Fatal autopilot crash, NHTSA investigating...

[MarcusMaximus]

If he heard it after the accident that doesn't mean it was playing during the accident. The actual accident or the crash into the telephone pole could have provided the force to start the player if it was paused. All it takes is one key press and the key doesn't have to be pressed by a human, any random object pushing against it is fine.

Occams Razor says he was likely playing it at the time of the accident but even then that doesn't mean he was watching it, he could have been using it as a glorified audio book and be listening to it.

So we have possibilities of

1. impact cause player to start
2. player was playing but driver wasn't watching / only listening
3. player was playing and driver was watching

You can say which is most likely but you can't say for certain because no eye witness mentioned seeing his face or head and the direction facing at or immediately before the impact.

I'd just leave it as an unfortunate accident and stop trying to peg down the details when there are multiple possibilities that can't be confirmed or ruled out.

Sure, and keep in mind that we all need to be attentive, even while using autopilot, to avoid incidents like this.

 

[drklain]

That's correct. At this point with the conflicting reports in the press and the fact there is no mention of it in the NHTSA or FHP reports, I suspect that it was not the case, but we likely will never know for sure. What we do know for sure is that there was no attempt to brake/decelerate the Tesla prior to the impact which is indicative that the driver was not paying attention/did not see the truck. Based on the videos the driver had previously posted to Youtube, we can theorize that he was not looking out the window and was doing something else (whatever it was), but that is just conjecture.

 

[Andyw2100]

What we do know for sure is that there was no attempt to brake/decelerate the Tesla prior to the impact which is indicative that the driver was not paying attention/did not see the truck.

Another possibility, as unlikely as it may be, is that the driver had somehow become incapacitated just before the accident. Yes, I realize that this is incredibly unlikely, and that he had set cruise control about two minutes before the accident. But if we're trying to account for all possibilities, that one can't be ruled out.

 

[dhanson865]

Another possibility, as unlikely as it may be, is that the driver had somehow become incapacitated just before the accident. Yes, I realize that this is incredibly unlikely, and that he had set cruise control about two minutes before the accident. But if we're trying to account for all possibilities, that one can't be ruled out.

Did they do an autopsy? Can we rule out heart attack, stroke, etcetera?

 

[Andyw2100]

Did they do an autopsy? Can we rule out heart attack, stroke, etcetera?

I honestly don't know if those things can be ruled out or not. But I imagine there are things--for example, a short coughing bout--that would never show up on an autopsy report, but that still could have resulted in a few seconds of inattentiveness.

 

[drklain]

There is no question that incapacitation can not be ruled out, but given the driver's age and former military service as a SEAL, he is likely in a low-risk category for that. That is counterbalanced by the fact he had a demonstrated track record of driving with autopilot enabled while doing things that appeared to demonstrate an over-reliance on the autopilot and what many would classify as distracted driving. A coughing fit or even a heart attack is also unlikely to divert you away from looking out the window for seven seconds. The fact that the brake was never touched (nor was the accelerator) makes the far more likely scenario that the driver simply wasn't paying attention as unfortunate as that is.

 

[kort677]

I honestly don't know if those things can be ruled out or not.

an autopsy would revel if there was a heart attack or other episode

But I imagine there are things--for example, a short coughing bout--that would never show up on an autopsy report, but that still could have resulted in a few seconds of inattentiveness.

it has been determined that there was a long period of inattentiveness, far longer than a short coughing bout

 

[MarcusMaximus]

I'd argue that since him merely not paying attention is:

A: the far most likely case, given what we know

B: something that's actionable by all drivers in order to maximally avert such situations

And C: not harmful to anyone to assume

That it makes the most sense to stick with that assumption. Sure, maybe he had a sudden heart attack at just the wrong time and we're all blaming him for something he didn't do. But, at the risk of sounding insensitive, he's dead. His problems are over. Better to use his memory, even at the slight risk of being wrong, to protect the living.

 

[Andyw2100]

The fact that the brake was never touched (nor was the accelerator) makes the far more likely scenario that the driver simply wasn't paying attention as unfortunate as that is.

Of course, and I don't think I ever said anything to indicate that I thought otherwise.

But people were talking about possibilities, and there is at least the POSSIBILITY that the accident was due to something else. Do I think that possibility is a probability? Absolutely not.

 

[dhanson865]

Apparently the full reports are public record now. Someone in the reddit thread mentioned the autopsy as being included but its 179 pages so I haven't found it yet.

Florida Highway Patrol releases full investigation into fatal Tesla crash: read it here

It's in 3 files but requires a scribd account to download. You can view online without an account but it's not text so you can't search it.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Florida Highway Patrol releases full investigation into fatal Tesla crash: read it here

First report, page 8, mentions that the autopsy on Joshua Brown was conducted on 5/8/2016 by the Florida ME's office in Gainesville, and determined the cause of death as head trauma. Blood samples were tested by toxicology and were negative for drugs and ethanol (page 44). The actual autopsy report is not a part of the published documents.

The toxicology results from Frank A. Baressi (truck driver) were positive for cannabis (pages 41-43).

 

[dhanson865]

Florida Highway Patrol releases full investigation into fatal Tesla crash: read it here

First report, page 8, mentions that the autopsy on Joshua Brown was conducted on 5/8/2016 by the Florida ME's office in Gainesville, and determined the cause of death as head trauma. Blood samples were tested by toxicology and were negative for drugs and ethanol (page 44). The actual autopsy report is not a part of the published documents.

I'm not looking at that page right now but if you are talking about the page I did see it says "preliminary cause of death" or "preliminary autopsy" thus isn't a determined cause of death.

Of course the preliminary cause of death is trauma, no surprise there. It'd take a full autopsy to rule out the possible non obvious causes or contributing factors.

For example if you black out and fall into a garbage compactor and get crushed the preliminary cause of death will be trauma but an autopsy could show that you had a heart attack or a blood test could show blood sugar levels too low or too high or any number of other reasons you fell in. Of course not every case is fodder for CSI so some will never get the correct test done and the most obvious cause will get the final billing even if it is wrong. But to know what tests were run and what has been ruled out you need the full report.

It's why I barely glanced at the one page that said preliminary on it and moved on looking for the real deal.

 

[Andyw2100]

First report, page 8, mentions that the autopsy on Joshua Brown was conducted on 5/8/2016 by the Florida ME's office in Gainesville, and determined the cause of death as head trauma. Blood samples were tested by toxicology and were negative for drugs and ethanol (page 44).

Pretty sure the above should be "drugs and alcohol", right? Is that just a mistake (or odd auto-correct) you made when posting, or does the report actually say "drugs and ethanol?" I tried to check the report, but page 44 is just a barely legible form.

 

[chillaban]

Pretty sure the above should be "drugs and alcohol", right? Is that just a mistake (or odd auto-correct) you made when posting, or does the report actually say "drugs and ethanol?" I tried to check the report, but page 44 is just a barely legible form.

Does it matter? I see ethanol used pretty frequently in the medical context — technically speaking the alcohol in consumed alcoholic beverages is ethanol.

 

[Andyw2100]

Does it matter? I see ethanol used pretty frequently in the medical context — technically speaking the alcohol in consumed alcoholic beverages is ethanol.

I was thinking of Ethanol fuel. I didn't realize alcohol would just be referred to as Ethanol.

 

[bhzmark]

Most interesting is the Tesla Log:

and then

and various faults at the time of the crash:

Some other interesting logs showing what is being tracked:

other pages indicate pedal positions and cruise speed setting etc.

 

[wdolson]

I was thinking of Ethanol fuel. I didn't realize alcohol would just be referred to as Ethanol.

A coroner's report is going to specify ethanol to distinguish from other alcohols. Someone can be intoxicated with methanol too, but that has other implications than ethanol intoxication.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Pretty sure the above should be "drugs and alcohol", right? Is that just a mistake (or odd auto-correct) you made when posting, or does the report actually say "drugs and ethanol?" I tried to check the report, but page 44 is just a barely legible form.

Page 44 (the actual chain of custody and declaration of the processing of the blood sample) indeed says "negative for drugs and alcohol". However, the autopsy summary paragraph on page 8 says "negative for drugs and ethanol". I repeated what the paragraph on page 8 said.

I believe the toxicology tests specifically test for ethanol (the type of alcohol present in alcoholic beverages) and may not detect other alcohols, e.g. methanol (wood alcohol, poisonous) or isopropyl alcohol (rubbing alcohol, also poisonous). Thus, it's correct to refer to it as ethanol in terms of the test results, although most people would assume that ethanol is what is referred to if the report said "alcohol" in the context of an MVA.

 

[bhzmark]

The EU legislated anti-underride design features for all tractor trailers there would likely have significantly mitigated both this and the previously mentioned 'summon' tractor trailer incident. Heck, who knows, such an underride structure on this tractor trailer may even have triggered the radar to come to respond differently. Personally, if Tesla can replicate this incident I would like to see them try with both an underride and non underride protected tractor trailer

I agree. Check out the video here at 1:40 to see an example of what the underride protection does:

If the Side Underride Problem Makes You Mad, Here Are 5 Ways To Be A Part of the Solution

without guards:

with the guard the car bounces back.

Also see:

side underride | AnnaLeah & Mary

https://www.trucks.com/2016/08/10/trucks-underride-hidden-danger/

Underride Network

These crashes kill 200 people a year. Why hasn't Congress taken action?

 

[Tam]

I just got Model X with enhanced autopilot for 2 weeks and so far, I am quite pleased as a test pilot.

It still has problem of detecting tall truck from time to time.

I was on autopilot at 35mph approaching a stopped tall truck but I had to manually take over at the very last minute. I took a picture and the dashboard shows that the system does not register the very big, tall, stopped obstacle in front:

I would not recommend using autopilot if you don't have a special skill to be ready to take over the system at any time.