Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Autosteer put me in the penalty box?

mblakele

FSD Beta (99)
Mar 7, 2016
1,816
6,185
SF Bay Area
We paid for six-figure cars. We don't need to be punished when we use a feature beyond the feature's capability. The reminder is enough.

I agree with you, but don't I see what the price of the car has to do with it. No offense meant, but I think mentioning how much you paid tends to perpetuate certain ideas about Tesla owners. Take out any mention of price and your point is still valid.

Speaking of timeouts — and I hope only slightly off-topic — you can hit similar penalties when the camera temporarily stops functioning. I've seen this in heavy rain, when the wipers can't keep up. Autosteer decides the camera isn't working, and disables itself for the rest of the drive. In my case it disabled TACC too, adding injury to insult [sic]. I've also seen this happen when the sun is low-ish and directly in view of the camera. Lens flare, or something, can discombobulate the camera enough to disable Autosteer for the rest of the drive. In this case thankfully TACC still works. I'd prefer it if any Autosteer exceptions only lasted a minute or two, whether caused by speed, rain, or sun. I've communicated that feedback to Tesla.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
I agree with you, but don't I see what the price of the car has to do with it. No offense meant, but I think mentioning how much you paid tends to perpetuate certain ideas about Tesla owners. Take out any mention of price and your point is still valid.

The reason I mentioned the cost is that we are customers purchasing a high-end, premium product, and should be treated as such as opposed to being treated like small children who need to be punished in order to learn a lesson.
 

brianman

Burrito Founder
Nov 10, 2011
17,615
3,217
Maybe they think it really isn't safe at 89 mph either? If I was using AP over 90 mph and got a warning and AP was temporarily shut down, the first thing I'd do is see how fast it WOULD work. Having to stop and park before you can try again prevents that behavior?
My recollection was that the original release disabled all autopilot-related features above 85mph -- and was documented as such.
 

mblakele

FSD Beta (99)
Mar 7, 2016
1,816
6,185
SF Bay Area
The reason I mentioned the cost is that we are customers purchasing a high-end, premium product, and should be treated as such as opposed to being treated like small children who need to be punished in order to learn a lesson.

And you mentioned "six-figure cars". So it's ok if a $75,000 Model S 75D treats you like a naughty child? What about a $50,000 Model 3? $35,000? A beater that you got for free from your uncle? When does it become ok?

That's why I don't think price helps your argument. But I've made mine, so I'll butt out now.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
And you mentioned "six-figure cars". So it's ok if a $75,000 Model S 75D treats you like a naughty child? What about a $50,000 Model 3? $35,000? A beater that you got for free from your uncle? When does it become ok?

That's why I don't think price helps your argument. But I've made mine, so I'll butt out now.

There's really no need to quibble about the exact words and numbers. Clearly I was not suggesting that the behavior was acceptable in cars below six figures.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
Please tell me someone else took a picture of your display while you were driving over 80MPH without autopilot engaged. Otherwise, safety arguments here go right out the window.

Even if the picture was taken by the driver, while standing on his head in the rear seat, safety arguments don't go out the window.

One person driving unsafely (and I'm not saying the person who posted the picture was or wasn't) would not invalidate the safety concerns I and others have expressed.
 

mallman

New Member
Jan 13, 2017
2
0
San Diego
There has been a lot of debate about this in other threads. Personally I think this is ridiculous. Sure, disengage at 90, but re-engage below 90.

Musk has talked about how autosteer could save lives in the case of an incapacitated driver. Well, not if the driver was in the penalty box before becoming incapacitated.

Just silly!


That is the simple answer - if too fast it won't work, if below max speed it will. There is no need for a "memory"
 

Electroman

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2012
6,527
7,897
TX
AP increases safety (when compared to no AP) with a responsible driver.

AP is dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible driver and can cause more harm than no AP at all.

Pushing AP beyond 90 is a display of irresponsible behavior. Hence the need to turn off AP

I can't make it more simpler than that. $100K rich mans car inflicts the same carnage as a $20K poor mans car in an accident.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
AP increases safety (when compared to no AP) with a responsible driver.

AP is dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible driver and can cause more harm than no AP at all.

Pushing AP beyond 90 is a display of irresponsible behavior. Hence the need to turn off AP

I can't make it more simpler than that. $100K rich mans car inflicts the same carnage as a $20K poor mans car in an accident.

How many times are we going to go around and around on this?

No one--NO ONE is suggesting that it is OK to push the car past 90 with auto steer engaged. Our point is that auto steer should be able to be re-engaged once the car is again travelling below 90, without us having to pull over and put the car in park.

Incidentally, in another thread someone posted that resetting the IC will get one out of the penalty box. So now people can do that, and wind up driving for a short while with no display at all. I'm sure that is exactly the behavior Tesla was hoping to encourage with their ridiculous "penalty."

Here's that post:

So, if you ever get put in the penalty box and don't mind a driving reboot, rebooting clears the penalty. I tested this with the most recent version PRIOR to the one just released in the last few days.
 

stace

Member
Feb 1, 2015
34
15
Chicago, IL
Even if the picture was taken by the driver, while standing on his head in the rear seat, safety arguments don't go out the window.

One person driving unsafely (and I'm not saying the person who posted the picture was or wasn't) would not invalidate the safety concerns I and others have expressed.

Well, no, what I'm saying is that arguing Tesla is making you unsafe holds a lot less water when you demonstrate that you're not interested in being safe.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
Well, no, what I'm saying is that arguing Tesla is making you unsafe holds a lot less water when you demonstrate that you're not interested in being safe.

You had said "...Otherwise safety arguments here go right out the window." My point was that just because one driver making the safety argument may be unsafe, that would not have an impact on others arguing the same point.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
Ahh, pedantry. That's why I love the internet. One must choose one's words exactly.

Well, when people can't see your face or hear the tone in your voice, yes--words matter.

If you had simply said, "Please tell me someone else took a picture of your display while you were driving over 80MPH without autopilot engaged. Otherwise, --YOUR-- safety arguments here go right out the window.", we wouldn't be having this discussion, as that would have been making a point I have no issue with. But the way you wrote your sentence it sounded like you were trying to dismiss everyone's safety arguments because the person you were responding to may not have been driving using good safety measures.
 

SomeJoe7777

Marginally-Known Member
Mar 28, 2015
2,205
5,816
Houston, TX
Telsa is attempting to force drivers to pay attention and to do so in a way that proves it.

This software behavior (AP lockout after exceeding 90 MPH with AP engaged) is designed to force the driver to manually disengage AP prior to exceeding 90 MPH in order to avoid the AP lockout.

I'm sure Tesla's theory is that a driver who manually disengages AP prior to exceeding 90 MPH is proving that he is paying more attention than a driver who exceeds 90 MPH while AP is engaged. This theory is probably true, although many here will not agree with it.

Tesla also probably believes that using this software feature to force manual AP disengagement prior to exceeding 90 MPH reduces risks for the fleet as a whole more than AP lockout (and associated loss of it's safety factor) increases risk for the fleet as a whole.

While the decision seems overly punitive, I can see that statistics will probably bear out that this software behavior lowers overall crash risks associated with AP.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,443
Ithaca, NY
If one reads the Report about autosteer by NHTSA you will understand that they are (soto voice) complimenting Tesla about the "penalty box" lasting until placing the car in park. This will likely drive behavior to a safer alert situation. Tesla wants to be on NHTSA's good side.

Unless I am missing something, the above is misleading and inaccurate as it relates to this discussion. We are discussing getting put in the "penalty box" for exceeding 90 MPH with Autosteer engaged. The only reference I could find in the report to the penalty box, called "Autopilot Strikeout" in the report, is below:

--
4.3 Driver monitoring.
Tesla monitors driver engagement through the interactions with the steering wheel, turn signal, and TACC speed setting stalk. If the system does not detect the driver’s hands on the steering wheel (assessed using micro torque measurements) or other signs of driver engagement for periods of time that vary depending on road class, vehicle speed, road curvature, and traffic conditions, an escalating series of warnings is presented. The warnings start with a visual alert indicating that hands on he steering wheel are required. If the driver does not respond to the visual warning, an audible chime is sounded after 15 seconds. A more pronounced chime is initiated if the driver does not respond after another 10 seconds. If the driver fails to respond to the third alert stage within five seconds, the system gradually slows the vehicle while maintaining position in the lane. Once the driver’s hands are detected on the steering wheel, the warnings are suspended and Autopilot operation resumes. As part of Tesla’s 8.0 over-the-air (OTA) software update in September 2016, Tesla revised the timing of the hands-on warnings and added a feature that takes away the Autopilot driving feature for the remainder of the drive cycle if the driver fails to respond to the alerts adequately (known as an “Autopilot strikeout” – Figure 6).
--

The entire section above refers only to autosteer and driver monitoring, which involves making sure the driver is attentive. There is nothing above that states or even implies anything about exceeding a certain speed on autosteer and winding up with "Autopilot Strikeout", or, as we've been referring to it, the penalty box.

If there is another section of the report that talks about this, and that would provide any support for your assertion above, @William13, please provide the relevant portion of the report, as I have.

Thanks!
 

JRMW

Member
Nov 13, 2016
289
285
Minneapolis
Another possible explanation for why Tesla did this :

The legal ramifications regarding Tesla Motors itself.

As we've seen: the media and some politicians tend to report or act against Tesla Motors whenever anything happens with a Tesla.

Person rams through their garage. Immediate thought is that it must have been Summon feature or Launch problem
Person gets in massive accident: immediate thought is that it must have been AutoPilot.
then Tesla has to pull the logs to say "no, your foot pushed the accelerator". But many will think the data is altered.

AP is in theory to be used in controlled settings. Regardless of what people say, there are (edit) few times when going 90 mph constitutes normal controlled driving. Especially when a person rapidly achieves 90 mph. I'm not saying it's necessarily super dangerous, but it is clearly NOT normal controlled driving.

My guess is that Tesla is concerned that a yahoo will be out using AP at 75mph, accelerate to 90 mph, and get into an accident.
then everybody will blame Tesla Motors and AP, putting the company and the Autonomy program in jeopardy.

Much better to disable the rest of the drive.
This way, when said yahoo crashes Tesla can truthfully say "The car was not in AP. It is impossible for a Tesla car to go 90mph in AP. If a car reaches that speed, AP is disabled the rest of the trip"

End the legal responsibility of Tesla and AP.
 

Products we're discussing on TMC...

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top