LA drivers - Autopilot on Laurel Canyon

[Beachybumm]

For those of you LA drivers who've tried Autopilot on Laurel Canyon, do you find it to be absolutely atrocious? I've tried it numerous times, and the car goes over the very clearly marked lines, often trying to veer into opposing traffic. It sometimes even tries to drive into a wall on the side of the road. Same experience on Coldwater Canyon. I'm surprised that the M3 can't pull off these roads when the speed limit is 25 mph and the turns, while tight, should be very manageable at these speeds.

Wondering if I need to reset my sensors or if others are having the same experience.

 

[Knightshade]

My suggestion would be to read the owners manual.

Especially the parts where they mention it's only intended for use on divided, controlled access, highways... not local roads with tight turns and oncoming traffic.

 

[LACALawyer]

You expect autopilot to handle a GP style course?

Gimme a break.

 

[Beachybumm]

I expect it to be able to do curves at 20 mph when it can do them at 80mph on a freeway. And given that Elon Musk has said there will be FSD by end of the year (3 months away), a good start would be the ability to go down a major commuting route in a city that has one of the highest concentration of Teslas. It seems like the tech is there, so why not make this work instead of adding minor features like chiming at a green light? I have filed several big reports, and given that they must have millions of data points on this route, it seems like it wouldn't be to difficult to address.

 

[Michelle_eriw]

I expect it to be able to do curves at 20 mph when it can do them at 80mph on a freeway. And given that Elon Musk has said there will be FSD by end of the year (3 months away), a good start would be the ability to go down a major commuting route in a city that has one of the highest concentration of Teslas. It seems like the tech is there, so why not make this work instead of adding minor features like chiming at a green light? I have filed several big reports, and given that they must have millions of data points on this route, it seems like it wouldn't be to difficult to address.

The software is under development; Musk says it is a complete rewrite, and will be released in mid December barring unforeseen events.

 

[Beachybumm]

The software is under development; Musk says it is a complete rewrite, and will be released in mid December barring unforeseen events.

So the car will be able to do full self driving in December? It just seems so far off from being able to do that based on its current behavior. I have to constant take over. And it never seems to learn, even when I file a bug report or speak to my local Tesla tech.

 

[Knightshade]

I expect it to be able to do curves at 20 mph when it can do them at 80mph on a freeway.

Why?

Those are entirely different driving domains- one of which is explicitly supported in the owners manual, and the other is not.

And given that Elon Musk has said there will be FSD by end of the year (3 months away)

You might wanna double check what you think he said versus what he actually said.

I have filed several big reports.

Which is a waste of time for 2 reasons

1) Those don't get sent to Tesla at all (see below)

2) You're reporting "System isn't working in a place the owners manual I didn't read explicitly says it's not intended to work"

Which isn't really a bug. At least not with the car.

So the car will be able to do full self driving in December?

Nope.

They hope to have the post March 2019 version "feature complete" by then- based on a complete re-write of the code your current car is not running at all.

Which isn't', remotely, real full self driving.

Musk has defined feature complete as "there's a non zero chance the car will be able to do any needed driving without intervention"

Meaning, especially early on, that non-zero chance will be a quite low number.

Or another way he put it- they hope the re-write will allow, by end of year, the car to attempt a roundabout... but it'd likely be ANOTHER year before it does so well.

It just seems so far off from being able to do that based on its current behavior. I have to constant take over.

Because you keep using it places the current SW explicitly tells you in the manual it's not intended to be used.

And it never seems to learn, even when I file a bug report or speak to my local Tesla tech.

Bug reports don't go anywhere. They sit local to the car in case you open a service ticket for your local tech to look at.

The car doesn't "learn" and isn't' intended to.

Imagine the nightmare troubleshooting would be if each car "learned" different behavior from each other.

All training is done back at HQ using gathered data from the fleet and then any updates are pushed out to the entire fleet as an OTA update.

 

[JD M3]

Wow, I don't usually do this but this seems to be going south quickly. The OP asked was whether other people experienced the same behavior or whether they may have a problem with the sensors that needs addressed. I don't believe they asked to be disparaged by a list of things you believe they don't know. The idea of this forum is to create a supportive environment where people can feel free to ask questions that help them understand and enjoy their cars. Not to try to prove that you're more knowledgeable than everyone else. Let's try to be a bit more supportive.

 

[Knightshade]

Wow, I don't usually do this but this seems to be going south quickly. The OP asked was whether other people experienced the same behavior or whether they may have a problem with the sensors that needs addressed.

And it was explained to them almost immediately they don't have a sensor problem, they instead should spend some time reading the owners manual to learn where the system is actually intended to be used and what it's limitations are- as they seem to have some significant misunderstandings about those things.

Both for their own safety and that of other drivers.

They seem unwilling to do so though.

 

[Beachybumm]

And it was explained to them almost immediately they don't have a sensor problem, they instead should spend some time reading the owners manual to learn where the system is actually intended to be used and what it's limitations are- as they seem to have some significant misunderstandings about those things.

Both for their own safety and that of other drivers.

They seem unwilling to do so though.

You must have some real anger issues. All I asked was a simple question. And to your remark about feature complete, it connotates that the feature, "full self driving," would be completely working. That's what the term means. So one would expect FSD to be working by end of the year based on Musk's statement. And my point was that if it can't go down Laurel Canyon, I don't understand how it'll be FSD by end of year. Musk recently said this:

"Yeah, feature-complete, I mean, it's the car able to drive from one's house to work, most likely without interventions."

So if I work on the other side of Laurel Canyon, but Autopilot tries to go into oncoming traffic regularly, then "Feature complete" (able to drive to work without intervention) isn't accurate. But you act like I'm crazy for asking if it can go over Laurel Canyon when Musk has clearly stated it should be able to go from home to work without interference about three months from now.

 

[jjrandorin]

You must have some real anger issues. All I asked was a simple question. And to your remark about feature complete, it connotates that the feature, "full self driving," would be completely working. That's what the term means. So one would expect FSD to be working by end of the year based on Musk's statement. And my point was that if it can't go down Laurel Canyon, I don't understand how it'll be FSD by end of year. Musk recently said this:

"Yeah, feature-complete, I mean, it's the car able to drive from one's house to work, most likely without interventions."

So if I work on the other side of Laurel Canyon, but Autopilot tries to go into oncoming traffic regularly, then "Feature complete" (able to drive to work without intervention) isn't accurate. But you act like I'm crazy for asking if it can go over Laurel Canyon when Musk has clearly stated it should be able to go from home to work without interference about three months from now.

Here is the meaning for "feature complete". No it does not mean "would be completely working". It could be feature complete, and the "improvements before release" could take several years.

Fea·ture-com·plete

adjective
COMPUTING

1. denoting a version of a piece of software having all the functionality intended for the final version but requiring some improvements and fixes before release.

Feature complete - Wikipedia

 

[NerdUno]

Gotta love the smell of vaporware.

 

[Beachybumm]

Here is the meaning for "feature complete". No it does not mean "would be completely working". It could be feature complete, and the "improvements before release" could take several years.

Fea·ture-com·plete

adjective
COMPUTING

1. denoting a version of a piece of software having all the functionality intended for the final version but requiring some improvements and fixes before release.

Feature complete - Wikipedia

He literally says in his quote that a driver will be able to drive from home to work with minimal intervention. I must be so stupid for thinking he meant that one could drive from home to work on one of the most-used routes for doing exactly that. Silly me.

mistook that to mean I would be able to drive down a major roadway in Los Angeles that takes millions of people from home to work.

 

[jjrandorin]

He literally says in his quote that a driver will be able to drive from home to work with minimal intervention. Sorry that I mistook that to mean I would be able to drive down a major roadway in Los Angeles that takes millions of people from home to work.

Your idea of "minimal" doesnt need to match his idea of "minimal"... and it likely wont include a road like laural canyon for quite some time, if ever.

You are also ignoring what I posted, which is explaining that the words " feature complete" do not mean what you specifically said they meant in your other post. It specifically does NOT mean "full self driving is completely working".

 

[Beachybumm]

Your idea of "minimal" doesnt need to match his idea of "minimal"... and it likely wont include a road like laural canyon for quite some time, if ever.

Well, he's teasing a rideshare service that was supposed to start by end of year. How would that service work if the car can't drive down Laurel Canyon, which should be pretty simple given that it's a very slow speed limit and the car clearly shows the ability to navigate turns on the freeway at 80mph.

I'm sure his vision of minimal intervention doesn't mean having to constantly take the car off Autopilot or else risk being hit head on. That's the current state of driving on Laurel Canyon.

 

[jjrandorin]

Shrug... if you think there will be level 5 Autonomy anytime soon, you are welcome to believe that, but its not promised anywhere. I am certainly not going to argue about what you believe or whatever. I was mainly telling you that "feature complete" has zero to do with you being able to use autopilot on a road like laurel canyon.

 

[Knightshade]

You must have some real anger issues

I think you're projecting here.

So far you've come in with a bunch of anger and emotion.

And I've replied with specific, well documented, facts.

And you just got madder still, to the point of now insulting people for trying to explain why you're experiencing the issues you are.

. All I asked was a simple question.

And you were given a simple answer.

Your experience is the result of using the feature somewhere it's not intended to be used- you should read the owners manual to understand the current intent and limits of the system.

No anger- just facts.

I'm guessing by your continued argument you still haven't read it though?

And to your remark about feature complete, it connotates that the feature, "full self driving," would be completely working.

No, it absolutely does not.

Feature complete has a very specific definition for software.

It means all primary features exist in the program but they're not finalized because of potential bugs, performance, or stability issues.

It "works", but not well.

That's what the term means.

Again- your facts are not correct.

I just told you what the term means for software, and it doesn't match your understanding of it.

So one would expect FSD to be working by end of the year based on Musk's statement.

Nope.

One would expect it can at least attempt all the features promised in the complete version of the software.

Which, BTW, is not level 5 driving.

It's currently a very specific list of functionality, that you were shown when you agreed to buy FSD.

Specifically it's these features (on the left is as it is now, on the right was an earlier version)

it already does all of those except the last one- which is the one that...huh... you're complaining it doesn't do.

Guess if you'd read either what you were actually buying or the manual you wouldn't have been so surprised?

And my point was that if it can't go down Laurel Canyon, I don't understand how it'll be FSD by end of year

Well, for one, you're running a completely different set of software from what will be running by end of this year, so there's that.

. Musk recently said this:

"Yeah, feature-complete, I mean, it's the car able to drive from one's house to work, most likely without interventions."

Right. Which is him saying feature complete is not self driving

He mentions, repeatedly, feature-complete will still require human supervision, and sometimes human direct intervetion.

Later in the same discussion you quote he says:

requiring supervision and intervention at times. That’s feature complete. Then it doesn’t mean like every scenario, everywhere on earth, including ever corner case, it just means most of the time

But you act like I'm crazy for asking if it can go over Laurel Canyon

Because the actual feature you purchased tells you in its own written description- as well as telling you again in the owners manual for that feature- that it's not intended for use on such roads today

when Musk has clearly stated it should be able to go from home to work without interference about three months from now.

Man- that baby isn't walking today.

Clearly that means it never will be able to!

Seriously man- read the manual. Lots of useful and important stuff in there.

 

[JD M3]

And it was explained to them almost immediately they don't have a sensor problem

Actually no, no one ever said that it was not a sensor problem. Because you don't know. Because you can't know unless we know if other cars have behaved the same way on the same road, which was the question that the OP asked and no one has yet answered. Yes we know that the manual says it should be used on highways. We also know that Tesla recently added stoplight and stop sign functionality in beta) (haven't seen too many stop signs in the middle of the highway) and no longer disables autopilot on local roads. We also know that autopilot typically works quite well on most of these roads and this has been well demonstrated. So let's stop pretending that we would expect the car to drive off the side of a cliff simply because the instruction manual says it should be used on highways. Yes, you have to be very careful, and yes you have to be selective on which roads you use it. To be honest, laurel canyon may not be a road that I would be comfortable using it on at this point. But back to the original post, the question was whether or not others have used it on that road and experienced similar behavior so he/she can determine if there is an issue with the car. So if you have used it on that road and experienced similar behavior, then say so. If no one has used it on that road, then mention another road where it worked well and suggest that they test their sensors there to see if the car is working properly. Simply telling someone to read the manual or that your interpretation of "minimal intervention" is superior to theirs is useful to no one.

 

[timk225]

OP, funny you should mention this area, I used to live in L.A., and am very familiar with Laurel Canyon Blvd. I lived on it just a bit north of Burbank Blvd. 5716 Apt 5. Back in 13-14. I've taken Laurel Canyon south, over the hill, and down into the Hollywood / West Hollywood area, and I think yes, those turns going over the hill are way too tight for Base AP.

There's one off ramp here that I go on often, and it is a very tight 180 degree turn. Base AP gets about 1/3 of the way through it and freaks out. And that is at 25 mph or less.

I've been on Coldwater going over the hill, and it is also too curvy for AP, at least our current version of AP.

Gonna have to steer the car yourself, like people have done for 100+ years. I know, it's a pain.....

How does your AP handle Mulholland going west from Laurel Canyon or Coldwater? It has some tricky intersections.

Just like Tesla Time, don't forget to apply the Tesla factor to the idea of "Feature Complete". In Tesla talk, that means that the car can do each of the things the full AP will do, but in a very shaky, incomplete, and unreliable fashion, with a very low chance of success, and certainly nowhere near good enough to be let loose on the roadways.

 

[Knightshade]

Actually no, no one ever said that it was not a sensor problem

He asked why it wasn't working well on a road the manual specifically says it's not intended to work on.

That's not a sensor problem that's user error.

So I directed him to the manual so he could learn where the system is intended to be used.

If he found operational problems when using it places it's actually intended to be, that'd be another discussion.


I mean he's welcome to open a service ticket with Tesla anyway, but I'd expect them to provide the same answer I am- if it only has trouble on roads it's not intended to be used, that's not a problem with the car, it's a problem with the driver.