-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
NTSB can only make recommendations, they don't really have an enforcement action. Also the report doesn't have that suggestion anyways (the accident was on a highway, albeit one with an intersection).
Tesla have also made changes since that accident (more nags, radar being used for detection).
Its possible this particular investigation will be the tipping point that drives the NHTSA to make new regulations regarding the developing autonomous vehicle industry. So, sure it could make a dent . We will see if it does, though.
My cars are supposed to be able to text without taking your eyes off the road. IIRC, you push a button on the wheel, say your contact and text, then it notifies you it has a response and reads it to you.
However, I don't think it will catch on. I read the news and it says everybody is taking naked pics of themselves and texting them. I simply am not nimble enough to disrobe while driving at 75mph anymore.
Last edited:
timvracer
Member
Well... very well stated NTSB, and pretty obvious IMO.
Tesla already made the fixes far before the investigation, so not sure about the value of a long drawn out expensive investigation, except for the fact that I do want to always make sure that car manufacturers have healthy fear of penalty if they don't act fast and improve safety when such clear issues are discovered.
Over dependence on automation is probably the biggest thing that scares me. I love AP2, but clearly know it can be very unsafe if not used "correctly".
Tesla already made the fixes far before the investigation, so not sure about the value of a long drawn out expensive investigation, except for the fact that I do want to always make sure that car manufacturers have healthy fear of penalty if they don't act fast and improve safety when such clear issues are discovered.
Over dependence on automation is probably the biggest thing that scares me. I love AP2, but clearly know it can be very unsafe if not used "correctly".
Agreed. But when used as intended, still far safer than the kid in the lane next to me on iMessage....
Here he comes, (what is that, what is that?)
There he goes, (what was that, what was that?)
And drivin' without his clothes.
Oh yes, they called him the Streak
(When was this, when was this?)
Been forty years since his peak
(Oh my God, Oh my God)
And since he's rather old n grey
I'm kinda glad to say
He gonna stay in his seat.
Oh, yes, they called him the Streak
(Not again, not again)
AP put him back on the street
(WTF?, WTF?)
He's just as nude as he can be
Drivin autonomously
Givin it plenty of cheek
The cool thing about folk in cheap cars who text, is they weave and have poor speed control, and seldom limo tint all their windows.
They are much easier to spot than those with ACC, LKA, AutoSteer, and blacked out windows.
Why the windows? Tip: If somebody is staring at their groin in the driver's seat of a car, they are either texting or doing something worse. Either way, treat them like a drunk.
Tam
Well-Known Member
The Board doesn't seems to like Tesla Steering Wheel Sensor method:
"9. The way that the Tesla Autopilot system monitored and responded to the driver’s interaction with the steering wheel was not an effective method of ensuring driver engagement."
And its rationale is:
"6. Because driving is an inherently visual task and a driver may touch the steering wheel without visually assessing the roadway, traffic conditions, or vehicle control system performance, monitoring steering wheel torque provides a poor surrogate means of determining the automated vehicle driver’s degree of engagement with the driving task."
Does that mean the Board prefer GM Cruise eye-tracking monitoring system?
"9. The way that the Tesla Autopilot system monitored and responded to the driver’s interaction with the steering wheel was not an effective method of ensuring driver engagement."
And its rationale is:
"6. Because driving is an inherently visual task and a driver may touch the steering wheel without visually assessing the roadway, traffic conditions, or vehicle control system performance, monitoring steering wheel torque provides a poor surrogate means of determining the automated vehicle driver’s degree of engagement with the driving task."
Does that mean the Board prefer GM Cruise eye-tracking monitoring system?
I think their bigger problem, though, was with that AP1 at that time did not enforce steering wheel interaction? Apparently it did send out several reminders in this case, but still continued onwards? AP1 was changed later to alter this behavior...
That said, I think we are seeing why Tesla added the interior camera in Model 3. It is possible that is where things will be headed.
timvracer said:
That is probably true for AP1, but there are several of us who find AP2 requiring more attention than regular driving, to be operated safely. its ghost brakings and steering anomalies are something that the kid on iMessage - a terrible and dangerous thing for sure - does not do.
I pay more attention when using AP2, when driving without it. The contrary was the "curse" of AP1 in the Brown incident, it actually worked much better than AP2 and was probably lulling the driver into a false sense of security, because it did the steering part so admirably...
The Brown accident probably would not have happened with AP2 because the driver (a person knowledgeable about Tesla things) would have been paying attention, nags or no nags, knowing what they know about AP2.
So as AP2 improves it actually becomes less safe since incorrect driver assumptions resurface.
So it's inevitable that audible and visual reminders and lockouts will continue. Mobileye's claim of eyes off (in 2018) and mind off (in 2020) The Evolution of EyeQ - Mobileye will never happen because a minimum provable level of driver alertness will have to be maintained at all times.
I think full autonomy will happen, it just won't be the labor saving, driver fatigue dissolving miracle we expect.
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
I have found that:
AP did some things I was not expecting - because I had not read the manual and the forums. e.g. losing lane-lock when cresting a rise. now I know about that its fine ... not so good for a newbie
AP continues to do some things which I cannot predict - because it is not (mis-)behaving predictably (to me at least). e.g. AP will sometimes jump on the brakes whilst passing a truck, sensing that the gap is too narrow (nothing suggests that that is the case to me); a seemingly-identical gap a few minutes later poses no such problem. Sudden braking for no obvious reason is a definite issue for vehicles following me (and as such I drive on AP with my foot resting by the accelerator to counter that issue - maybe that newly-developed driving style habit is likely to contribute to a new outcome, not experienced in pre-AP times?)
That said, I have never had the car dive across the diving line unexpectedly, or anything "unnerving" of that nature.
So I'm on the side which considers that this augmented-driving, as a prelude to full autonomy, poses a definite risk to even an attentive driver, because the action that AP takes can be so different from what is expected. I see this as being an increasing problem as the rollout becomes more widespread - increasing numbers of other cars on the road being inclined to do weird, unanticipatable, things, or their drivers, attentive or otherwise, being caught unawares by the unexpected behaviour.
AP did some things I was not expecting - because I had not read the manual and the forums. e.g. losing lane-lock when cresting a rise. now I know about that its fine ... not so good for a newbie
AP continues to do some things which I cannot predict - because it is not (mis-)behaving predictably (to me at least). e.g. AP will sometimes jump on the brakes whilst passing a truck, sensing that the gap is too narrow (nothing suggests that that is the case to me); a seemingly-identical gap a few minutes later poses no such problem. Sudden braking for no obvious reason is a definite issue for vehicles following me (and as such I drive on AP with my foot resting by the accelerator to counter that issue - maybe that newly-developed driving style habit is likely to contribute to a new outcome, not experienced in pre-AP times?)
That said, I have never had the car dive across the diving line unexpectedly, or anything "unnerving" of that nature.
So I'm on the side which considers that this augmented-driving, as a prelude to full autonomy, poses a definite risk to even an attentive driver, because the action that AP takes can be so different from what is expected. I see this as being an increasing problem as the rollout becomes more widespread - increasing numbers of other cars on the road being inclined to do weird, unanticipatable, things, or their drivers, attentive or otherwise, being caught unawares by the unexpected behaviour.
It is very rare when I become the Speling Polease, but this is something that needs to be nipped in the bud. There are too many overlapping designators in the auto industry which leads to confusion.
Cruise Automation is a division of GM that is operating at least 180 AV electric cars in 3 states. It is often referred to as just GM Cruise or Cruise.
Super Cruise is a technology first demonstrated in 2012 that combines high/low speed auto-steering with automatic braking and adaptive cruise control. It is currently used on ICE CT6 luxury cars being produced this fall. It only operates on controlled access highways.
While there is a second meaning to Super Cruise (supercruise also means supersonic flight without afterburners), it is unlikely to be confused with cars in the near future.
Since SC can mean Service Center or Supercharger (not to be confused with forced induction), you cannot abbreviate Super Cruise to SC at this time. Perhaps SCC (Super Cruise Control?) dunno.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Eyes off you are right the new nags prevent that one. Mind off you are wrong, that one is full autonomy so it doesn't require driver alertness. There will be a turning point eventually when they allow level 5.
I don't envy the middle ground when they regulate nags until then.
Similar threads
