Model X Crash on US-101 (Mountain View, CA)

[Az_Rael]

Um... No. Not even close. Nice try though. I say again, there is NO WAY AP drove that Model X into that wall/barrier/whatever. It's simply not how AP behaves/acts/programmed to function.

Jeff

Well, we have established that AP is perfectly capable of driving people into barriers if the conditions are correct. Tesla Autopilot crash caught on dashcam shows how not to use the system

So the question becomes, could AP have mistaken the lines? If so, hitting the barrier is a distinct possibility.


Now, I don't subscribe to the "AP was on" theory, if only because the police reported an "out of control vehicle". I am just pointing out that AP IS capable of driving people into barriers so it can't really be ruled out.

 

[LMNOP]

Um... No. Not even close. Nice try though. I say again, there is NO WAY AP drove that Model X into that wall/barrier/whatever. It's simply not how AP behaves/acts/programmed to function.

I'm certainly not an expert here, but I wouldn't dismiss the possibility flat out like this. There have been a number of documented incidents of autopilot hitting stationary objects in the lane. Here's one example: Why Tesla's Autopilot Can't See a Stopped Firetruck

This knowledge, coupled with the anecdotal evidence of @Alset72 here that AP has drifted left at that exact location before, means to me that it should absolutely be considered as a plausible theory and not immediately ruled out.

 

[jeffro01]

Well, we have established that AP is perfectly capable of driving people into barriers if the conditions are correct. Tesla Autopilot crash caught on dashcam shows how not to use the system

So the question becomes, could AP have mistaken the lines? If so, hitting the barrier is a distinct possibility.


Now, I don't subscribe to the "AP was on" theory, if only because the police reported an "out of control vehicle". I am just pointing out that AP IS capable of driving people into barriers so it can't really be ruled out.

We're talking about the one where the car drove into the side of the semi trailer making the turn right? Assuming that's the case, I think we can all agree that's a completely different set of circumstances than what we're seeing here.

Jeff

 

[jeffro01]

I'm certainly not an expert here, but I wouldn't dismiss the possibility flat out like this. There have been a number of documented incidents of autopilot hitting stationary objects in the lane. Here's one example: Why Tesla's Autopilot Can't See a Stopped Firetruck

This knowledge, coupled with the anecdotal evidence of @Alset72 here that AP has drifted left at that exact location before, means to me that it should absolutely be considered as a plausible theory and not immediately ruled out.

AP isn't going to drift like that, it just doesn't work that way and even still what we know from eye witness accounts doesn't paint that picture either.

Jeff

 

[MXWing]

Would there be 1/1000th the attention if this was a 2019 Leaf with ProPilot?

I think not.

Accidents happen, and no car is invincible. It's just a motherfrieken Tesla so there is an irrational level of intrigue that is 1000x more than what it should be.

Marketing aside, its a driver assistance tool that requires your 100% attentiveness. If something happens in the 5 seconds it takes you to crack open a can in the car while autosteer is active (which I do frequently) - it's all on ME.

 

[cbdream99]

Well, we have established that AP is perfectly capable of driving people into barriers if the conditions are correct

I have experienced this similarly in Dallas myself before, I usually disengage it before it crash and I can tell you my forward collision never once gives me a positive warning, even false positive warnings are rare, service center said they have no way to verify it unless I crash into something ! In my VW GTI, the forward collision warning and emergency brake assist saved me several times with very few false positive warnings.

Having said that, I am skeptical about the AP is the issue, there are just so many other possibilities (distraction, avoiding another driver or something, operator error, power steering failure ...), just the other day while I am still exiting in a single lane off ramp, a corolla overtook me in 90mph ! Fortunately, I held steady and he barely passed through the gap in merging traffic, otherwise major accident.

 

[LMNOP]

even still what we know from eye witness accounts doesn't paint that picture either.

@jeffro01 can you please share the eyewitness accounts you're referring to? I haven't been able to locate any public information from eyewitnesses leading up to the crash that could shed some light on what lane the car was in prior to the crash. The only eyewitness quotes I've seen thus far were describing the aftermath. Genuinely interested ... not trying to troll here.

 

[Kincaid]

What if we were to try this approach in order to understand what happened to cause this tragedy.

We have 3 factors that are most likely responsible for the accident: Auto Pilot error, driver error, or roadway conditions.

Let’s give the benefit of the doubt to the most reasonable defense for each variable:

1. AP was working as designed and did not cause the crash or was not operating.
2. The driver was healthy, attentive, responsible, a good driver, and his actions did not cause the crash.
3. The roadway was properly designed and not in disrepair and there were no observable defects to indicate it caused the crash.

Now, which of those defenses can most logically be disproved based on clearly observable facts?


1. It is very hard to prove that AP was not operating as intended.

1. It is extremely hard to prove that the driver was not responsible, healthy, and attentive.
2. Based on readily observable facts, It is very easy to prove that the roadway was not properly designed, maintained, or repaired, as required by law. The required crash attenuators had been destroyed in an identical fatal accident involving a Lexus sedan in 2015. The attenuator had not been repaired or replaced. The attachment rails for the attenuator had been left unprotected and constituted an obstruction that was raised up from the highway surface and a was clear obstruction to tires. Neither clearly visible warning paint, nor clearly visible warning signs were in place at the location of a prior fatal car accident.

The primary fault of this accident is most logically attributed to the highway department for failure to remove a dangerous roadway obstruction, failure to replace, repair, or maintain the crash attenuator, and failure to provide the required warning signs.

 

[mattack4000]

The wall jumped out and hit the car? 10000 plus cars drive by it daily, the wall reaper decided to jump out to hit the tesla. If this accident happened in a Mazda, no one would even talk about it outside of the local news.

What if we were to try this approach in order to understand what happened to cause this tragedy.

We have 3 factors that are most likely responsible for the accident: Auto Pilot error, driver error, or roadway conditions.

Let’s give the benefit of the doubt to the most reasonable defense for each variable:

1. AP was working as designed and did not cause the crash or was not operating.
2. The driver was healthy, attentive, responsible, a good driver, and his actions did not cause the crash.
3. The roadway was properly designed and not in disrepair and there were no observable defects to indicate it caused the crash.

Now, which of those defenses can most logically be disproved based on clearly observable facts?


1. It is very hard to prove that AP was not operating as intended.

1. It is extremely hard to prove that the driver was not responsible, healthy, and attentive.
2. Based on readily observable facts, It is very easy to prove that the roadway was not properly designed, maintained, or repaired, as required by law. The required crash attenuators had been destroyed in an identical fatal accident involving a Lexus sedan in 2015. The attenuator had not been repaired or replaced. The attachment rails for the attenuator had been left unprotected and constituted an obstruction that was raised up from the highway surface and a was clear obstruction to tires. Neither clearly visible warning paint, nor clearly visible warning signs were in place at the location of a prior fatal car accident.

The primary fault of this accident is most logically attributed to the highway department for failure to remove a dangerous roadway obstruction, failure to replace, repair, or maintain the crash attenuator, and failure to provide the required warning signs.

 

[buttershrimp]

There are situations where I think AP is likely on during the accident (the red truck ramming is one).... this however is not one of them. I don’t think AP was on, but I think the only way to tell in the absence of evidence is trying to replicate an AP lane drift in that area, which I don’t recommend ... leave it to Tesla

 

[mattack4000]

The lanes there aren’t even remotely close to some of the third world country bs we deal with in California. The two hov lanes are a good half a mile solid before the gore point. The gore point is also extremely long, you are not going to get trapped in there without knowing a wall is coming. If you tell me he tried to pull a fast and furious and pass someone there I find that more believeable. If we are just pushing theories, how about suicide or falling asleep?

 

[NeverFollow]

I'm certainly not an expert here, but I wouldn't dismiss the possibility flat out like this.
There have been a number of documented incidents of autopilot hitting stationary objects in the lane.
Here's one example: Why Tesla's Autopilot Can't See a Stopped Firetruck

About the fire truck accident, in fact the Tesla was following another vehicle.
The driver of the front vehicule suddenly changed lane to avoid the fire truck.

The driver of the Tesla (using AP or not) didn't have too much time to react
and stayed on the same lane, trying to make an emergency stop.

In this case, the Tesla was damaged but stay in one piece, and the driver was able to walk away.
The Tesla must have considerably decreased the speed, as the damage were similar to the 35 mph
NHTSA Crash Test, for which the Tesla X received a 5 stars:

NHTSA Crash Test - Consumer Reports

Frontal crash tests

Changing lane would have been a better option, but also could have been a dangerous maneuver.

To be safe, the Tesla should have keep enough distance from the car ahead.
The following values are the estimated stopping distances at 60 and 70mph:

Driver Care - Know Your Stopping Distance ! - Government Fleet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed ............................................................................ 60 mph ...... 70 mph
Perception/Reaction Distance ..................................... 88 feet ...... 103 feet
Braking Distance .......................................................... 180 feet ...... 245 feet
Overall Stopping Distance ............................................ 268 feet ...... 348 feet
Equal to Approx Number of Car Lengths (@15 feet) .... 18 ................ 23

So basically to be safe and be able to stop in time in any situation
(like a deer crossing and stopping in middle of a road, or two cars colliding into each other in front of you,...)
at the speed of 65 mph, you need to have about 300 ft (100 m) of visibility, or about 20 car length.

Well, keeping about 20 car length distance with the car in front of you is not always possible or practical.

Note: From the above mentioned web link:
(Government Fleet – Managing Public Sector Vehicles & Equipment)

"Studies have shown that it takes the average driver from
one-half to three-quarters of a second to perceive a need to hit the brakes,
and another three-quarters of a second to move your foot from the gas to the brake pedal."
​

I believe that the AP reaction time would have been only few microseconds, saving about 100 feet.

 

[Brando]

I thought these highway "crash barriers" were plastic drums filled with water or sand ?

When they stop doing that?

 

[EV-lutioin]

I thought these highway "crash barriers" were plastic drums filled with water or sand ?

When they stop doing that?

It was supposed to be a metal impact attenuator, which works really well if it is intact, but this one was damaged earlier and not repaired by CalTrans. They just left it there with no additional cushioning. Unconscionable. Also, they had poorly painted lines that made the gore point look like a lane instead of the commonly used heavy white chevrons as seen in the lower image taken in New Zealand.

 

[mattack4000]

I still don’t see how it is mistaken as a lane unless you are drunk or high

 

[EV-lutioin]

I still don’t see how it is mistaken as a lane unless you are drunk or high

Or using Autopilot. Two white lines leading directly into a gore point.

 

[mattack4000]

Or using Autopilot. Two white lines leading directly into a gore point.

How does the autopilot lead it into the gore point? The lines went from one solid line and split into two uninterrupted. You don’t think the car will freak out when it realize it is in a lane that is the wrong size at the beginning? The one solid line was a good 1/4 mile solid before the split.

 

[SMAlset]

Here is something that I don't think has been specificially mentioned yet (which would be amazing given 37 pages). We know the driver was on his way to work at apx. 9:30am. How likely would it have been for him to be checking in with colleagues by phone on some matter and maybe be distracted that way at a crucial point in the roadway? Even if the phone call would have come through on the car's speakers (likely assumption there) it could have caused a momentary distraction and a drift to the gore point given the speed. I will assume that given how often people are observed on their actual phones in the car while driving STILL that the investigators would check out any cell activity on his mobile phone line at the time of the accident.

Another possibility of distration, and something I see people do while in their cars, having a cup of coffee. It was morning, maybe he didn't have time to have breakfast before heading into the office and had some liquid with him that tipped causing a lapse in road attention. I was stopped in a line of cars exiting a shopping center. We had been actually stopped for a few minutes while waiting for perpendicular traffic to clear so we could all make our right hand turn out of the shopping center and suddenly I get rear ended by the SUV behind me. Like really hard too. Turns out the lady behind me dropped her water bottle and was reaching for it and lifted her foot of the brake and probably got confused when her vehicle started to move and hit the gas instead. Fewer people smoke these days but in days with no AC and the windows down, cigarette embers could go flying in ones car and panic a driver.

Not trying to come up with way out there scenarios but plausible ones that could also have been a factor.

 

[e-FTW]

I had a thought - do we think this was an AP2 car? The reason I wonder is because the force required to override the wheel in AP2 (at least before 10.4) is a lot higher than with AP1. In my 3 I had a couple of scary disengages at 70mph where I corrected the car with the wheel, AP2 wrestled with me for a bit, then let go, causing me to jerk the wheel. It was scary enough that I stopped using the wheel to disengage because I was worried about losing control at freeway speeds.

There was also this fellow who gave an account of losing control of his AP2 car after using the steering wheel to disengage at 80mph: Scary Experience with AP2.0 Autosteer on the Highway (OP in this thread thought it was a malfunction, but it was probably more likely to be steering overcorrections after the AP disengagement). A couple others in that thread also relayed almost losing control of their cars upon wheel disengagement.



I could see a scenario where AP2 decided to act up right at this bad junction, the X driver disengaged with the wheel, and then due to the high release force, the wheel was jerked at freeway speeds after AP let go. Now the fellow is in a scenario ripe for steering overcorrections and subsequent loss of control of his vehicle.

The above just became more interesting.
I have AP1, and the claims by the family have me puzzled, as "taking over" is extremely easy with AP1. So AP2 is that much different?

 

[EV-lutioin]

How does the autopilot lead it into the gore point? The lines went from one solid line and split into two uninterrupted. You don’t think the car will freak out when it realize it is in a lane that is the wrong size at the beginning? The one solid line was a good 1/4 mile solid before the split.

As you move towards the gore point the lines are the exact same distance apart as a lane, all you would have to do is turn on your blinker and AP would move you into the "lane" directly into harms way. There should be chevrons between the lines so it is not mistaken as lane.