Model S Accident/Fire

[efusco]

Jalopnik has a story up that includes the transcript of the report (I think that's what it is) which includes the owner's name and home address. Appears he's and orthopedic surgeon in Bellevue.
Batteries Burned In Tesla Model S Fire, Firefighters Say

 

[lorih]

Same here. Got at least a dozen question if I was sure that my car wasn't on fire... Lovely.

I have a bunch of 'non-tesla friends' that know my enthusiasm. One even texted me a picture yesterday of a car she saw while on vacation in Redmond Washington (Tesla EV vanity plate). I was relieved the text said, "saw this and thought of you" :smile:.

I'm not looking forward to having to answer the questions I may get from uninformed folks...sigh...

PS. Whose car was that? Bad photo of just back of car (black or blue) with Tesla EV plate... My godchild's mother took your photo!!

 

[brianman]

This confuses me.

...
E71 then attempted to extinguish with water. The application of water seemed to intensify the fire activity. E71 then applied dry chemical extinguisher to extinguish the fire. The application of the dry chemical extinguisher put down the majority of the fire.
...
E71 then used a circular saw to cut an access hole into front structural member to apply water to the battery pack. E71 completely extinguished the fire.
...

After learning that water makes the fire worse, why would they apply water again to the full pack?

Is this an error in the report or are there two different types of fires being battled here?

 

[blakegallagher]

This confuses me.

After learning that water makes the fire worse, why would they apply water again to the full pack?

Is this an error in the report or are there two different types of fires being battled here?

I Have wandered that too since I read the report. I am guessing it is misreporting but who knows.... very odd.

 

[scaesare]

I Have wandered that too since I read the report. I am guessing it is misreporting but who knows.... very odd.

I tend to suspect perhaps so.

Given that they later also report using chemical agents, I suspect that is what they eventually used.

 

[texex91]

The longer Tesla goes without a formal statement FROM ELON, the worse off it's going to be.

Address it head on (and not in some tiny comments from PR), state that it's being investigated, etc, etc.

The worst thing they can do is just wait.

I understand they need more info, but they don't need anymore info to state that they are looking into it.

Press will keep feeding on it.

This is crisis control 101--face it ASAP.

 

[brianman]

The worst thing they can do is just wait.

Wrong. Issuing an incorrect or misleading statement is far worse.

 

[NigelM]

Jalopnik has a story up that includes the transcript of the report (I think that's what it is) which includes the owner's name and home address. Appears he's and orthopedic surgeon in Bellevue.

Poor guy, I wouldn't be surprised if he's keeping his head down. It's got to have been fairly traumatic and now the press is going to be looking for him. Pretty mean of Jalopnik to print that now I think about it. Here's just one guy with the same name:

 

[texex91]

Wrong. Issuing an incorrect or misleading statement is far worse.

I didn't SAY issue a cause (read the post), I said let people know they ARE investigating. That's it--simple.

Trust me, it's crisis control 101--YOU DO NOT WAIT!

Silence is NOT your friend when the press is putting out all kinds of misleading info, and the public has not heard from Tesla.

 

[dirkhh]

This confuses me.

After learning that water makes the fire worse, why would they apply water again to the full pack?

Is this an error in the report or are there two different types of fires being battled here?

The standard practice is to use chemical extinguishers to stop the fire and to use LOTS of water to cool down anything that is still hot enough that it could self-ignite (you can't really do that with chemical extinguishers). So this seems reasonably consistent to me.

 

[omarsultan]

This confuses me.

After learning that water makes the fire worse, why would they apply water again to the full pack?

If you read the first responder guidelines (I was bored one day), this is actually following the recommended procedure to help cool the battery and stop things from getting worse.

If the high voltage battery becomes involved in fire or is bent, twisted, damaged, or breached in any way, or if you suspect that the battery is heating, use large amounts of water to cool the battery. DO NOT extinguish fire with a small amount of water. Always establish or request an additional water supply.

O

 

[blakegallagher]

oh ok thanks for the explanation. Makes sense

 

[scaesare]

If you read the first responder guidelines (I was bored one day), this is actually following the recommended procedure to help cool the battery and stop things from getting worse.



O

Thanks for providing that. Makes sense. (And to you too dirkhh).

 

[NoMoGas]

Under normal circumstances, investigators from NHTSA, the government's auto safety watchdog, would travel to Washington state to investigate the Tesla crash. But with the partial government shutdown, NHTSA's field investigations have been suspended.

Wonderful

 

[SFOTurtle]

Safety comes first of all. IMO the solution should be retrofitted to all existing Model S for free. I am not a lawyer and I am not speaking from a legal point of view, but according to the common sense the same standards of safety should be guaranteed on all existing Model S.

* * *

But the pack went to fire. Unless the fire was staged how can you say this?

Sorry, unless I'm missing something, this is the first time a Tesla battery in a MS has caught fire in over a year after the cars first hit the road, and there have been some pretty impressive crashes of the car to date without any fires. From statistics, there are something like 140,000-150,000 cars that catch fire every year in the U.S. If every time a vehicle caught fire resulted in a reengineering of that car, that would pretty much solve all traffic problems in my area as you'd never see any cars on the road. And the driver of the MS had plenty of time to pull over, shut off the car, get out of the car, and only then did the driver smell smoke.

If the battery pack had been ruptured by the metal object and it took that long to catch fire, I'd say the car held up as well as you can expect without building an impenetrable fortress of steel that weighed 10,000 lbs surrounding the entire car so it would look like an armored tank. There is a cost benefit analysis to any change, and without any evidence that human lives are at greater risk for making any retrofit and without any showing that the retrofit would materially improve safety of the car, I don't see why Tesla would go through substantial expense to retrofit and add weight to the car to ensure that only car per year doesn't catch flame in a freak accident.

 

[texex91]

Under normal circumstances, investigators from NHTSA, the government's auto safety watchdog, would travel to Washington state to investigate the Tesla crash. But with the partial government shutdown, NHTSA's field investigations have been suspended.

Wonderful

You're about the 5th person to bring that up.

No guarantees of that--there are over 150,000 auto fires annually. There's no guarantee that they would have--and quite frankly there was no need. Tesla can do their investigation, vs some govt intervention that's not needed.

Has nothing to do with govt 'shut down' (but it makes for nice forum complaining).

 

[rolosrevenge]

Honestly, anyone thinking that this suddenly means Model S isn't safe needs to realize that there is no way possible to stop all contingencies. With the amount of energy stored in the pack, plus the energy of a car moving 70 mph on a freeway, there will always be a way to break into the pack and light it on fire. I say that time will show that Model S is as safe as they claim, safer than any ICE. I also am happy the stock is tanking. I'd love it to drop a ton so I can jump back in.

 

[JRP3]

There is a cost benefit analysis to any change, and without any evidence that human lives are at greater risk for making any retrofit and without any showing that the retrofit would materially improve safety of the car, I don't see why Tesla would go through substantial expense to retrofit and add weight to the car to ensure that only car per year doesn't catch flame in a freak accident.

However, if there is a weakness that can be addressed with reasonable effort they should do it. Nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement. It may be as simple as using a thicker piece in place of the existing front belly pan section.

Regarding what someone previously said a skid plate is and how it's shaped, I had a Jeep with a skid plate that wrapped up around the tank, protecting the front and back of the tank as well as the bottom, so it need not only refer to a flat object.

 

[Smop]

Honestly, anyone thinking that this suddenly means Model S isn't safe needs to realize that there is no way possible to stop all contingencies. With the amount of energy stored in the pack, plus the energy of a car moving 70 mph on a freeway, there will always be a way to break into the pack and light it on fire. I say that time will show that Model S is as safe as they claim, safer than any ICE. I also am happy the stock is tanking. I'd love it to drop a ton so I can jump back in.

Well I guess this begs the question if a flat pack is safer than an ESS in a configuration similar to that of the Roadster. More surface area exposed to road hazards; which means a greater propensity for damage. The biggest x-factor in all this is the flammable coolant- this could be the main reason why Nissan did not opt for liquid cooling on its flat pack design.

However, if there is a weakness that can be addressed with reasonable effort they should do it. Nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement. It may be as simple as using a thicker piece in place of the existing front belly pan section.

Regarding what someone previously said a skid plate is and how it's shaped, I had a Jeep with a skid plate that wrapped up around the tank, protecting the front and back of the tank as well as the bottom, so it need not only refer to a flat object.

And a firmware flash that does not lower the car (greater chance of contacting road debris) at x speed. It is important to note that diesel fuel is quite difficult to ignite so not all ICE's are created equal.

 

[SFOTurtle]

However, if there is a weakness that can be addressed with reasonable effort they should do it. Nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement. It may be as simple as using a thicker piece in place of the existing front belly pan section.

Yeah, but those are the real questions, first, if there really is a weakness (none of us are experts, but based on the car's track record in other accidents and number of miles driven, there is little evidence there is a weakness) and second, is there a "reasonable" fix, and "reasonableness" is not only cost but also weight and performance of vehicle. If they could have prevented the fire by using a paper clip, I'm all in favor of that change. If only a tractor's snow plow scraping the road surface would have made a difference, then no thanks.