MrBadger
Badger out
Thankfully Chucks UPL and other city streets scenarios are not the sort covered by UNECE 157. But NoA functionality would be.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
FSD Beta in the UK?
- Thread starter Zilla91
- Start date
Thankfully Chucks UPL and other city streets scenarios are not the sort covered by UNECE 157. But NoA functionality would be.
Cardo
Active Member
Whilst I’d rather we get full FSD, I’m a realist and I don’t see this happening for a very long time. I’d be impressed if it happens within this decade.
However, I’m with the Badger and would be happy to have L3 on motorways / dual carriageways. This could be a part of NoA to encourage people to stump up from basic AP. Personally, I find NoA is already pretty capable and it wouldn’t take much to go full hands off. I already only just about rest a hand on the wheel during motorway journeys, as it is. Hands free, even if needing to be prepared to take the wheel at short notice, would be very welcome and would make long distance journeys that much less tiring.
As for city streets, unless the car can autonomously come and pick me up from the airport / train station / pub (full L5), I’m personally not overly fussed.
However, I’m with the Badger and would be happy to have L3 on motorways / dual carriageways. This could be a part of NoA to encourage people to stump up from basic AP. Personally, I find NoA is already pretty capable and it wouldn’t take much to go full hands off. I already only just about rest a hand on the wheel during motorway journeys, as it is. Hands free, even if needing to be prepared to take the wheel at short notice, would be very welcome and would make long distance journeys that much less tiring.
As for city streets, unless the car can autonomously come and pick me up from the airport / train station / pub (full L5), I’m personally not overly fussed.
Yeah, I understand why we as owners want this. What I’m saying is, what is the incentive for Tesla to do this in a world where they already/have until recently been unable to keep up with demand?
goRt
Active Member
The single stack can be implemented without issue as it's the planner that does the decision making
If the code is well designed then the implementation should be a simple operation, as it's 9 months late in the USA...
If the code is well designed then the implementation should be a simple operation, as it's 9 months late in the USA...
Because it costs nothing to implement once written and is pure profit. I'd buy EAP/FSD if it could do this reliably (well would have done when I did 25k motorway miles a year), I imagine every travelling sales man/business consultant/executive transport taxi would buy it if they do a lot of miles. Imagine £10k extra on a large number of cars they sell because of it, whereas today you're laughed at if you've bought FSD outside the US, and I imagine even by some in the US.
MrBadger
Badger out
I suspect that this is why there are not too many on topic posts to
[UK] For those that have ever owned FSD and resold/traded that vehicle in
Questions for those UK owners that have ever owned a Tesla with FSD option and subsequently traded that vehicle in. Q. Do you know if your FSD option was ever transferred to the new owner? I ask because, especially in states, if a FSD equipped vehicle has gone through the Tesla trade...
teslamotorsclub.com
Trying to work out if, along with benefits from a second purchase, whether Tesla may also be trying to reduce their exposure to potential FSD upgrades.
Bobby_Dazzler
Member
That’s exactly why I splashed 7k on FSD to benefit later. Many underestimate what is possible and make their judgements on phantom breaking and wipers rather than the AI itself. Some have made bad decisions in the past and feel cheated but that’s because they didn’t really understand what they are buying into.
I wonder if you would change that opinion at any time in future. I originally had exactly your view. Little by little I am getting more doubtful.
If Tesla won't even give recent and capable cars remote video viewing when hackers have shown it's possible, and Tesla are moving away from configurations they previously claimed would deliver fsd very soon. Deleting radar support and fiddling incessantly with cold weather settings does not represent anything of value to me. They seem to have no interest in genuine improvement for vehicles they can find a way to justify neglecting. In any case, they have their hand full trying to fix brand new models. Little sign of them being on top of the job!
Neither have they given FSD owners in UK feedback regarding the results of Tesla's efforts to get regulatory approvals.
If new cars come with different radar with no liklihood of retro fitting, along with no fix for b-pilar cams that fog up all the time, I recall don't see how FSD is going to come in a useable form within years.
Last edited:
I'm sure they are. Why wouldn't they? It is probably the main factor that would make me keep the car..... so I can try and get what they sold me. Sadly, they are so difficult to engage with (more evidence imo that they really don't care about collateral damage from their actions) I am not sure that in 10 years time I will still care enough to argue with them.
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
Tesla can remove FSD if you trade in, to them, but there is nothing to stop a new owner buying / adding it.
if I sold my FSD car 2nd hand then the price would include a consideration for FSD - so restricts my audience to buyers who want (to pay extra) for FSD
I'm not sure Tesla removing FSD (and all other software-upgrades like EAP and GoFaster) is specifically about concern over legal action, but more about making sales. I don't suppose many people are adding-on FSD to a 2nd hand purchase, any more than buyers of brand new vehicles are - numbers of FSD-owners must be dwindling due to apathy about likelihood of it being available any time soon.
I agree. Which equates to less upgrade liabilities.
MrBadger
Badger out
A post from a previously banned user seems to have subsequently disappeared/moved. For those that had earlier read it (snippet below), it contained information regarding whose liability it was if an autonomous vehicle (ie covered by UNECE 157) was involved in an accident. It stated that it was the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer, and used as one of the reasons that Tesla might not to want to introduce an autonomous under UNECE 157. The official UK line seems to be quite different.
In an attempt to keep this discussion relevant to UK, and distance from the UK was EU, EU = UNECE assumptions that float around, I wanted to post the current official UK legislation documentation regarding autonomous vehicles (rather than assisted driving vehicles that we currently have).
Bearing in mind that an autonomous vehicle must still be fully legal, ie MOT, Taxed and insured, the UK Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018. is as follows: (my bold in clause)
Longer term, I know the industry is of the opinion that fully autonomous vehicles will need to be covered by manufacturer (I heard it said from a very reliable source that ultimately you will insure your vehicle as another high value item) but certainly, with Level 3, we are not there yet. It may well be different under L4 and L5 - the fundamental difference between L3 and L4 is liability and legal rather than any specific technical difference (L3 requires a qualified and legal driver to be in the car and have ultimate responsibility of the vehicle, L4 and L5 there does not even need to be a driver, hence robotaxi)
In an attempt to keep this discussion relevant to UK, and distance from the UK was EU, EU = UNECE assumptions that float around, I wanted to post the current official UK legislation documentation regarding autonomous vehicles (rather than assisted driving vehicles that we currently have).
Bearing in mind that an autonomous vehicle must still be fully legal, ie MOT, Taxed and insured, the UK Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018. is as follows: (my bold in clause)
Longer term, I know the industry is of the opinion that fully autonomous vehicles will need to be covered by manufacturer (I heard it said from a very reliable source that ultimately you will insure your vehicle as another high value item) but certainly, with Level 3, we are not there yet. It may well be different under L4 and L5 - the fundamental difference between L3 and L4 is liability and legal rather than any specific technical difference (L3 requires a qualified and legal driver to be in the car and have ultimate responsibility of the vehicle, L4 and L5 there does not even need to be a driver, hence robotaxi)
UN ECE 79 are the regulations on steering systems in general and introduces the notion of a steering assist feature, it's last revision was 2018
UN ECE 157 is a later regulation which offers more functionality with regard to automated lane keep and introduces some new terms. This regulation came out in 2021 and sets out the responsbilities (or parameters for the implementation) of the car when trying to undertake lane keep.
Unfortunately the word "responsible" is often misunderstood. "Responsible" is generally taken as the the entity doing the thing, so to create a distinction, and anyone familiar with RACI models will understand, "Accountable" is the entity that has to make sure the doing of the thing is done correctly, even if its not doing the doing itself (if you follow). It can be one and the same, or they can be different. In simple terms, at the moment, the driver is always accountable whatever the car does. Level 3 introduces the prospect of the car taking over the accountability for short periods, however even then, there are obligations on the driver to be available at short notice. However, the driving laws on this matter are a different thing, and those look at the accountability.
Tesla have not, in any juristriction, looked to address a change in accountability. To explain this again, it is entirely possible for the car to be responsible for a complete journey (as some examples of the FSDb in the US shows) but have no accountable at all for that drive. This is a key point, and until it does, it is no more than a Level 2 driver asssist system.
Driving laws are interested in the accountability. There is no defence for the car ignoring a 30 speed limit and driving at 40 when cruise control is on, the car may have been responsible for changing speed, but the driver is accountable. With lane keep, the car has clear rules it should follow, but if the car fails to meet those rules and departs from the lane and crashes, the driver is accountable. There doesn;t appear anything in UN ECE 157 that looks to change that as far as I can see, The penalty for the car failing can result in the conformity being withdrawn (section 12).
Mercedes have approval and have made the statement that they will take accountability (to avoid using "responsible" and confuse the context) in the event of an accident when in use and it is shown to fail (they have made the statement because it is not implicit in the approval) - is this just the costs of the repairs or does it include everything? Also, if the system drives beyond the speed limit and the driver gets a fine and points, how will it be demonstrated the car was in charge at the time? There's a longer article on the topic.
Mercedes to accept legal responsibility for accidents involving self-driving cars
Mercedes has announced that it will take legal responsibility for any crashes that occur while the self-driving system on any of its cars is engaged.
www.driving.co.uk
Unless the model 3 goes through many versions - like ford did with their Fiesta - was it 9? over 25 years - then the M3 will never ever become capable of proper FSD like a robotaxi. I know its all very complicated and computers no matter how powerful cant match a human brain on so many levels and there isn't enough computing power built into the car for anything other than novel temporary features allowing the car to "drive" for a little while under very quiet conditions - when it gets tough it sounds the alarm for you to take over.
I like driving but i also like gadgets - driving for a bit on FSD is currently a lot more stressful than just driving yourself. Do I need it? absolutely not, but would i want it - Oh yes.
I haven't tested my FSD for months, in fact I last used it coming from Sheffield down the M1 to Leicester on a Friday night in March 2022 - well just into Saturday morning - about 00.30hrs - The motorway was very quiet and the car "drove" without any issue on NOA - even took me off the motorway at junc 21 - though it indicates at the third (last) marker whereas I always signal at the first marker giving plenty of notice to following drivers. It was great.
I also used Summon at B&Q - always park defensively on the perimeter as this saves dings and reverse in - so boot up pretty much up to the shrubbery - came out - summoned the car forward for access to the boot - absolutely perfect - even though by the time the car moved I could have got in and driven it forward and had the boot loaded - but it was fun to do - and it certainly attracted many to watch what was happening.
I was at Tesco a week or so ago, needed to access the boot - so used Summon, lights came on as the car woke up, whirling and clicking, wheels turned left to right then centred and then nothing - and by the time this nothing had been achieved my frozen stuff was probably thawed.
I am a gadget freak, so have added the power boot and bonnet, I have changed the rear reflectors to illuminated ones with sequential indicators, Illuminated sill plates to all 4 doors, tesla projection puddle lights, new front grill with fly screen, colour coded mud flaps, and the boot and bonnet insulation, white centre arm rest in white, steering wheel in black and White leather (the only proper leather in the car) - plus a shed load of other more minor stuff - my car is my baby. In short - I want to like FSD, my fingers are crossed we get something that works even a little bit. Currently Its a complete waste of money - Id jump at a refund.
I like driving but i also like gadgets - driving for a bit on FSD is currently a lot more stressful than just driving yourself. Do I need it? absolutely not, but would i want it - Oh yes.
I haven't tested my FSD for months, in fact I last used it coming from Sheffield down the M1 to Leicester on a Friday night in March 2022 - well just into Saturday morning - about 00.30hrs - The motorway was very quiet and the car "drove" without any issue on NOA - even took me off the motorway at junc 21 - though it indicates at the third (last) marker whereas I always signal at the first marker giving plenty of notice to following drivers. It was great.
I also used Summon at B&Q - always park defensively on the perimeter as this saves dings and reverse in - so boot up pretty much up to the shrubbery - came out - summoned the car forward for access to the boot - absolutely perfect - even though by the time the car moved I could have got in and driven it forward and had the boot loaded - but it was fun to do - and it certainly attracted many to watch what was happening.
I was at Tesco a week or so ago, needed to access the boot - so used Summon, lights came on as the car woke up, whirling and clicking, wheels turned left to right then centred and then nothing - and by the time this nothing had been achieved my frozen stuff was probably thawed.
I am a gadget freak, so have added the power boot and bonnet, I have changed the rear reflectors to illuminated ones with sequential indicators, Illuminated sill plates to all 4 doors, tesla projection puddle lights, new front grill with fly screen, colour coded mud flaps, and the boot and bonnet insulation, white centre arm rest in white, steering wheel in black and White leather (the only proper leather in the car) - plus a shed load of other more minor stuff - my car is my baby. In short - I want to like FSD, my fingers are crossed we get something that works even a little bit. Currently Its a complete waste of money - Id jump at a refund.
Apropos of nothing but the person who is banned, who posted that, appears to be involved with this ADAS testing in the UK, and has regular dialogue directly with Tesla engineering.
It seems to me like their views would be beneficial to the forum ? Does anyone know why they were banned?
I do, but I’ll not go into details other than to say it’s not without good reason. We’ve been made aware they’ve also been banned from several other forums for similar reasons and even Facebook at a worldwide level temporarily banned them. These things don’t happen by accident.
In related news, California have apparently just passed a law/made a ruling stopping Tesla call it Full Self Driving. I think Germany have previously done similar things. There might be a bit of politics in both, but you feel there’s ever mounting pressure and patience is running out.
Regardless of all the conjecture and debate, regardless of what your exact purchase contract states, if it refers to FSD capability then a reasonable interpretation of those words unavoidably plays a (big) part in setting buyer expectations.
Similar threads
