TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

Autoparking without Autopilot Hardware?

Discussion in 'Model S' started by ChooseAnother, Jun 23, 2017.

  1. ChooseAnother

    ChooseAnother Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    Simple: Why we need Autopilot HW for a simple autoparking feature?

    For example, BMW i3's parking sensors aren't better than Model S's (probably worse). But it still can "auto-park".

    Why Model S Non-AP can't?
     
  2. gabeincal

    gabeincal Enjoying Napa life the electric way

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    Napa, CA, USA
    Because to develop a system you choose certain requirements. Since the AP camera was available to Tesla, they chose to develop their IP using the cameras and in the process, they made AP even more vital to be purchased. I agree with you, it could be done using sensors just like other manufacturers did. Tesla chose not to. Same with automatic headlights. Same with rain-sensing wipers.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. ChooseAnother

    ChooseAnother Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    Shameful.
     
    • Disagree x 2
    • Like x 1
  4. gabeincal

    gabeincal Enjoying Napa life the electric way

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    Napa, CA, USA
    You could say that... I probably used auto-park a handul of times.
     
  5. ChooseAnother

    ChooseAnother Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    Yes i know, probably i would be like this too but the thing is: Tesla's approach.
     
  6. MarcusMaximus

    MarcusMaximus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2017
    Messages:
    589
    Location:
    San Jose
    Because implementing and maintaining two separate implementations of that feature using two completely different sets of sensors and data would be a huge waste of resources.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Disagree x 1
  7. SabrToothSqrl

    SabrToothSqrl Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,034
    Location:
    PA
    Auto Park would be hard for us fossil cars with zero sensors.

    Also, my understanding is that auto park only works in the very conditions of which I would never park... near enough to another car that would make me worry about other people damaging it with car doors...
     
  8. whitex

    whitex Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,828
    Location:
    Seattle area, WA
    #8 whitex, Jun 23, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
    Unless of course not implementing separate system result is a Swiss army knife solution, does everything but nothing well, all-in-one solution. For example, Tesla's blind spot detection is about as functional and practical as a Swiss army knife saw blade is. AP2 auto-headlights just turn the lights on most of the time, even perfectly sunny weather, but they can put a check-mark next to the feature - "yes, we got it". The list goes on...
     
  9. MP3Mike

    MP3Mike Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Messages:
    3,900
    Location:
    Oregon
    The cars without AP hardware don't have electronic brakes, so there is no way for it to stop the car.

    They added the iBooster brakes when they added the AP hardware.

    There could also be the issue of the required processing power wasn't available in the car, but really no electronic brakes=no auto-park.
     
    • Like x 1
  10. MarcusMaximus

    MarcusMaximus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2017
    Messages:
    589
    Location:
    San Jose
    That's not really what's being discussed here. It's not about implementing a single separate system to handle auto-park in all cars, but rather implementing and maintaining two different versions of auto-park: one that uses the AP hardware and another that uses only other sensors(presumably ultrasonics) for non-AP cars.

    I'll refrain from comment on your complaints so as not to hijack the thread.
     
  11. whitex

    whitex Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,828
    Location:
    Seattle area, WA
    If you have a separate system that performs a function well, there is no need to create or maintain an AP hardware based equivalent.

    Agreed, I was just using those as well known examples, not meaning to hash them out here. However, if you disagree, feel free to comment on relevant threads like "Blind Spot Detection is disappointing" which includes a poll on how many people are happy with they blind spot warning functionality.
     
  12. MarcusMaximus

    MarcusMaximus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2017
    Messages:
    589
    Location:
    San Jose
    That first part is possibly true, but it also requires both that you expect it to be of equal quality and requires less engineering effort. Right now implementing that other system would be superfluous and possibly/probably lower quality.

    And, without looking through it, I think I've already responded to that thread. At least I've talked about it elsewhere and gone back and forth quite a bit about it with oktane.
     
  13. tuanyes84

    tuanyes84 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2017
    Messages:
    3
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I use the auto park feature quite often, it has been very useful parallel parking in the city!
     

Share This Page