Out on the road, engineers noted instances in which each vehicle except the Model 3 failed to respond to stopped vehicles ahead."
The 3 was the best!
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Out on the road, engineers noted instances in which each vehicle except the Model 3 failed to respond to stopped vehicles ahead."
In other news, feature does exactly what the manual says it's supposed to do. You can argue that the feature would be more valuable if it stopped to avoid a collision, but it didn't fail.
I agree, this is definitely an issue. Many do not know the limitations of these systems.The biggest headline is that the industry and owners are not well educated as to what the system does and doesn't do
It's FUD because it's doing a serious recolouring of the underlying report. ((Thank you to the people that linked that BTW, so I don't give BI the satisfaction of clicks.))“I don’t like what I’m reading therefore it’s FUD!”
...reason the Model S didn't do as well is because it's an AP1 car running 2 year old firmware (7.1).
“I don’t like what I’m reading therefore it’s FUD!”
It's not being critical that makes it FUD, it's the fact that they cherry picked an erroneous part of the test for the headline that makes it FUD.Or more simply, "Critical Tesla news = FUD!"
AEB has been limited to a 25mph decrease long before phantom braking issues showed up.TLDR: AEB is limited to 25mph b/c of the phantom braking issue. Tesla will likely resolve this gradually via OTA updates.
There's absolutely no reason to implement it this way unless the computer has uncertainty about whether there is an object in front of you.AEB has been limited to a 25mph decrease long before phantom braking issues showed up.
I agree, auto braking on the tesla without EAP was never designed to come to a complete stop at high speeds (it's not a feature the car has), it is just to reduce the impact in an inevitable crash. It's a known fact so BI is just spreading FUD.Business Insider FUD
If I understood the article correctly TACC was causing the braking events not AEB.There's absolutely no reason to implement it this way unless the computer has uncertainty about whether there is an object in front of you.
It is the same sensor set that sees these shadows or real cars. But my guess is, TACC is more cautious like mentioned in IIHS review and slowing down much before, where as AEB waits for last moment before kicking in, and by that time mostly sensor gets more data to indicate there is no obstruction in case of shadows. May be Tesla is still not comfortable with sensor data to be completely trust worthy to apply full braking at late stage with AEB.If I understood the article correctly TACC was causing the braking events not AEB.
AEB works as intended. BI translation: major flaw found in Teslas.I agree, auto braking on the tesla without EAP was never designed to come to a complete stop at high speeds (it's not a feature the car has), it is just to reduce the impact in an inevitable crash. It's a known fact so BI is just spreading FUD.
I mean that's like saying the cruise control works terribly on cars without cruise control... Why would they expect the system to work outside of specified parameters?
Headline is that tesla is worst (according to the headline) then why was it also the best when you add the feature (EAP) that handles this. This is why it is spreading FUD, it makes it sound like the car with the most automated driving experience is the worst at auto braking, but that's not the case, as they were testing a non EAP vehicle.
Thanks BI, now go home.
The intent of AEB is that when driver fails, system can take care, just like ABS, Airbags etc. If AEB is failing in normal mode, then it is a failure on part of Tesla.
Only Tesla failed this AEB test "Only the two Teslas hit the stationary target in this test."
I think main issue Tesla having is detecting stationary objects it seems.