-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
C141medic
Active Member
Depends, if it was always static, and never seen as moving by the radar, it's quite possible it will just slam right into the back of it, with either AP1 or 2, however on ocassion AP2 will recognize and start slowing correctly, it's it's definitely hit or miss. We don't call it Russian roulette for no reason.
You would probably need to take over manually in that situation. If the vehicle ahead is completely stopped, AP1 or 2 may not recognize it in time to react. AEB might work, but it is designe d to reduce a collision not prevent one.
It is a scary situation to happen at speed without AP, and a scary one while on AP as well. Best defense is to not have your follow distance set too close.
morrisdl
Member
I understand the camera not "seeing" a stationary object, but what about the radar? All Automatic Emergency Braking systems track static objects in the path of the car. Does the Tesla actually have "Crash Imminent Braking" or just forward collision warning?
This, I still don’t get how the radar doesnt take over and picks up an stationary object
Honestly I suspect radar-only braking to be AP2-only right now. When they initially started messing with that on AP1, people got all kinds of random/unexpected sudden braking under signs and overpasses. And then all that suddenly went away for AP1 but persisted on AP2.
Now that we understand autopilot maps, it seems like the whitelist isn't as dynamic and crowd sourced as expected — the whitelist is metadata in map tiles that are updated once a year or so (the latest Californian ones are dated 2017-06).
I'm not sure they've perfected radar-initiated-braking yet.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
If you think about how TACC works, it makes sense why it avoids braking or slowing for stationary objects. Say for example you are approaching a curve in the road. There will be stationary objects right in front of the vehicle (barriers, cars parked on the side, trees, signs, walls, etc). If the car brakes for that scenario, then there would be a lot of false braking/slowing events, which would be extremely annoying. A lot of radar based ACC are programmed to ignore stationary objects for this reason.
AEB might still kick in, but only if it detects a completely unavoidable crash (in which case it might crash anyways). We don't know from details of story if AEB engaged.
IMO the damage doesn't look like it's a 65mph collision. It's not at all clear if any FCW or AEB kicked in before the crash.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Same thing happened with a Tesla on the Bay Bridge:
Tesla driver passes out allegedly drunk in his Model S, tells the police the car was on Autopilot
@Max* , two separate incidents (one Telsa driver with 2Xalcohol limit arrested as he passed away and his tesla stopped middle of bay bridge - no crash", and this one - also 2X the alcohol limit? looks to be a day-time crash per photos. I have doubts the two stories got mixed up?
Agree with @chillaban and others that this doesn't look like a 65Mph crash. Crashing into a stationary barrier by a 5000lb car would do serious damage to both (if the barrier is a fire truck on wheels even if gear is in park - it would push that far out and may cause injuries to near-by people). I think either the driver panic-braked at the last minute (or EAB did). So glad that no one was hurt!
Agree with @chillaban and others that this doesn't look like a 65Mph crash. Crashing into a stationary barrier by a 5000lb car would do serious damage to both (if the barrier is a fire truck on wheels even if gear is in park - it would push that far out and may cause injuries to near-by people). I think either the driver panic-braked at the last minute (or EAB did). So glad that no one was hurt!
Ah, good point. The post seems to have linked 2 stories into 1. Misleading headline, nice catch.
-This one (it starts off saying it's culver city, and shows the fire truck and the guy with the "DUI", but maybe there was no DUI).
-San Fran where the guy fell asleep in his car with the DUI
Both blame AutoPilot.
That is scary. My 2017 Acura MDX, on adaptive cruise control, slows down on its own when the car in front slows down and speeds up with it, or when that car moves out and the car in front of it suddenly presents itself. Of course it doesn't brake for me, but it does flash a big "BRAKE" alert on the instrument panel and makes some noise to alert the driver.
whitex
Well-Known Member
Don't feel bad. Those of us who paid $20K extra for the 691hp car got 691hp motors but only 463hp battery (and therefore car), so it was just a donation towards R&D for P100D's on the road today (or maybe towards Elon's bonus, as it helped meet financial goals).
whitex
Well-Known Member
This is similar, the car in front of the Tesla moves over to avoid a concrete barrier:
Canuck
Well-Known Member
If the driver is responsible for what happens on AP, then how can it not be driver error? Just like this AP crash in China:
I got my car before AP came out, but when it did, and I looked to upgrade to get it, I had a loaner for a week, took it all over on AP, to my cabin and back, and I decided it's really just a gimmick to me. Unless I can relax and take my eyes off the road, I might as well be driving -- and after Joshua Brown was killed using AP, my eyes were not leaving the road. So I found it gimmicky -- impressive but still gimmicky. Now, if I lived in LA or other places with slow stop and go traffic, I can easily see it being a must but I rarely drive in stop and go traffic. If I have to pay constant attention or it could kill me, I might as well be driving.
I'm still looking forward to getting the latest and greatest AP when I get my Model 3 -- but until I can get in the vehicle and have it drive me without me having to constantly babysit it, it will be a gimmick to me and nothing more. As I've said before, I can live with me killing myself (pun intended) but I can't live trusting Tesla's AP and having it kill me.
Tesla screwed up big time just by calling it "autopilot". I don't need to hear from the pilots telling me it's a correct term. Tesla is marketing it to lay people and to us it means what it says. It should have been called "driver assist" or something like that.
It's unfortunate more people will likely die thinking stuff like this won't happen -- on AP1.0, 2.0 or 2.5 -- they all require constant attention. Looking back years from now the current systems will look like a baby learning to walk -- and that's where we really are tech wise, at least in this lay person's view.
I think Tesla fooled us with that FSD video -- and it did fool me -- but not anymore. I think we're years away from FSD.
Last edited:
Lasttoy
Active Member
He was 2.0 drunk. He was so drunk it was crazy. Remember Florida. AP told the guy to grab wheel 7 times.
Wait till tesla downloads recording.
Wait till tesla downloads recording.
Similar threads
