Autopilot clarification?

[Tam]

...does keeping in lane mean that the car is driving on its own and everything is taking care of...

AP has 2 parts:

1) TACC
2) Autosteer

That means

1) it speeds up, slows down and stops and does not collide with the car in front

as well as

2) It can steer itself in its own lane so you don't have to worry about drifting off your lane and fall into a cliff.

However, it is still beta and not perfect so you still are responsible for its performance and need to take over as needed otherwise crashes, injuries, and death still happen.

 

[Fernand]

For me, one thing about automatic lane change during NOA, and upon blinker request in AS - that I don't believe comes with the default AP - is that I have a real fear of changing lanes in high speed traffic, because I don't feel I can really see around all the blind spots.

That's especially unnerving on merges where you have to quickly get through 2-3 lanes to get onto another ramp. Before I got the Tesla this was a horrible ordeal, gritting my teeth just waiting for impact. So, I was happier letting someone else drive.

I'm still nervous on complex merges, but I've observed and learned to trust the car's ability to work its way safely across lanes. This has been a real life changer for me, I drive more. That's almost priceless.

 

[Tam]

...I don't believe comes with the default AP...

Correct. New 2019 AP does not come with Auto Lane Change. Each lane change in current AP would disable Autosteer (then you just have to enable Autosteer again.)

I agree that Auto Lane Change is very valuable in my case also (just turn on your signal light and the system would look through 8 cameras and perform a lane change automatically).

My concern is if there's speeding car far away in an adjacent lane, would Auto Lane Change be competent enough to wait for that speeding car pass before automatically change the lane? So far, it has been pretty good at yielding for speedy adjacent cars during an Auto Lane Change maneuver.

How high is the speed? Since I've been driving on 70 MPH roads, I guess most passing cars would pass me by at about 90MPH. I doubt that I've encountered 100 or over MPH cars zooming by me so far.

I still look around at each Auto Lane Change because it's still beta but I do feel Tesla automation system has made my driving much safer.

 

[acarney]

Aside from the convenience of NOA, it's also safer in that it has a route to the destination, so it doesn't get as easily confused by changes in lane markings, splits etc. If you are considering options and want to see NOA, this is a > 3.5 Hr drive on freeways entirely in NOA.

If that’s the case (that it uses the Nav to improve AP’s lane keeping) then Tesla should roll that into the standard AP whenever there is a destination selected. It would be better for Tesla I’m selling an upgrade to FSD, and it wouldn’t really take way sales from FSD. If my car is skittish and hugs a lane or keeps pulling to the right at every exit, I’m not going to be ready to drop $6k+ to upgrade to FSD. However, if it uses every tool and trick it has to follow that lane as best as it can, but NOT pass cars or make lane changes or exits for me, then I might be more likely to consider the upgrade thinking it’ll just make it so much more convenient...

 

[Tam]

...If that’s the case (that it uses the Nav to improve AP’s lane keeping) then Tesla should roll that into the standard AP whenever there is a destination selected...

Navigation on Autopilot is not about making lane keeping better.

Autopilot alone does a very good job on centering a lane already. You can turn on the turn signal all you want but Autopilot just keeps on centering a lane without moving to a new lane.

Navigation on Autopilot is a convenience that it can automatically change lane for you without any human turning on the turn signal or it can automatically change lane for you when you turn on the turn signal.

That's why Tesla wants us to pay $6,000 more if we get tired of Autopilot that only works in the same present lane and if we are tired of the fact it can't even move the car to a new lane automatically!

 

[acarney]

Navigation on Autopilot is not about making lane keeping better.

Autopilot alone does a very good job on centering a lane already. You can turn on the turn signal all you want but Autopilot just keeps on centering a lane without moving to a new lane.

Navigation on Autopilot is a convenience that it can automatically change lane for you without any human turning on the turn signal or it can automatically change lane for you when you turn on the turn signal.

That's why Tesla wants us to pay $6,000 more if we get tired of Autopilot that only works in the same present lane and if we are tired of the fact it can't even move the car to a new lane automatically!

He specifically said “Aside from the convenience of NOA, it's also safer in that it has a route to the destination, so it doesn't get as easily confused by changes in lane markings, splits etc.”

If THAT part is true then Tesla really needs to enable that on all cars with AP and FSD. Obviously I don’t expect the auto lane change, but if FSD is better at auto steer and traffic aware cruse control because it’s factoring in routing information as well, that shouldn’t be disabled on lower end configs.

 

[Tam]

He specifically said “Aside from the convenience of NOA, it's also safer in that it has a route to the destination, so it doesn't get as easily confused by changes in lane markings, splits etc.”

If THAT part is true then Tesla really needs to enable that on all cars with AP and FSD. Obviously I don’t expect the auto lane change, but if FSD is better at auto steer and traffic aware cruse control because it’s factoring in routing information as well, that shouldn’t be disabled on lower end configs.

I think it's about gore point concrete divider.

When Autopilot is at a fork of the road, a gore point that splits the road in 2, Autopilot should have only 2 choices:

1) AutoSteer to the left path

or

2) AutoSteer to the right path

AND NOT

3) Centering itself to collide the gore point concrete divider.

Choice #3 resulted in the death of Apple Engineer in Mountain View, CA. There have been quite a few youtubers who demonstrate that choice #3 does happen with Autopilot but they took over and managed to stay alive to show us their videos.

So I think Tesla has solved that fatal Autopilot choice by introducing Navigation on Autopilot.

So, at a fork of a road, paying $6,000 more to activate Navigate on Autopilot can save your life.

 

[acarney]

I think it's about gore point concrete divider.

When Autopilot is at a fork of the road, a gore point that splits the road in 2, Autopilot should have only 2 choices:

1) AutoSteer to the left path

or

2) AutoSteer to the right path

AND NOT

3) Centering itself to collide the gore point concrete divider.

Choice #3 resulted in the death of Apple Engineer in Mountain View, CA. There have been quite a few youtubers who demonstrate that choice #3 does happen with Autopilot but they took over and managed to stay alive to show us their videos.

So I think Tesla has solved that fatal Autopilot choice by introducing Navigation on Autopilot.

So, at a fork of a road, paying $6,000 more to activate Navigate on Autopilot can save your life.

And if that’s Tesla’s position, then it’s absolutely horrible. Safety has always been number one with them, this would be artificially making a lower trim car LESS safe because they want people to upgrade.

 

[woodguyatl]

As long as there is a car in front of you.

Q
And they act appropriately.

 

[Fernand]

@acarney FSD includes NOA. EAP was a config that had everything that FSD currently offers. There are no Teslas with AP and FSD that don't have NOA. In order for the car to "have a destination" it needs the whole NOA. I speak a destination and the car programs a route using the mapping and GPS. It then handles the driving, with lane changes out of slower lanes, doesn't hog the passing lane, takes appropriate freeway forks etc. It also responds to the blinkers if you want to initiate a lane change. One side effect is that it knows a lot about forks along the way, like the "gore point divider".

Yes it handles lane changes with approaching cars, it waits for the right spot, and like a human it might have to cancel a lane change if a speeding car suddenly appears, before it can "see" it.

 

[acarney]

@acarney no, in order for the car to "have a destination" it needs the whole NOA. I speak a destination and the car programs a route using the mapping and GPS. It then handles the driving, with lane changes out of slower lanes, doesn't hog the passing lane, takes appropriate freeway forks etc. It also responds to the blinkers if you want to initiate a lane change. One side effect is that it knows a lot about forks along the way, like the "gore point divider".

Yes it handles lane changes with approaching cars, it waits for the right spot, and like a human it might have to cancel a lane change if a speeding car suddenly appears.

I thought all Tesla’s had point to point GPS nav??

 

[Fernand]

There's a difference between asking the mapping system for routing assistance, or to find a specific address or business, which doesn't necessarily mean you will go there, and telling the car to go there (NOA).

For those of us who have EAP, we paid extra for AP automation, that included NOA etc. For me, buying FSD for $6K only adds future features. For current M3s, you get AP automation for free, but not all the available automation. You have to buy FSD to get NOA, lane change on blinker in AS, self-park, auto-summon. If I were buying the car now, I wouldn't even consider NOT getting "FSD". The car, with FSD, is cheaper than what I paid in December 2018, and as part of FSD you get future features which I didn't get.

 

[acarney]

There's a difference between asking the mapping system for routing assistance, or to find a specific address or business, which doesn't necessarily mean you will go there, and telling the car to go there (NOA).

For those of us who have EAP, and paid extra for automation, buying FSD only adds future features. For current M3s, you get AP automation for free, but you have to buy FSD to get NOA, lane change on blinker in AS, self-park, auto-summon. If I were buying the car now, I wouldn't even consider NOT getting "FSD". The car, with FSD, is cheaper than what I paid in December 2018, and as part of FSD you get future features which I didn't get.

Ya, I get that if you don’t have FSD then the can will just maintain the speed and lane for as long as it can and will go right past wherever you set the nav point to. However, if you DO set a nav point then standard autopilot should maintain speed and lane but also know that in the right hand lane you have four exits that you’re passing and where those exits are. Then when it sees the right hand line move away it shouldn’t hiccup at all because it knows that match’s up with its map that there is an exit there and you do not intend to take that exit.

Now that’s not saying the car will drive for you, you don’t have FSD. But it should improve and refine the lane keeping ability of standard autopilot.

(This is assuming it uses mapping and nav data when running in FSD mode that just improves basic lane following)

 

[trm2]

@acarneyThere are no Teslas with AP and FSD that don't have NOA.

Well, technically..... I have AP and FSD and DO NOT have NOA. I have a software version that is almost a year old in my Model S.

 

[Fernand]

@acarney, I think you're making an assumption here, that in a base model M3 entering data on the mapping is carried over to the control system, but somehow Tesla is deliberately depriving people of something. That argument might possibly apply on blinker-initiated lane change. It's impossible to know how exactly the software is structured, but if you drive with NOA you know it involves a lot more functionality/software. Having an on-screen navigation display has become commonplace in other cars. Basic lane-keeping and cruise control that slows down with traffic is even working on my son's Jeep. Tesla's is IMHO better, but I think the competition can catch up. It's good that Tesla doesn't charge extra for it.

Where Tesla has something unique starts with the deeper integration, and NOA is its obvious manifestation. You are not understanding the boundaries if you keep demanding Tesla somehow SHOULD provide everyone a "partial NOA" gratis. It's not even clear what that would be, how it would work. A non-NOA screen computer can display maps, Yelp or track your position, but it evidently doesn't pass anything about the details of the route, like forks, freeway changes, to the control computer -- so it can't possibly act on it.

When I was considering the M3, my son - who sells non-Tesla cars - said something smart: if you're buying a Tesla, get what only Tesla has, the full automation. That makes sense. A Basic+ M3 with full automation ("FSD") is under $50k, that's more than competitive.

 

[acarney]

@acarney, I think you're making an assumption here, that in a base model M3 entering data on the mapping is carried over to the control system, but somehow Tesla is deliberately depriving people of something. That argument might possibly apply on blinker-initiated lane change. It's impossible to know how exactly the software is structured, but if you drive with NOA you know it involves a lot more functionality/software. Having an on-screen navigation display has become commonplace in other cars. Basic lane-keeping and cruise control that slows down with traffic is even working on my son's Jeep. Tesla's is IMHO better, but I think the competition can catch up. It's good that Tesla doesn't charge extra for it.

Where Tesla has something unique starts with the deeper integration, and NOA is its obvious manifestation. You are not understanding the boundaries if you keep demanding Tesla somehow SHOULD provide everyone a "partial NOA" gratis. It's not even clear what that would be, how it would work. A non-NOA screen computer can display maps, Yelp or track your position, but it evidently doesn't pass anything about the details of the route, like forks, freeway changes, to the control computer -- so it can't possibly act on it.

When I was considering the M3, my son - who sells non-Tesla cars - said something smart: if you're buying a Tesla, get what only Tesla has, the full automation. That makes sense. A Basic+ M3 with full automation ("FSD") is under $50k, that's more than competitive.

What I’m saying is, since all Tesla cars ship with the hardware for FSD and NOA and all could have the same code running, IF (key word here!) when I’m autopilot the FSD enabled cars are safer then non-FSD cars because FSD is also using nav data to augment its vision/sensor system to decide if it stays in the lane or follows a right hand line drifting off, etc, then Tesla should enable that on every car with AP. Tesla can still disable all the FEATURES of FSD. The point to point automatic navigation, the lane changes, the passing of cars, the off ramp merges, etc. ALL of that could still be disabled so the driver doesn’t get any of the convince benefit. BUT!, the system might be more accurate in knowing you plan to take exit 4 which is four miles down the road and it ignores the right line breaking away for off ramp exit 1, 2, and 3, because it knows about them in its map database and it knows you weren’t going to take those. However, if you don’t take exit four, it just keeps going because it’s simply auto lane keeping and traffic aware cruise control.

In fact, there shouldn’t even be a reason why you need to set a nav point. It should just look at the map database, figure out which lane you’re in, and then mark all exits and ignore a lane marking on the appropriate side (right/left depending on exit) within 50 feet of the exit. Then if it loses sight of both lane markers it obviously should disengage, OR if it doesn’t pick up that right/left lane marker within 100 feet past the exit it should potential disengage.

Now maybe it already does all that in the code, but my comment was initially to someone that claimed lane keeping was more accurate/safer when FSD was running (vs normal AP) because it somehow used mapping data and your nav route to improve its understanding of the roadway. That is the part to me that screams of a clear reduction in safety based on a FEATURE trim level.