Autopilot Jail- 1 strike only for speed?

[chronopc]

I don’t see the cognitive dissonance myself. AP is explicitly built so that you can override the speed with the accelerator without having it disengage, ordinarily. The only exception is when you cross the magic speed barrier. I suppose if you imagine that @Peteski went through the thought process of “oh I intend to exceed the AP cutoff limit, should I disengage AP first?” then your criticism would apply, but when I put it that way, it doesn’t really seem very plausible, does it? My one experience with this “feature” certainly didn’t involve the leisure to consider my several options, it was in-the-moment.

This is a case of a user interface element (the accelerator) causing two different behaviors under different circumstances. It’s not a hair-on-fire UI error but I don’t see your “drive it manually or use AP, make up your mind” criticism as being on target.

The 90 mph barrier isn't unreasonable. The highest speed limit in the US is 85 mph and in most highways it's 60 mph. I don't think it's a big problem disengaging if you want to do something the car is not designed to do.

My use of EAP must just be different from other people so I guess I never ran into this problem. If I want to take control I always disengage first because then I know exactly what the car will do. To me it doesn't make sense to set the car at a certain speed and then not want to go that speed.

 

[chronopc]

I guess I had not been clear- it was an emergency maneuver to accelerate, I didn't have time to think about disabling EAP. I'll try to train myself to do that for the next time, but it was a completely unplanned thing. My only point was the "one strike" aspect, vs. getting three strikes for being hands-off the wheel for several minutes, which seems much more risky and stupid than trying to save your life.

I completely agree that one strike and being put in EAP jail is ridiculous. It should just reduce the speed to 90mph if you do exceed it. I tend to always disengage EAP if I want to take over since I want to know exactly what the car will do so I haven't ran into this problem.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

AP is explicitly built so that you can override the speed with the accelerator without having it disengage, ordinarily. The only exception is when you cross the magic speed barrier. I suppose if you imagine that @Peteski went through the thought process of “oh I intend to exceed the AP cutoff limit, should I disengage AP first?” then your criticism would apply, but when I put it that way, it doesn’t really seem very plausible, does it?

The reason is because the hardware can't do it. Above 90 MPH, the frame rate of the camera and the lag of the AP hardware to make corrective steering inputs is insufficient to safely auto-drive the car -- too much road is covered every camera frame for the AP computer to reliably react to curves, obstacles, and other vehicles.

EAP, in its current incarnation, is a level 2 system. That means it's a driver aid -- a simple tool that you must supervise at all times. It is your responsibility to know, understand, and apply the limitations of the system to your driving. Failure to do that means you aren't using the tool correctly.

In an emergency situation where you have EAP engaged, your absolute first reflex reaction should be an upward flick of the drive selector lever to disengage EAP and take over manually. Failure to do that is unsafe because EAP cannot handle the emergency situation -- only you can.

 

[chronopc]

In an emergency situation where you have EAP engaged, your absolute first reflex reaction should be an upward flick of the drive selector lever to disengage EAP and take over manually. Failure to do that is unsafe because EAP cannot handle the emergency situation -- only you can.

This

 

[sdrevik]

This

and I have no problem with this whatsoever. My only point was, fine, disengage AP when I make an emergency maneuver, I would absolutely happy to take control of the car (and I did), but in the emergency my handa were focused on controlling the wheel, and not flicking the damn stalk. The automatic “AP jail“ was my only complaint People seem to read other things into the OP that was not there.

 

[chronopc]

and I have no problem with this whatsoever. My only point was, fine, disengage AP when I make an emergency maneuver, I would absolutely happy to take control of the car (and I did), but in the emergency my handa were focused on controlling the wheel, and not flicking the damn stalk. The automatic “AP jail“ was my only complaint People seem to read other things into the OP that was not there.

Until your post I thought AP jail was only if you ignored the warning.

 

[sdrevik]

Until your post I thought AP jail was only if you ignored the warning.

Nope, you cross 90 for a half a second while in AP, you’re in AP jail. You can’t just re-engage when you are back to normal speed.

But you can fall asleep twice at the wheel or read a book for a few minutes, that’s ok.

 

[chronopc]

Nope, you cross 90 for a half a second while in AP, you’re in AP jail. You can’t just re-engage when you are back to normal speed.

But you can fall asleep twice at the wheel or read a book for a few minutes, that’s ok.

If you fall asleep and EAP fully disengages, you're in AP jail too aren't you?

 

[jgs]

The 90 mph barrier isn't unreasonable. The highest speed limit in the US is 85 mph and in most highways it's 60 mph. I don't think it's a big problem disengaging if you want to do something the car is not designed to do.

Sure, I’m ok with it disengaging, especially if (as has been suggested) it’s a hardware limitation (although clearly not one precisely at 90 given @OPRCE reports 95.7 on the Autobahn). The original complaint was about it invoking AP jail after said disengagement.

My use of EAP must just be different from other people

Clearly so.

The reason is because the hardware can't do it. Above 90 MPH, the frame rate of the camera and the lag of the AP hardware to make corrective steering inputs is insufficient to safely auto-drive the car -- too much road is covered every camera frame for the AP computer to reliably react to curves, obstacles, and other vehicles.

OK, although see note about it operating up to 95.7, above. In any case, in the part of my note you didn’t quote, I acknowledged that the UI inconsistency isn’t a big deal.

EAP, in its current incarnation, is a level 2 system. That means it's a driver aid -- a simple tool that you must supervise at all times. It is your responsibility to know, understand, and apply the limitations of the system to your driving. Failure to do that means you aren't using the tool correctly.

Sure, of course, but so? This is motherhood-and-apple-pie boilerplate and doesn’t seem relevant to the discussion.

In an emergency situation where you have EAP engaged, your absolute first reflex reaction should be an upward flick of the drive selector lever to disengage EAP and take over manually. Failure to do that is unsafe because EAP cannot handle the emergency situation -- only you can.

I couldn’t disagree more. In an emergency situation where you have AP engaged, your absolute first reflex should be to use the system as it was designed — by taking over control without inserting the unnecessary additional step of manually disengaging it. In an emergency, by definition every millisecond may matter, so adding superfluous steps is unsafe driving.

 

[pipestem]

I Totally Agree. I have been thinking about this a lot recently, EAP should help the driver. Too often I feel like I am helping EAP. Taking control from EAP is not smooth and disengages it. EAP and driver should work together and it should be seamless, not one or the other. Interesting to see what it looks like in 2 more years.

 

[chronopc]

I couldn’t disagree more. In an emergency situation where you have AP engaged, your absolute first reflex should be to use the system as it was designed — by taking over control without inserting the unnecessary additional step of manually disengaging it. In an emergency, by definition every millisecond may matter, so adding superfluous steps is unsafe driving.

In most emergency situations a driver would step on the brakes. This would disengages EAP and all control of the car will go back to the driver.

EAP isn't currently designed to handle emergencies, it's a driver assist function. So if the situation is dangerous, disengaging is the fastest thing for it to do.

 

[chronopc]

I Totally Agree. I have been thinking about this a lot recently, EAP should help the driver. Too often I feel like I am helping EAP. Taking control from EAP is not smooth and disengages it. EAP and driver should work together and it should be seamless, not one or the other. Interesting to see what it looks like in 2 more years.

I'm not sure how the car would know you only want to take control for a few seconds and not longer. It has to disengage if you override it. I think EAP should also disengage when you step on the accelerator like it does when you step on the brakes. This would solve the AP jail that the OP is mentioning.

 

[RED MDL3]

I wonder about an “emergency” solved by accelerating to 90. Was the car next to you trying to get past you? Braking while taking evasive action will remove you from his proximity more quickly than accelerating. Let him get ahead of you where you can see him and keep your distance.

I agree the jail is unnecessary.

 

[jgs]

In most emergency situations a driver would step on the brakes. This would disengages EAP and all control of the car will go back to the driver.

EAP isn't currently designed to handle emergencies, it's a driver assist function. So if the situation is dangerous, disengaging is the fastest thing for it to do.

Sure. What I was disputing was that manual disengagement is ever the smart option in an emergency.

I think EAP should also disengage when you step on the accelerator like it does when you step on the brakes.

I’m so glad it doesn’t. I’ve been driving with AP since it was introduced on the S and I doubt a week goes by when I don’t override with the accelerator. In case you’re curious, this is usually on city streets, where my car often slows more timidly than needed in response to a slowing turning car ahead, it turns out a human driver will usually hold speed because we can see the car ahead starting to turn and judge the distance and closing speed will allow it to clear the lane in time. (And before someone starts schoolmarmishly lecturing me about it, I’m talking TACC here, not Autosteer. I make no apology for using TACC on city streets and wish more people did it.)

Even though that’s my most common use for accelerator override, I don’t doubt there are uses for it on the freeway in full-on AP (TACC+Autosteer) mode.

 

[chronopc]

Sure. What I was disputing was that manual disengagement is ever the smart option in an emergency.


I’m so glad it doesn’t. I’ve been driving with AP since it was introduced on the S and I doubt a week goes by when I don’t override with the accelerator. In case you’re curious, this is usually on city streets, where my car often slows more timidly than needed in response to a slowing turning car ahead, it turns out a human driver will usually hold speed because we can see the car ahead starting to turn and judge the distance and closing speed will allow it to clear the lane in time. (And before someone starts schoolmarmishly lecturing me about it, I’m talking TACC here, not Autosteer. I make no apology for using TACC on city streets and wish more people did it.)

Even though that’s my most common use for accelerator override, I don’t doubt there are uses for it on the freeway in full-on AP (TACC+Autosteer) mode.

Isn't slamming on the brake considered a manual disengagement? That's what you're taught to do in emergencies so I would say it's a smart option most of the time.

I have no problem with you using EAP in city streets. I do it all the time in traffic. However, if you do use in it in city streets you have to constantly be ready to disengage for red lights and stop signs.

I can understand your use of accelerator override when using EAP in city streets. I find the speed limitation annoying and I typically just drive manually if there isn't any traffic.

 

[jgs]

Isn't slamming on the brake considered a manual disengagement?

No, not in this context, no. Go look upthread at @SomeJoe7777’s post that this whole tangent branches off from: “In an emergency situation where you have EAP engaged, your absolute first reflex reaction should be an upward flick of the drive selector lever to disengage EAP and take over manually.”

Rather, the brake is what I described as “taking over control”.

That's what you're taught to do in emergencies so I would say it's a smart option most of the time.

I don’t disagree.

I have no problem with you using EAP in city streets. I do it all the time in traffic. However, if you do use in it in city streets you have to constantly be ready to disengage for red lights and stop signs.

Naturally.

I can understand your use of accelerator override when using EAP in city streets. I find the speed limitation annoying and I typically just drive manually if there isn't any traffic.

As it happens, I dislike exceeding the speed limit in residential neighborhoods but it’s all to easy to do inadvertently. So I often use TACC in such situations because I want to adhere slavishly to the speed limit.

 

[No42]

Majority thinks that is normal.
Wired.
Are you OK with AutoPilot jail?

Have fun.

 

[chronopc]

No, not in this context, no. Go look upthread at @SomeJoe7777’s post that this whole tangent branches off from: “In an emergency situation where you have EAP engaged, your absolute first reflex reaction should be an upward flick of the drive selector lever to disengage EAP and take over manually.”

That's only one way to disengage EAP. You can also hit the brakes and turn the steering wheel.

If there was a situation that requires me to accelerate and go around an obstacle I would most definitely disengage EAP by turning the wheel without having a 2nd thought about it.

 

[jgs]

That's only one way to disengage EAP. You can also hit the brakes and turn the steering wheel.

I know that. You know that. Maybe @SomeJoe7777 doesn’t know that? In any case, that was the context of the subsequent conversation.

If there was a situation that requires me to accelerate and go around an obstacle I would most definitely disengage EAP by turning the wheel without having a 2nd thought about it.

We agree.

 

[pipestem]

I'm not sure how the car would know you only want to take control for a few seconds and not longer. It has to disengage if you override it. I think EAP should also disengage when you step on the accelerator like it does when you step on the brakes. This would solve the AP jail that the OP is mentioning.

I actually like the way that acceleration is handled. When I ease of the accelerator, TACC takes over. I would like the same thing to happen with Autosteer, I want to smoothly take control without any resistance and the car should smoothly take over when I stop controlling the wheel to keep me in the lane. I would be in control as long as I want. I think that would be safer.

But good point if you want it to work your way, there should be settings for that.

The car should also learn the behaviors of the drivers and the traffic.

Side note: I once had to design the digital controls for a magnetic resonance system this way, so the scientist would be able to manually move a controller and feel and see the response, but then relinquish control to the servos while the ADACs continuously acquired data. This car is of course infinitely more complex.