or not the car was on AP I don't think it would have mattered. Without some barrier on the underside of the truck it was a no win for the driver. No chance to emerge even injured but still alive with all that windshield and roof debris directed into the front seats. Tesla's have done pretty well in head-on impacts otherwise. To me this is kind of akin to the Mt. View accident where if the sled-type crash barrier cushion had been in it's proper position and not collapsed, the driver stood a better chance of coming out alive as I think was evidenced by the driver who hit it previously and walked away.
I'll be looking forward to the initial report to get some basics as to what happened and lead this discussion a more directed path. I don't look at AP as being able to react yet to these kind of circumstance even in the best of conditions and don't think Tesla has mislead people on that. For what it's programmed to do so far I think it does work well. This was a relatively new Model 3 owner if he had a P3D as someone said (don't know if this was his first Tesla) and there's always the possibility that he didn't read the manual for the limitations of AP. But in my mind without more info it's also possible he experienced a sudden pull out of the truck and the outcome was going to be a given.
Last edited:
Disagree: my vehicle was sold as coming equipped with all L4-capable hardware and this radar has proven to be supremely unfit for that purpose, so it's either a design flaw or flat-out deception.
I cannot know what Musk intended in his secret heart, only what Tesla pitched me in its sales verbiage, as outlined above. That IMHO is a contractual obligation enforceable against them if they fail to provide an effective and timely remedy.
Do you mean the radar is signalling "massive truck parked in lane dead ahead" but the tired CPU cannot manage to switch this info through to the brakes in time? There is no reason to think that but I suppose Tesla can resolve the issue by showing us how they have validated this radar for redundancy in L4 operations.
The difference between assume and presume is that the former is to arbitrarily suppose a cause, whereas the latter means that probability supports the proposition.
So, yes, I presume Mr Banner had AP engaged and was paying negligible attention to the road, as a reasonable basis on which to argue about the system's flaws.
I am disinterested in how the media portrays AP accidents and also the bad habits of truck drivers in general, but wish to focus on the technical feasibility of using this current sensor setup to achieve a safe L3, which AFAICT is the minimum Musk is describing when he talks about sleeping in car with FSD by end of 2020.
My contention is that the current radar as integrated is a more of a liability than an aid towards ever reaching that goal, as it has an established record of treacherous and complete failure as a redundant safety sensor for detecting stationary solid obstacles in planned path.
If I am correct then there is no good technical reason to continue tolerating its failures at the needless cost in human lives. As it has to be replaced in any case why not recognise this and do so earlier rather than later, thus saving a fair few lives into the bargain?
Of course people try to avoid an accident unless they are suicidal. My post was more about legal responsibility. The truck driver had a stop sign, which he says he stopped at according to law enforcement who were investigating the scene, and we may have to take his word for that unless there is evidence recovered from the Tesla's forward camera or if the truck had video footage being recorded. Assuming he stopped we know he had the responsibilty to not enter the intersection unless it was safe to do so, which it wasn't. The Tesla had no such stop sign so did have the right of way.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
The semi appears to have made it all the way in to the intersection so I think 9 seconds is about right. That's the time it would take the back of an 80 foot truck to reach the starting point if it's accelerating at 2ft/sec^2. The Model 3 can stop from 60mph in less than 3 seconds. I cannot conceive of a scenario where an accident like this is unavoidable.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
You have a legal responsibility to avoid car accidents in California. Florida is crazy place though, so who knows?
Yes the cars do have the hardware needed for future use from what we have been told. We don't have the software yet to take advantage of that. Thinking you do makes no sense. So no design flaw or flat-out deception. It simply means that you won't have to have new hardware installed in your car when the appropriate software is available. Your car won't have to be disassembled to install cameras and sensors. Nothing else than that, we understood that when we bought our cars.
Last edited:
From what we have been told, yes, but from the results we see, no.
I do not believe that a software upgrade will ever make this radar sensor function reliably to detect massive stationary obstacles in the planned path.
But maybe Tesla intends to simply dispense with it as a redundant sensor at higher SAE levels, and go vision-only? Which sounds like a cunning plan to achieve the world record in AV goof-ups.
The truck had forward momentum even at the time of the accident so didn't stop the moment it was struck by the car. If you look at the overhead photos of the truck, it isn't positioned straight across the SR441 but at a weird angle. In fact if you look at where the car impacted the trailer where the truck is now, there's no way the car could have ended up in the median 3/10 down the road off "camera" where it ended up, but instead would have shot straight across the other side of the highway and into the canal. By the looks of it the trailer is longer than the width of the two highway lanes. As mentioned in someone's previous post it would be highly unlikely for the investigators on the ground to have moved the truck or the car from where they came to be until their work was done. I'm pretty sure the truck was blocking the 2 lanes of SR441 when it was struck.
Last edited:
So I think we come to the crux of our disagreement. You believe the single component, RADAR is already inadequate and should already be replaced. What is the replacement? Supplemental LIDAR could improve the performance of the system, but not at a cost that most people would be willing to purchase.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I don't think you can conclude much from the final position of the Tesla. Who knows what direction it would go after taking extreme damage from the truck. Having it's trajectory change by a fraction of a degree either way doesn't seem implausible. The truck might have been moved off course because it got hit by a 4000lb projectile moving at 60+ mph. Or the driver might have driven safely into the median because he had just been in a severe accident.
Assuming you mean the Tesla driver, I'd venture to say the driver was dead as he passed under the truck and made no adjustment to steer into the median.
Thought I would post the link to the NTSB report from the Brown tractor trailer accident in 2016. The photos of the car and damage to the tractor trailor are very similar with embedded pillar or roof parts and windshield lodged there. https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports/reports/har1702.pdf
Last edited:
Continental already have several improved radar sensors but I think the ARS-441 makes the most likely candidate, as it is rated for
- Adaptive Cruise Control Follow to Stop up to 200 kph (ACC)
- Forward Collision Warning (FCW) compliant with NHTSA
- Emergency Brake Assist (EBA) compliant with EuNCAP, UN-ECE131 (AEBS)
- Enables Highly Automated Driving
- Blockage detection
- Auto alignment
- Elevation measurement capability
- Safety Integrity Level according to ISO 26262: EBA: max. B
Swampgator
Active Member
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Obtuse enough I can't follow you! I was mostly pretty serious about this post, though obviously I should not be in marketing, I would be really bad at it. Though perhaps that would be a plus for Tesla in this case.
Something I've noticed regarding which side of the car's impact point with the trailer some of the car parts are embedded into the trailer. In this Model 3 accident it's on the left side looking at the tractor trailer, and in the Williston, Fl accident the car parts are on the right side of the trailer (Pg 7 of NTSB report).
BTW from the NTSB report on the previous 2016 accident: "The car struck the right side of the semitrailer, crossed underneath it, and then went off the right roadside at a shallow angle." (Pg vi)(emphasis mine). If you examine the accident diagram (Pg 3), you'll see the Tesla's after-impact direction was pulled at the shallow angle in the direction of travel of the tractor trailer, to the car's right. I believe this also explains the path of the Model 3 which in this case was instead to the left slightly--path of tractor trailer (coincidence the car parts were on the left here?).
2016 accident of Model S's direction after impact & trailer damage with car debris :
Model 3's direction after impact & trailer damage with car debris:
"According to the data recorded by the car, the airbags did not deploy when the car struck and passed under the semitrailer, most likely due to the car’s low change in velocity during this portion of the crash. About 8.4 seconds after the initial impact with the semitrailer, the car’s airbags deployed when it collided with the utility pole." (Pg 5). (Emphasis mine)
Did the airbags deploy in the Model 3 accident? From overhead footage of the scene showing where the impact occured and where the car came to rest I don't recall anything the car would have hit like the pole in the 2016 accident.
Update: I see from rereading @Cinematechs eyewitness post passing by the Model 3 that the airbags were deployed. Another tragic fatality with a semi in Florida. This time a Model 3 Unless driving past, it was the emergency responder's tarping placed over the cabin instead of the airbags. Feds investigating fatal Tesla Model 3 crash in Florida
BTW from the NTSB report on the previous 2016 accident: "The car struck the right side of the semitrailer, crossed underneath it, and then went off the right roadside at a shallow angle." (Pg vi)(emphasis mine). If you examine the accident diagram (Pg 3), you'll see the Tesla's after-impact direction was pulled at the shallow angle in the direction of travel of the tractor trailer, to the car's right. I believe this also explains the path of the Model 3 which in this case was instead to the left slightly--path of tractor trailer (coincidence the car parts were on the left here?).
2016 accident of Model S's direction after impact & trailer damage with car debris :
Model 3's direction after impact & trailer damage with car debris:
"According to the data recorded by the car, the airbags did not deploy when the car struck and passed under the semitrailer, most likely due to the car’s low change in velocity during this portion of the crash. About 8.4 seconds after the initial impact with the semitrailer, the car’s airbags deployed when it collided with the utility pole." (Pg 5). (Emphasis mine)
Did the airbags deploy in the Model 3 accident? From overhead footage of the scene showing where the impact occured and where the car came to rest I don't recall anything the car would have hit like the pole in the 2016 accident.
Update: I see from rereading @Cinematechs eyewitness post passing by the Model 3 that the airbags were deployed. Another tragic fatality with a semi in Florida. This time a Model 3 Unless driving past, it was the emergency responder's tarping placed over the cabin instead of the airbags. Feds investigating fatal Tesla Model 3 crash in Florida
Last edited:
FlyinDelorean
Member
Doesn't matter if the airbags deploy if you are literally decapitated.
Well you have two eyeballs until your skull gets crushed so why the guy never braked is a real issue. I don't want to come off as rude or disrespectful to the family but I bet this guy was going 90MPH on autopilot and not paying attention to the road. Just a guess, based on the damage and loss of life to those involved. I don't expect my car to automatically stop at an intersection or when a GIANT TRUCK TRAILER is about to smash into my skull. I commute often and cross paths with big rigs every day. Usually I slow down and go behind them, or go into the speed lane and go around them. I use proven defensive driving techniques to avoid damage. It is unfortunate that this driver did not. The marketing doesn't say, please proceed to violate the speed limit (probable), engage autopilot (probable), and don't prepare to take evasive action when a road hazard is present (obvious).
This truck is big enough to see from all the way down this huge stretch of flat land, so why he didn't slow down or break is beyond me. The tragedy here, IMO, is that it was avoidable. If the driver was convinced that AP would autobreak for him then he must not have been driving the car very long or even read the visual warnings when enabling autopilot or even skim thru the manual. I find it hard to blame the truck driver in this instance unless it turns out he ran the stop sign or stalled at the intersection. But even if he did, he will never admit that he did.
The problem for me is that this stretch of road is so obvious for speeding that there should most certainly be a traffic light there. This is the type of road where you would be tempted to mash the accelerator.
Well you have two eyeballs until your skull gets crushed so why the guy never braked is a real issue. I don't want to come off as rude or disrespectful to the family but I bet this guy was going 90MPH on autopilot and not paying attention to the road. Just a guess, based on the damage and loss of life to those involved. I don't expect my car to automatically stop at an intersection or when a GIANT TRUCK TRAILER is about to smash into my skull. I commute often and cross paths with big rigs every day. Usually I slow down and go behind them, or go into the speed lane and go around them. I use proven defensive driving techniques to avoid damage. It is unfortunate that this driver did not. The marketing doesn't say, please proceed to violate the speed limit (probable), engage autopilot (probable), and don't prepare to take evasive action when a road hazard is present (obvious).
This truck is big enough to see from all the way down this huge stretch of flat land, so why he didn't slow down or break is beyond me. The tragedy here, IMO, is that it was avoidable. If the driver was convinced that AP would autobreak for him then he must not have been driving the car very long or even read the visual warnings when enabling autopilot or even skim thru the manual. I find it hard to blame the truck driver in this instance unless it turns out he ran the stop sign or stalled at the intersection. But even if he did, he will never admit that he did.
The problem for me is that this stretch of road is so obvious for speeding that there should most certainly be a traffic light there. This is the type of road where you would be tempted to mash the accelerator.
1. Yes, it sadly appears that Mr Banner was a naïve recent owner who instead of studying the manual had liberally imbibed the Kool-Aid [e.g. Musk lying wildly a month before that "we already have FSD on the highway"] until the vapours rose to his head and convinced him the vehicle was L3 and would safely manage without constant supervision.
2. Re. truck driver seeking suitable break in traffic to cross, I agree that, even if his timing was not exactly textbook, he was entitled to assume other road-users would be approaching within the speed limit and in any case exercising reasonable caution to avoid crashing into the very large and visible obstruction temporarily presented.
3. It would be interesting to see the output of a @verygreen video simulating this scenario, as I cannot imagine the vision system would have been painting the road under the trailer as a green drivable space, at least not for more than a few meters beyond the impact point.
4. If that is the case, it begs the question as to why AP would be programmed to allow it to continue driving at full tilt into an undefined space, independent of the readings [or rather lack thereof] from the radar?
5. OTOH, if it was able to paint a drivable path for another 100m under the truck, such that no braking was required at that point, the irony becomes that perhaps even a soft plastic side-skirt on the trailer sufficient to obstruct the view through it may have been enough to safely brake the M3 to a full stop under AP.
Last edited:
chronopc
Active Member
- Status
Similar threads
