Navigate on Autopilot is Useless (2018.42.3)

[S4WRXTTCS]

Here's what makes me the most worries about this stuff: My original post opening this thread was three years ago... while a few things on that original bullet list have had some minor improvements, the feature as a whole (NoA) is still pretty much the same as it was then, with most of the same flaws.

It's baffling to me that after 7 years of promises, we still don't even have hands free on-ramp to off-ramp. (And yes, by hands free I mean hands free unless the car says it needs me, not nag me every 10-30 seconds to tug the wheel.)

What I find remarkable is you're someone clearly capable of communicating to Tesla what's wrong with it, and Tesla following up with questions/fixes.

Yet, that didn't occur.

It didn't occur with you
It didn't occur with me
I don't know of a single soul who worked with Tesla in fixing some NoA issue

NoA is over and done with it as it pertains to HW2/HW2.5 EAP based NoA, but never real lived up to its promise. If one was to look at it from a customer acceptance criteria. As in what percentage of customers feel like the feature works.

NoA with HW3/FSD will be a different beast. It already is at it introduced the "joys" of pure vision.

 

[AWDtsla]

It's baffling to me that after 7 years of promises, we still don't even have hands free on-ramp to off-ramp. (And yes, by hands free I mean hands free unless the car says it needs me, not nag me every 10-30 seconds to tug the wheel.)

They could, the system is effectively has this capability now. But Tesla does what is good for Tesla. No reason for them to transfer liability from the driver to themselves. So keep tugging on that wheel.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

They could, the system is effectively has this capability now. But Tesla does what is good for Tesla. No reason for them to transfer liability from the owner to themselves. So keep tugging on that wheel.

It's not about transferring liability as with an L2 system all the liability is still on the driver whether its hands free or not.

It's about what's possible.

Here is why Tesla can't activate hands free L2 NoA.

Hands free L2 requires camera based driver monitoring system. Normally this type of system is designed specifically for this task like what the GM Supercruise system has. Tesla does have interior facing Cabin camera that they're using for driving monitoring, but it seems to augment the torque sensor in the steering wheel. That augmentation likely means the cabin camera isn't enough by itself in all situations.
I don't think Tesla is confident enough in the auto-lane change to allow lane changes to happen without any driver feedback. The current system requires a very recent steering torque to begin the lane change.
Tesla still has issues detecting stalled vehicles partly in the lane, and it would be a bad idea to implement any hands free system in it.

I don't expect Tesla to ever introduce hands free L2 because they've never expressed any interest in it. They seem stubbornly committed to autonomous driving where liability will transfer, but it also means it might never happen with HW3.

 

[AWDtsla]

It's not about transferring liability as with an L2 system all the liability is still on the driver whether its hands free or not.

It's about what's possible.

Here is why Tesla can't activate hands free L2 NoA.

Hands free L2 requires camera based driver monitoring system. Normally this type of system is designed specifically for this task like what the GM Supercruise system has. Tesla does have interior facing Cabin camera that they're using for driving monitoring, but it seems to augment the torque sensor in the steering wheel. That augmentation likely means the cabin camera isn't enough by itself in all situations.
I don't think Tesla is confident enough in the auto-lane change to allow lane changes to happen without any driver feedback. The current system requires a very recent steering torque to begin the lane change.
Tesla still has issues detecting stalled vehicles partly in the lane, and it would be a bad idea to implement any hands free system in it.

I don't expect Tesla to ever introduce hands free L2 because they've never expressed any interest in it. They seem stubbornly committed to autonomous driving where liability will transfer, but it also means it might never happen with HW3.

NoA is an L3+ system on-ramp to off-ramp. You can argue whether or not it's good at that, and even what the definition of good is, but Tesla is not taking any liability that they don't have to. Why would a company that that got their beta testers pay THEM $10k on top of ~$90k for the hardware to maybe get the chance at beta testing their software and generate training data? You think I could even get Tesla to comp me for a curbed wheel on FSD beta? I should be getting paid $100/hr with both the test car and the insurance provided as part of the job. But no, I'm paying Tesla, and taking all the risk myself. And that is why, for the 3rd time now - why Tesla WILL NOT take liability, regardless of the technical capabilities of the car. The customers DO NOT care.

Also frankly, I've been trying to remember the last time I needed to perform an intervention on the highway to avoid a bad situation, and I'm not coming up with anything.

 

[DrDabbles]

NoA is an L3+ system on-ramp to off-ramp

Not it absolutely is not in any way whatsoever. Its legal and technical definition is L2. As cited by Tesla legal.

 

[AWDtsla]

Not it absolutely is not in any way whatsoever. Its legal and technical definition is L2. As cited by Tesla legal.

It is totally if driver monitoring is disabled. And the lawyers (and Elon) will keep that system on, again, for the 4th time in the last page.

 

[DarkMatter]

To this day I don't see AP slowing down for people changing lanes in front of me. Like it doesn't consistently give way when someone is merging into my lane.

I have found this behavior to be quite consistent. It's actually the reason I stay out of the right lane most of the time on AP, because it's a little too aggressive about getting out of the way of merging traffic. In middle lanes, it clearly has a bit of hysteresis so it doesn't just jam on the brakes when someone steps into the set gap. This is one of the parts that has really improved in the last few years.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I have found this behavior to be quite consistent. It's actually the reason I stay out of the right lane most of the time on AP, because it's a little too aggressive about getting out of the way of merging traffic. In middle lanes, it clearly has a bit of hysteresis so it doesn't just jam on the brakes when someone steps into the set gap. This is one of the parts that has really improved in the last few years.

It could be that I'm not giving it enough time so I'm taking over when I don't necessarily have to.

I'll have to test this some more.

One thing that surprised me was I expected turn signal visualization to be part of FSD Beta, but as of 10.5 I haven't seen it.

 

[DarkMatter]

When someone stepped in to the gap it used to be really aggressive about making a new gap. It's been super smooth for the last year or two though, at least in my experience.

 

[wk057]

What I find remarkable is you're someone clearly capable of communicating to Tesla what's wrong with it, and Tesla following up with questions/fixes.

Yet, that didn't occur.

It didn't occur with you
It didn't occur with me
I don't know of a single soul who worked with Tesla in fixing some NoA issue

NoA is over and done with it as it pertains to HW2/HW2.5 EAP based NoA, but never real lived up to its promise. If one was to look at it from a customer acceptance criteria. As in what percentage of customers feel like the feature works.

NoA with HW3/FSD will be a different beast. It already is at it introduced the "joys" of pure vision.

It's more remarkable that you (and probably others) make these assumptions. What evidence do you have that I've not communicated with Tesla about these deficiencies?

Oh right, you have none... because I have certainly done so through more channels than one, including some most wouldn't have access to utilize. The bottom line is that they don't seem inclined to really do anything about it. Why would they when people just keep throwing money at them, even for things that don't even exist!

I can't say I blame them, it's just disappointing.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

It's more remarkable that you (and probably others) make these assumptions. What evidence do you have that I've not communicated with Tesla about these deficiencies?

Oh right, you have none... because I have certainly done so through more channels than one, including some most wouldn't have access to utilize. The bottom line is that they don't seem inclined to really do anything about it. Why would they when people just keep throwing money at them, even for things that don't even exist!

I can't say I blame them, it's just disappointing.

My assumption was based almost entirely on Tesla having no mechanism to do so. That's my evidence.

That was a bad assumption with you because obviously you would have contacts/channels that other people wouldn't have.

In my defense I don't recall you ever mentioning speaking to anyone or their response. But, I may have missed something as this thread has been going on for years.

 

[DrDabbles]

My assumption was based almost entirely on Tesla having no mechanism to do so. That's my evidence.

That was a bad assumption with you because obviously you would have contacts/channels that other people wouldn't have.

In my defense I don't recall you ever mentioning speaking to anyone or their response. But, I may have missed something as this thread has been going on for years.

I've filed bugs with Tesla. They absolutely ignored me and the bugs still exist. Super disappointing.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

It's more remarkable that you (and probably others) make these assumptions. What evidence do you have that I've not communicated with Tesla about these deficiencies?

Oh right, you have none... because I have certainly done so through more channels than one, including some most wouldn't have access to utilize. The bottom line is that they don't seem inclined to really do anything about it. Why would they when people just keep throwing money at them, even for things that don't even exist!

I can't say I blame them, it's just disappointing.

Just for clarification the point of my post wasn't to blame you or any other Tesla owner for not trying to communicate with Tesla. I did not assume that you didn't attempt to communicate with Tesla. I assumed that whatever communication you had with them fell flat on its face because the problems you have still exist. The entire tone of your messages on here would be different if you felt like you were engaged with Tesla in a meaningful way that would produce improvements in their product. That's the assumption I was making.

What I was getting at is there are numerous tech savvy Tesla owners eager to help out, and yet all these bugs exist. So clearly these owners are not being leveraged by Tesla in a way that's expected by any manufacture.

Instead you feel like they don't care
I feel like they don't care to the point where I'm moving to Rivian whenever it arrives. That still gives Tesla a couple years of annoying me.

 

[bhzmark]

I've filed bugs with Tesla. They absolutely ignored me and the bugs still exist. Super disappointing.

When the feature first came out in AP1 ~2015-2016, I used it to report phantom braking and the locations were fixed within a few months. Not having any other phantom braking I just periodically report frustration with USB music to no avail.

 

[DrDabbles]

When the feature first came out in AP1 ~2015-2016, I used it to report phantom braking and the locations were fixed within a few months. Not having any other phantom braking I just periodically report frustration with USB music to no avail.

The good thing about the phantom braking fixes is that they added them to a whitelist. So, when they started adding overpasses to the list, they prevented the vehicle from braking for obstructions, which led to Teslas crashing into traffic beneath those overpasses.

 

[wk057]

The good thing about the phantom braking fixes is that they added them to a whitelist. So, when they started adding overpasses to the list, they prevented the vehicle from braking for obstructions, which led to Teslas crashing into traffic beneath those overpasses.

That's actually not exactly how that worked.

The "whitelist" would store a good bit of information, including the distance and angles of the false-triggering item, aggregated over multiple vehicles. If this is an overpass, this would not match the distance and angles of a vehicle or other obstacle and thus would not cause an issue for actual safety features.

---

As for NoA, it amazed me yesterday. It actually completed a lane change before slowing down for the traffic ahead! I actually said aloud that I was amazed it did it, as it never actually pulls this off. Was a pretty simple situation. The only other vehicle of any impact was the slower vehicle ahead. No other traffic of note, but still, it actually did it. Yay!

My period of praise for the system didn't last long. No sooner than as soon as we get along side the vehicle being overtaken, BRAKKKKKKKKKE for no reason.

 

[bhzmark]

which led to Teslas crashing into traffic beneath those overpasses.

Cite?

 

[DrDabbles]

Cite?

First party reports at the time.

 

[drtimhill]

First party reports at the time.

Again, citations and/or primary sources of phantom braking directly leading to crashes. This is pretty fundamental and serious.

 

[DrDabbles]

Again, citations and/or primary sources of phantom braking directly leading to crashes. This is pretty fundamental and serious.

Target your searches from 2017-2019. There were three or four posts made about it either here or on reddit, all of them told the same exact story. Overpass that previously experienced phantom braking, no longer experienced phantom braking, didn't slow for traffic stopped under the bridge and rear ended another car.