First FSD Beta accident?

[willow_hiller]

What worries me is that this might be, the “dual disengage” problem I have pointed out to Tesla and in posts here...

It's part of what the new single chime OTA update was meant to help rectify: Tesla rolls out Traffic-Aware Cruise Control chime to make its vehicles even safer

So you get a single chime going from manual driving into TACC, or leaving Autopilot and going into TACC. Or a double chime going from manual driving or TACC into Autopilot, or a double chime going from Autopilot to manual driving.

 

[Sporty]

I suspect that he took over the steering but the cruise control kept the car moving forward. The driver wasn't expecting that so he interpreted it as FSD continuing to drive.
Ive had similar experiences. When I suddenly take over steering to avoid a collision and hear the disable chime I usually expect to be in full control. I am often startled to find the car is still moving on its own. I am still not used to that after more than two months with FSD beta.

Yes. I don’t like that behavior either. I think it should all stop when I take over. I’ve owned my car for 4 years.

I’ve gotten into the habit of using the stalk to explicitly cancel at time just to ensure that auto driving is fully off. And I did that at a stop light once without thinking (yes it must be off since I’m stopped) and threw the car into reverse. I corrected it, but the strange behavior of cancel had trained me into another strange behavior.

 

[drtimhill]

So you get a single chime going from manual driving into TACC, or leaving Autopilot and going into TACC. Or a double chime going from manual driving or TACC into Autopilot, or a double chime going from Autopilot to manual driving.

yeah but in an emergency take-over situation that subtlety will be lost on most people.

 

[drtimhill]

I suspect that he took over the steering but the cruise control kept the car moving forward. The driver wasn't expecting that so he interpreted it as FSD continuing to drive.
Ive had similar experiences. When I suddenly take over steering to avoid a collision and hear the disable chime I usually expect to be in full control. I am often startled to find the car is still moving on its own. I am still not used to that after more than two months with FSD beta.

Agreed .. I've emailed the FSD team about this as I think its a major safety issue, and I encourage anyone else who thinks this to do likewise.

 

[drtimhill]

I understand your point but don’t see it as an issue to keep TACC engaged when overriding the steering. Generally it would be more unsafe if I take over the steering from FSD / AP and the car suddenly starts slowing down because TACC is also disabled. That would mean every manual disengagement requires me to simultaneously grab the wheel / yoke and press the accelerator just the right amount to maintain my current speed.

It important to distinguish between disengaging AP/NoA on a freeway and FSD beta on city streets. On a freeway, disengaging NoA using manual steering input should indeed leave TACC enabled for the safety reasons you note (which is why I specified city streets only).

However, leaving TACC engaged after cancelling FSD beta on city streets is much more dangerous. Why? Because often FSD is driving well below the TACC speed (it may even be crawling). If you apply manual steering (canceling FSD beta) TACC takes over and instantly accelerates the car .. just at the moment you are trying to take control back of the car, possibly in an emergency. This has happened to me several times when FSD beta makes a mess of a roundabout, and having the car suddenly shoot forward in these circumstances is very bad. Sure, disabling TACC will mean the car slows down and you have to put your foot on the accelerator, but that's something you have to do anyway when you disengage TACC. I dont see how slowing down is anywhere near as dangerous as the car suddenly speeding up just when you have to take back control.

Probably what the car should do is leave TACC on but reset the TACC set speed to the actual car speed at the moment FSD beta or NoA is disengaged, so it neither slows down nor speeds up.

 

[TresLA]

It important to distinguish between disengaging AP/NoA on a freeway and FSD beta on city streets. On a freeway, disengaging NoA using manual steering input should indeed leave TACC enabled for the safety reasons you note (which is why I specified city streets only).

However, leaving TACC engaged after cancelling FSD beta on city streets is much more dangerous. Why? Because often FSD is driving well below the TACC speed (it may even be crawling). If you apply manual steering (canceling FSD beta) TACC takes over and instantly accelerates the car .. just at the moment you are trying to take control back of the car, possibly in an emergency. This has happened to me several times when FSD beta makes a mess of a roundabout, and having the car suddenly shoot forward in these circumstances is very bad. Sure, disabling TACC will mean the car slows down and you have to put your foot on the accelerator, but that's something you have to do anyway when you disengage TACC. I dont see how slowing down is anywhere near as dangerous as the car suddenly speeding up just when you have to take back control.

Probably what the car should do is leave TACC on but reset the TACC set speed to the actual car speed at the moment FSD beta or NoA is disengaged, so it neither slows down nor speeds up.

I think it should be consistent whether on freeway or surface streets. In an emergency takeover situation, consistent/known behavior matters more.

As for what that consistent behavior should be, this is moving into untested territory. I’m speculating that a new “take over including managing the pedal soon” state should happen, where the speed is slowly reduced (not normal regen that slows the car more rapidly), a warning alert to notify the driver (but not as glaring/panicking as the red hands takeover alert), and this new state is canceled the moment the accelerator or brake pedal is pressed. The idea of this state would be to allow the driver to handle the emergency steering input necessary in that dangerous instant, and so to allow and expect the driver time to take over the pedals as well when panic moment is over.

 

[AndreP]

Agreed .. I've emailed the FSD team about this as I think its a major safety issue, and I encourage anyone else who thinks this to do likewise.

Exactly why this stuff should just be reported to the NHTSA so they can handle it, assigning blame is missing the point that surely learnings can come out of incidents like these and be used to improve safety of the system's operation

Integration and seamlessness of these features are just as important as how they actually perform when active

 

[Sigma4Life]

It important to distinguish between disengaging AP/NoA on a freeway and FSD beta on city streets. On a freeway, disengaging NoA using manual steering input should indeed leave TACC enabled for the safety reasons you note (which is why I specified city streets only).

However, leaving TACC engaged after cancelling FSD beta on city streets is much more dangerous. Why? Because often FSD is driving well below the TACC speed (it may even be crawling). If you apply manual steering (canceling FSD beta) TACC takes over and instantly accelerates the car .. just at the moment you are trying to take control back of the car, possibly in an emergency. This has happened to me several times when FSD beta makes a mess of a roundabout, and having the car suddenly shoot forward in these circumstances is very bad. Sure, disabling TACC will mean the car slows down and you have to put your foot on the accelerator, but that's something you have to do anyway when you disengage TACC. I dont see how slowing down is anywhere near as dangerous as the car suddenly speeding up just when you have to take back control.

Probably what the car should do is leave TACC on but reset the TACC set speed to the actual car speed at the moment FSD beta or NoA is disengaged, so it neither slows down nor speeds up.

Great points. I didn’t realize you meant it speeds up, that’s definitely dangerous. I’m still waiting for my FSD beta invite so I misunderstood your original point. In no way should it speed up when there’s a manual disengagement. I agree with you 1000%.

 

[powertoold]

 

[JulienW]

That is odd. The video is back up on YouTube?

 

[powertoold]

That is odd. The video is back up on YouTube?

No, just another FSD beta "accident" I found on YouTube.

 

[Daniel in SD]

No, just another FSD beta "accident" I found on YouTube.

It does sort of look intentional, by both the "driver" and the pedestrian.
Maybe that's why Tesla doesn't count it.

 

[willow_hiller]

Maybe that's why Tesla doesn't count it.

It's also likely that Tesla is only notified of accidents that follow the same definition of crash as the quarterly Safety Report:

"all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed"

 

[JHCCAZ]

Probably what the car should do is leave TACC on but reset the TACC set speed to the actual car speed at the moment FSD beta or NoA is disengaged, so it neither slows down nor speeds up.

I think this is a more refined and better suggestion for the disengagement; perhaps you want to modify your communication to Tesla (if you believe they're paying attention to it).

I think that even on the freeway, it's not necessarily a good behavior to allow TACC to accelerate the car aggressively after a disengagement. With this newer idea, I don't think you'd have to distinguish between freeway and city-street disengagement behavior - and that consistency itself is a better overall AP behavior.

I would also very strongly encourage Tesla to provide an option for voice announcement of the small-font info messages that appear (briefly) below the ego-car visualization, IMO a little ridiculous and arguably dangerous. Many people have a hard time reading them when nothing else is going on, and having them appear briefly in the middle of a confusing traffic situation only makes things worse. More often than not, I wish I knew what that message had said but it's already gone. Just make it optional for those who don't need or want to hear them.

 

[FOOLSLFDRVNG]

Yes. I don’t like that behavior either. I think it should all stop when I take over. I’ve owned my car for 4 years.

I’ve gotten into the habit of using the stalk to explicitly cancel at time just to ensure that auto driving is fully off. And I did that at a stop light once without thinking (yes it must be off since I’m stopped) and threw the car into reverse. I corrected it, but the strange behavior of cancel had trained me into another strange behavior.

That happened to me recently, coming to a stoplight and canceling FSD. The light turn green, my spouse and I get a surprise whiplash when I hit the pedal and I’m completely disoriented and realize what’s going on. Luckily the car behind me was far enough that I didn’t reverse back and crash.

 

[CyberGus]

"FSD beta saving a suicidal pedestiran walking in the street at night"

There, I fixed it for u

 

[drtimhill]

Exactly why this stuff should just be reported to the NHTSA so they can handle it, assigning blame is missing the point that surely learnings can come out of incidents like these and be used to improve safety of the system's operation

Integration and seamlessness of these features are just as important as how they actually perform when active

All that will do is bring FSD development to an abrupt end.

 

[AndreP]

All that will do is bring FSD development to an abrupt end.

The NHTSA won't stop development based on something like this, they very clearly don't want to stifle potential innovation. But the NHTSA is in close touch with Tesla and can get them working on improvements to this type of stuff, and there seems to be plenty of room for improvement in the processes / procedures surrounding these types of scenarios.

I think if the NHTSA was the enemy, this would already be shut down. This seems relatively minor compared to the update that had FSD-enabled cars blaring forward collision warnings and slamming on their emergency brakes even when not in FSD.

 

[Daniel in SD]

All that will do is bring FSD development to an abrupt end.

I don't understand the common perception around here that NHTSA is looking to shutdown autonomous vehicle testing. I would say they are extremely enthusiastic about them.

Preparing for the Future of Transportation: Automated Vehicles 3.0 | US Department of Transportation

Preparing for the Future of Transportation: Automated Vehicles 3.0, October 4, 2018, Washington, DC

www.transportation.gov

 

[EVNow]

It's also likely that Tesla is only notified of accidents that follow the same definition of crash as the quarterly Safety Report:

"all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed"

Looks like Tesla only counts L3+ crashes. Given the avg US numbers they use, it makes sense.

BTW, if the drivers hits a pedestrian but doesn’t report, they won’t know about it.