I made a point about evidence on 10/2 and your counterpoint is to rebut it with a news article from 10/3?
Sorry, I was talking about evidence not from the future when I said that. Perhaps you're working with a time machine available, but I'm not.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model S Accident/Fire
- Thread starter joshuaeven
- Start date
Sorry, I was talking about evidence not from the future when I said that. Perhaps you're working with a time machine available, but I'm not.
From article Tesla says car fire began in battery after crash - Yahoo Finance:
I don't know if that's true about the NHTSA getting involved in an accident like this but it's a shame that they are unavailable. An 3rd party review of the crash would help. The fringe groups (both positive and negative) would still go at it but the rational middle ground would get the truth.
I don't know if that's true about the NHTSA getting involved in an accident like this but it's a shame that they are unavailable. An 3rd party review of the crash would help. The fringe groups (both positive and negative) would still go at it but the rational middle ground would get the truth.
Incorrect.
1. I can make all kinds of assertions and whether they later turn out to be fact has no relationship to whether there was evidence to support those assertions at the time I made them. For example, suppose I said the stock will close between $7000 and $7001 on January 27th, 2020. Now suppose it actually does that. Would you be willing to say "the evidence on 2013/10/03 supports the stock being between $7000 and $7001 on 2020/07/27"? I wouldn't.
2. I didn't deny your hypothesis. I said I didn't see facts supporting it.
BriansTesla
Old school meets new tech
Yes, I am also trying to figure out what the flaming liquid is. There appears to be a pretty good quantity. Any ideas?
palmer_md
Member
I thought it was previously established in this thread that there are at least two significantly different understandings of "cascade failure" in this thread.
Did we have evidence on 10/2 that at least 2 modules burned inside the main battery pack? To me, 1 module does not imply cascade failure.
Perhaps if you defined what you meant by cascade failure it might have helped, otherwise I'm free to apply any reasonable definition for cascade failure and there are several definitions that the evidence did not support.
Another definition of cascade failure would imply all 16 module would have to catch fire for it to be a "full cascade failure". By that definition, I'm not sure even you'd say we have evidence of that (yet?) but I could be wrong.
- - - Updated - - -
To be clear, this was a random example of a component in the front that could theoretically spark something interesting not a proposed hypothesis. I think you got that, but I figured it's worth making that clearer in case others didn't.
It seems clear from this phrasing that you are using the term "catastrophic cascade" to refer to things that can happen "within a module" whereas at least some of us were using the term to speak "across modules". Further the use of "catastrophic" suggests that the whole pack is put at risk and/or destroyed, which I don't think is appropriate when we're talking about only 1 of the 16 modules.
Perhaps you should start saying "cascade within a module in the main pack" for clarity.
I think that the most important thing here is how quickly the Tesla team diagnoses the cause and implements any necessary changes to solve the issues. I have faith that the engineers at Tesla are already on top of this and are examining every aspect of the crash and fire. The team has been very responsive to needed design changes in the past, even for very minor issues, and anything needs to be fixed or re-designed it will mean a safer Model S for all of us. Given the amount of data that Tesla keeps on its cars, they should be able to diagnose the cause quickly and accurately. Back in the day, Volvo used to have a large team that investigated every major crash involving one of their cars. It seems to me that Tesla is even more obsessed with safety than Volvo was, so I'm sure that the result of this and all future MS accidents will result in even better, safer cars in the future.
JPP
Active Member
I don't recall discussion like this prior to this post. This is what I was asking for that I didn't find in the prior posts: evidence (a) coupled with analysis (b). If you had verbalized more of (a) in your initial posts rather than just offering (b) we might have been more aligned. Something to consider for future discussions.
It's in the Tech Plus package, but the flux capacitor is on back-order. Also, the retrofit cost is $88,000.
Tesla is aware of the irony of the part "what makes time travel possible" (bad grammar to preserve quote integrity) being not available in the present and that it seems like they should just send it back in time from the future factory. Internal sources say it's a regulatory issue with time travel and what they didn't say in their press release about the recent Tesla fire is very telling in that regard. We also have a lot to say about reports of Tesla abusing enslaved unicorns based on what was missing from their official statement about the fire incident. Read more on jalopnik about this theory.
My understanding is that section contains two of the 16 modules. There they are stacked vertcally instead of side-by-side.
And it begins....
" The investigation concerns whether Tesla and certain of its officers and/or directors have violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.* In an August 19, 2013 press release, Tesla touted its Model S as having achieved the "best safety rating of any car ever tested" by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA").**On October 2, 2013, an analyst downgraded Tesla due to "execution risk."* Later the same day, a Model S burst into flames following a purported collision, with Tesla later admitting that the fire began in its battery pack.*"
http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/10/03/5271623/shareholder-alert-pomerantz-law.html
" The investigation concerns whether Tesla and certain of its officers and/or directors have violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.* In an August 19, 2013 press release, Tesla touted its Model S as having achieved the "best safety rating of any car ever tested" by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA").**On October 2, 2013, an analyst downgraded Tesla due to "execution risk."* Later the same day, a Model S burst into flames following a purported collision, with Tesla later admitting that the fire began in its battery pack.*"
http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/10/03/5271623/shareholder-alert-pomerantz-law.html
CNN just published an article on it as well. "Tesla S, praised for safety, catches fire":
Tesla stock to fall again, after Model S fire - Oct. 2, 2013
I'm hoping Tesla publishes a Blog post with their findings in the next few days/weeks. Even if they don't post something it's nice to see the car (and battery pack) operated as designed and shut down after allowing the driver to get to safety.
Tesla stock to fall again, after Model S fire - Oct. 2, 2013
I'm hoping Tesla publishes a Blog post with their findings in the next few days/weeks. Even if they don't post something it's nice to see the car (and battery pack) operated as designed and shut down after allowing the driver to get to safety.
He actually did. He explained how his knowledge of the battery vent systems was consistent with the flame pattern in the video. What more do you want from him?
You, on the other hand, wrote a dozen posts questioning folks' conclusions derived from knowledge + analyzing tesla's statements + analyzing the video. As initial theories (12V, brake fire, collision) evolved into battery pack involvement, you became alarmist and defensive. Cap Opp and others who shared their knowledge and responded to questions were tremendously helpful. However, I missed your generally helpful comments and extensive knowledge about Tesla on this thread.
