AutoPilot speed restrictions...what do you think

[boonedocks]

Soooo as we all sit around waiting "soon" for 8.1 "soon" that is now "about" 2 days past "about" 3 weeks now, according to Elon's tweet of 11-22-2016, I was thinking about my drive today. With the latest firmware updates and some AP2 functionality coming with 8.1 "soon", when AutoPilot is engaged now on non divided highways, we are now limited to the exact speed limit.

Reason 1:
If it is in anticipation of full autonomous driving coming and Tesla NOT wanting to be responsible for a traffic ticket by speeding then why are we still able to set the AP speed well above the posted speed limit on divided highways? So it can't be to avoid a traffic ticket for speeding while AutoPiloting.

Reason 2:
If it is because someone at Tesla thinks it is safer to drive the POSTED speed limit on non-divided highways I would propose that it is just the OPPOSITE of that. On an expressway there are usually several lanes to pass by and a car driving the exact speed limit is not as likely to impede the flow of traffic. As a test today I drove the EXACT speed limit during my 35 miles of errand running. I would not be exaggerating to have considered it dangerous and hazardous as people were trying every way they could to pass me. Swerving back and forth flashing their lights at me honking their horns...thereby not paying attention to enytging else around them. Even tho it doesn't sound like much the old 5mph over was actually about right for most non-divided roads to feel comfortable.

Reason 3: (and my guess)
Tesla has said from the beginning that AutoPilot was designed and meant to work on divided highways. We have all (most of us I am sure) enjoyed using it on non-divided roads and feel fairly comfortable and confident with it. By dumbing down AutoPilot(1) to maintain the exact posted speed limit Tesla has made it almost useless and unusable for that now. A design "feature" to make us NOT want to use it.

Your thoughts

 

[u00mem9]

I think the rollout of this restriction will result in a massive revolt. Tesla is many things to many people and the Prius crowd couldn't care less about this change. (They were 5 under anyway). But for those of us that live on autopilot, this is a deal breaker.

I'm on 7.1 now. If that becomes unsustainable due to further actions by Tesla, the car will go away... and not quietly.

 

[mmccord]

Mine is still 5mph over. That said, I am 100% against it. I drive on mostly non-divided roads. Speed limits are mostly 45-55. In the 45 zones, everyone goes 55-60. If AP can keep up with the car in front of me it is MUCH more reliable. Not having a car to follow makes AP mostly unusable on those roads. this means I either have to control my speed manually, or steer manually. Stupid.

 

[bob_p]

It's possible FSD approval might even require that all self driving vehicles obey the posted speed limits. While it will be frustrating for owners - not sure how manufacturers will be allowed to put cars on the road that are designed to disregard the traffic laws and break those laws by ignoring the speed limits.

As for using AP 1.0 on non-divided highways - it's not clear AP 1.0 can operate safely in those environments. AP 2.0 has more sensors - that can do a better job of detecting not only the vehicles on the road, but also monitor many objects coming from the sides of non-divided highways and urban streets - that may not be adequately detected by the more limited AP 1.0 sensors. If Tesla determines that AP 1.0 can't operate safely on non-divided highways, beyond enforcing the speed limit, they might be able to geofence the AP system and prevent it from even operating on non-divided highway.

 

[donv]

AP 1.0 can't operate safely in those environments without driver monitoring. I would argue that with a driver paying attention, it's much safer than manual driving in that environment.

None of that is any reason for the speed limitation. I think the speed limitation is probably meant to discourage AP use in that environment, without killing it altogether. That way you can still use it in a traffic jam or something.

As for using AP 1.0 on non-divided highways - it's not clear AP 1.0 can operate safely in those environments. AP 2.0 has more sensors - that can do a better job of detecting not only the vehicles on the road, but also monitor many objects coming from the sides of non-divided highways and urban streets - that may not be adequately detected by the more limited AP 1.0 sensors. If Tesla determines that AP 1.0 can't operate safely on non-divided highways, beyond enforcing the speed limit, they might be able to geofence the AP system and prevent it from even operating on non-divided highway.

 

[BerTX]

You asked for my opinion. My opinion is that using AP1 on non-divided roads that have hills is horribly dangerous at any speed. Is it just my car? Cresting a hill, the car loses the lane markings and immediately veers into oncoming traffic. Instant death if there is a car coming the other way. I would NEVER use it.

 

[ev-now]

When AutoPilot is engaged now on non divided highways, we are now limited to the exact speed limit

I missed this, can you send me a link to the announcement, or are there owners reporting this on cars which have had it pushed already?

 

[davidc18]

The ever increasing restrictions are a big part of my reason for staying on 7.1.

 

[Sir Guacamolaf]

People honk at me when I'm APing at 5mph over. At the exact speed limit, they'd probably want to shake my hand and get my autograph.

 

[mmccord]

You asked for my opinion. My opinion is that using AP1 on non-divided roads that have hills is horribly dangerous at any speed. Is it just my car? Cresting a hill, the car loses the lane markings and immediately veers into oncoming traffic. Instant death if there is a car coming the other way. I would NEVER use it.

Keep your hands on the wheel. Problem solved.

 

[number12]

Osborne ap1.0 so everyone runs out and trades their car in for ap2.0. Shady, but I guess tesla is just trying to make a buck like everyone else.

 

[BerTX]

Keep your hands on the wheel. Problem solved.

What's the point in using AP, then? It feels strongly enough about steering into the oncoming traffic that keeping it from doing so kicks off AP and I have to turn it back on. This happens again at the next hill, two minutes later.

 

[bob_p]

We shouldn't be surprised to see FSD regulatory approval require vehicles obey all traffic laws, including speed limits. It will be interesting to see who is held responsible for the car's operation while running in FSD mode. Is it the car's "driver" who issues the command to tell FSD where to go (and may not even be in the car)? Or is it Tesla, who is essentially providing the driver - the software that is operating the car?

AP is different. It's more like an enhanced cruise control than a self driving vehicle, because the driver is supposed to maintain control of the vehicle (which is a problem, because drivers tend to be complacent when the software appears to be working correctly almost all of the time).

Liability is a major concern by auto manufacturers. Other manufacturers place severe restrictions on what functions can be performed on their console displays while the cars are in motion (such as preventing entering of destinations). Even though the drivers would be technically responsible for getting distracted from the road because they were using the console display, if the manufacturers allowed that, they could be held at least partially responsible for accidents, and is the likely reason why they impose such severe restrictions on their user interfaces.

For AP, as Tesla gets more cars on the road, and we start seeing accidents with cars operating under AP, we should expect Tesla will either be forced or will voluntarily start imposing more restrictions on usage. Following the traffic laws/speed limits is a strong possibility - along with geofencing to restrict operations where AP 1.0 sensors & processor can safely run (only on limited access highways).

 

[mmccord]

What's the point in using AP, then? It feels strongly enough about steering into the oncoming traffic that keeping it from doing so kicks off AP and I have to turn it back on. This happens again at the next hill, two minutes later.

If you think AP = Hands-free driving, I agree that you should not use it. Perhaps you should read the manual.

 

[BerTX]

If you think AP = Hands-free driving, I agree that you should not use it. Perhaps you should read the manual.

You mean this part?

"Warning: Autosteer is intended for use only on highways and limited-access roads with a fully attentive driver."

 

[green1]

Good to see Tesla make the car even safer.
Everyone raved at how wonderful it was when Tesla forced it to limit to 5mph over, and when they increased the nag frequency. I expect everyone will think that limiting to the speed limit is yet another excellent move.

 

[thegruf]

If regulators required limitations apply to AP, then they should apply to TACC.
If limitations apply to TACC then ALL manufacturers should be required to limit their cruise controls to the speed limit.

I dont get the difference when "the driver remains in control at all times"

If the driver chooses to set the car to drive over the posted limit or to drive over the limit manually, it is the driver's responsibility, not the car, not the manufacturer.

Mind you when you read here about "hands free driving, reading books/papers, watching DVDs, being annoyed at the nags" I guess it just proves that smart systems just get dumbed down to the lowest denominator all the time, and it never ceases to amaze me at just how dumb some people can behave at times. So not for the first time the majority get hobbled for the sake of the few.

 

[Larry Hutchinson]

I had high hopes that autopilot and self driving in general would improve safety. But if it can not keep up with prevailing traffic, then it can not (or at least, will not) be used and the existing 30-40 thousand traffic deaths will continue indefinitely.

 

[drklain]

If regulators required limitations apply to AP, then they should apply to TACC.
If limitations apply to TACC then ALL manufacturers should be required to limit their cruise controls to the speed limit.

I dont get the difference when "the driver remains in control at all times"

I don't see that happening because the majority of cars with cruise control have no ability to know what the speed limit is. The cruise control is a simple device that regulates throttle to maintain a pre-set speed. As others have said, TACC is no more than a smart cruise control and I don't think anyone is saying that TACC is being limited to 5mph over the speed limit.

Rather, it appears that auto-steer is being limited to 5 mph over the speed limit which makes a lot of sense. Even without regluatory issues surrounding FSD, the faster a car is going, the less time it has to react to a given input of data. It may simply be that Tesla has determined that going more than 5 mph over the speed limit reduces reaction times relative to other traffic that the autosteer capability can't work reliably to the desired safety standard.

As others have said, it is quite common that the flow of traffic and general speed is well over the speed limit and it may be that Tesla determines that the 5mph limitation is too low and they need to raise it by some amount. In my experience, most traffic is running around 5-10mph above the speed limit on highways. I'd certainly like to see them raise the device limit to 10 or 15 mph over the speed limit, but I think expecting it to become "unlimited" is unlikely as Tesla works to ensure autosteering (and ultimately FSD) work reliably and safely.

Just as an aside (and not to badmouth the dead), but the Autopilot crash in Florida that kicked off so many concerns had the driver speeding 9 mph over the speed limit. Would the extra time provided by going 4 mph slower have made a difference? Given what we know about the accident and how the system did not detect the truck and the driver's apparent focus on something besides driving, the answer is that the accident would likely not have been prevented. At the same time, it is reasonable to assume this may have been a factor in Tesla's decision to create the no more than 5mph over the speed limit requirement.

 

[u00mem9]

I had high hopes that autopilot and self driving in general would improve safety. But if it can not keep up with prevailing traffic, then it can not (or at least, will not) be used and the existing 30-40 thousand traffic deaths will continue indefinitely.

Exactly. I'm not sure what background negotiations were involved here, but for me at least, this moves autopilot from a ground breaking technology to a novelty that I can show friends or use on the occasional road trip.

Sad.