NHTSA Close to forcing recall of FSD after more crashes

[jjrandorin]

I'm confused. My Tesla, like all others, came with Auto Pilot. Currently, you can choose to pay and extra $12,000 for "Full Self-Driving Capability" (their exact wording). It says nothing about beta. When I bought mine, I was told I could add FSD for $10K extra, but was told it wasn't nearly ready for prime time, and I probably shouldn't get it, which I had already said I was not.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but it has always been called FSD, and the beta started later.

There is no such thing as a "non beta" FSD. There is "beta" (the regular FSD that you get when you buy FSD) and "beta beta") the FSD beta people are talking about.

"Full self Driving", when you have it (the regular one, like I have), has this huge disclaimer warning that it is beta software, blah blah. There Is no "non beta" version of FSD. There is the regular beta, and the "beta beta".

Other than that, this thread, like all the various other ones on this topic in this subforum, is basically regurgitating the same arguments, from mostly the same people, made in the same manner. Most people in this subforum are extremely entrenched on their position, whatever it is, on this topic. I can look at who starts a particular thread, and tell, pretty much without reading it, what the angle of that person is going to be.

Thats not a moderator note or anything, its just a regular observation.

 

[NCC81701]

Tesla's cabin monitoring camera and system is far behind what other manufacturers such as Ford and GM are using. How they fix it without a major upgrade and recall I do do know... Steering wheel rotational sensing is clearly insufficient. I'm with the NHTSA on this one.

Don't know what you are talking about the Tesla in cabin camera actually monitor what the driver is actually doing rather than just simple eye/head tracking. If you have the FSD Beta it'll almost immediately prompt you to pay attention/tug the wheel if you grab and look at your phone.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1379929216511279108

 

[dgatwood]

There is no such thing as a "non beta" FSD. There is "beta" (the regular FSD that you get when you buy FSD) and "beta beta") the FSD beta people are talking about.

There is no "regular FSD". There is AutoPilot and there is the FSD hardware package that will in the future add self-driving capabilities.

Drivers who buy a car with the FSD hardware package do not get FSD software. They get Autopilot with a few extra features (Navigate on AP, Smart Summon, and stop sign/stop light beta), none of which are considered to be self-driving. And of those, only stop sign/stop light beta is even specific to the FSD package at all. The rest are all part of enhanced autopilot. None of the highway functionality from the FSD package is even slightly different from enhanced autopilot.

There's a reason they call the beta "FSD Beta". It is the first version of the Tesla software that is considered to be in any way self-driving, i.e. not a pure driver assistance feature. What you're calling "normal FSD" is explicitly NOT FSD, because it is not considered self-driving. It is an ADAS feature ONLY, and the instructions make that very, very clear. FSD beta is the only version that is considered driver monitoring to verify self-driving capabilities, as opposed to the car merely trying to reduce the mistakes that the driver makes.

"Full self Driving", when you have it (the regular one, like I have), has this huge disclaimer warning that it is beta software, blah blah. There Is no "non beta" version of FSD. There is the regular beta, and the "beta beta".

That's likely Navigate on Autopilot Beta, or at most the Stop Sign/Stop Light beta, not FSD.

Other than that, this thread, like all the various other ones on this topic in this subforum, is basically regurgitating the same arguments, from mostly the same people, made in the same manner. Most people in this subforum are extremely entrenched on their position, whatever it is, on this topic. I can look at who starts a particular thread, and tell, pretty much without reading it, what the angle of that person is going to be.

That's because those people actually understand the difference between buying the FSD package (which very clearly promises that it will deliver self-driving at some point in the future) and actually having FSD functionality, which probably over 99% of FSD package owners do not have, and which is by definition not installed on your car unless you are part of the FSD Beta program.

 

[jjrandorin]

What you're calling "normal FSD" is explicitly NOT FSD,

Sorry, you lost me. When I bought it, Tesla called it "Full self Driving", so in effect, you are saying "Full self driving is not full self driving" which is the genesis of many of these discussions.

I am simply saying that the "Regular purchased Full self driving package" that tesla sells with the vehicle, is described by tesla itself as beta when you activate it. Its not "full self driving hardware". I am calling "normal FSD" the package I bought with my 2018 model 3 that upgraded enhanced autopilot to "full self driving" and that came with a hardware upgrade for me to the "full self driving computer" (all teslas words).

I am certainly not "hear for" any debate on how effective the package is, I am just talking about what its called ("Full self driving") and what it is when you activate it (described by tesla as "this is beta software".).

I do not and will never have the "FSD opt in beta" as I am not interested in the slightest in driver scores, or using FSD in a more beta state than I have right now, which is what the "beta" is.

 

[Marty3SR+]

There is no such thing as a "non beta" FSD. There is "beta" (the regular FSD that you get when you buy FSD) and "beta beta") the FSD beta people are talking about.

"Full self Driving", when you have it (the regular one, like I have), has this huge disclaimer warning that it is beta software, blah blah. There Is no "non beta" version of FSD. There is the regular beta, and the "beta beta".

Other than that, this thread, like all the various other ones on this topic in this subforum, is basically regurgitating the same arguments, from mostly the same people, made in the same manner. Most people in this subforum are extremely entrenched on their position, whatever it is, on this topic. I can look at who starts a particular thread, and tell, pretty much without reading it, what the angle of that person is going to be.

Thats not a moderator note or anything, its just a regular observation.

I understand the intentions and fine print, but when you go to buy a Tesla, all you see is "Full Self-Driving Capability", which implies to the average buyer that it is capable of full self-driving. I had done enough research to know the actual facts, and the disclaimers, etc, but there are many people who will never even see that.

 

[dgatwood]

Sorry, you lost me. When I bought it, Tesla called it "Full self Driving", so in effect, you are saying "Full self driving is not full self driving" which is the genesis of many of these discussions.

It's fundamentally flawed reasoning. The Tesla page on FSD says:

"The currently enabled Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous."

Autonomous is a synonym for self-driving. It is quite literally saying that the currently enabled features are not self-driving.

There's nothing ambiguous about this. Tesla states very clearly what you get, and clearly states that the current capabilities of the FSD package are not self-driving, and clearly states that in the future, it will be.

I am simply saying that the "Regular purchased Full self driving package" that tesla sells with the vehicle, is described by tesla itself as beta when you activate it. Its not "full self driving hardware". I am calling "normal FSD" the package I bought with my 2018 model 3 that upgraded enhanced autopilot to "full self driving" and that came with a hardware upgrade for me to the "full self driving computer" (all teslas words).

Autopilot is beta. That's Autopilot that you're activating. You'll get that same warning whether you bought the FSD package or the base AP package or the EAP package.

 

[drtimhill]

I remember that they changed the regulations and implemented dual stage airbags so that they would stop killing people.

Yes, they improved them and mitigated the issues so as to prevent the gruesome issues but still retain the clear advantages. Which should be the approach to stuff like PB and AP/FSD issues. So let's get beyond the hysterical "omg PB is going to kill me, FSD/PB/NoA/Elon/kittens should be banned before we all die" hysteria and focus on a balanced approach that will give companies like Waymo and Tesla et al the space to innovate while keeping an eye on them going too far. Doesnt seem like too difficult a concept to me.

 

[jjrandorin]

It's fundamentally flawed reasoning. The Tesla page on FSD says:

"The currently enabled Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous."

Autonomous is a synonym for self-driving. It is quite literally saying that the currently enabled features are not self-driving.

There's nothing ambiguous about this. Tesla states very clearly what you get, and clearly states that the current capabilities of the FSD package are not self-driving, and clearly states that in the future, it will be.



Autopilot is beta. That's Autopilot that you're activating. You'll get that same warning whether you bought the FSD package or the base AP package or the EAP package.

Tesla does not define "autopilot" as being able to change lanes, etc. I definitely am not "enabling autopilot". This is one of the reasons I dont usually participate in any of these discussions. "FSD Beta" is also a driver assist aid (its not level 3) so I dont get whatever distinction you are drawing there for yourself.

Feel free to draw that distinction for yourself though, if it works for you.

 

[TresLA]

I'm confused. My Tesla, like all others, came with Auto Pilot. Currently, you can choose to pay and extra $12,000 for "Full Self-Driving Capability" (their exact wording). It says nothing about beta. When I bought mine, I was told I could add FSD for $10K extra, but was told it wasn't nearly ready for prime time, and I probably shouldn't get it, which I had already said I was not.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but it has always been called FSD, and the beta started later.

Yes, the wording has been mixed up and we (posters here) have only added to the confusion.

The first part of your response is correct, the second half is the confusion that has perpetuated.

Tesla (as far back as I’ve seen but am open to be corrected if you can find otherwise) has only sold AP which didn’t used to be free/included (or some variation of that like Enhanced Autopilot) and “Full Self-Driving Capability” package. They’ve never sold something just called “Full Self-Driving” (FSD). That “capability” is how they’ve always hedged that package because it’s referring to the hardware & future software unlock included, not current abilities. This isn’t just “legalese” but the language mixups have perpetuated the confusion. Many have arguably complained this should include any future hardware upgrades like camera suite, MCU2, or for all of us now a future HW4 if HW3 is determined not enough. Personally, I see various sides of this argument and am just because we are all trying to predict the future here.

We shouldn’t be ever using the term FSD in reference to anything currently existing, but instead here are the 3 terms Tesla used/uses and therefore we should be sticking to (but I know we won’t, haha):

Autopilot (or AP): this software suite of features includes TACC and autosteer. It’s a more advanced version of what other brands label Lane Keep Assist (LKA). Some parts of this are still considered beta by Tesla (designated in the car screen menu). This is now included with every new Tesla, but used to need to be purchased as a package, and at one time in the USA you could also purchase the Enhanced Autopilot package (and on top of that you could purchase the FSD Capability package). Some markets still sell the Enhanced Autopilot package, but it’s just a regrouping of the same group of features (or nerfed features in some markets due to regional regulations).

Full Self-Driving Capability (or FSD Capability): this is what people usually mean by FSD, but “usually” means often people are confusing this with that future promise of actual FSD or confusing it with the currently existing FSD beta program (more on that below). Paying for this package (when it was $3k, $10k, or now $12k) is locking in any future software feature releases including up to FSD when that’s actually available. During the HW2.5 phase, it also locked in a hardware upgrade to HW3. It currently adds a few more features on top of the (didn’t used to be) included AP features. Currently these include NoAP, Auto Lane Change, Autopark, Summon (both “dumb” and Smart Summon), and Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control. Many (if not all) of these features are still designated by Tesla on the car screen menus as in beta. But you are correct in saying this says nothing about the “FSD beta” program.

FSD beta: this is that “limited early access program” that’s not something you can pay for (but you do have to have paid for FSD Capability package/subscription to be considered). A couple years ago only some Tesla employees and some YouTubers/Twitter influencers (and maybe some “Early Access Program” members) got this. Then last Fall they opened it up to ~2,000 of the public via Safety Score 100 (many of us here got into this group), and have since kept opening it up to more cars. This is obviously designated by Tesla also as in beta, and includes the “Autosteer on City Streets” features that has been promised eventually (no exact timeline in the purchase/subscription legal terms) to all cars with FSD Capability package/subscription. This is what I’d understand as what you heard isn't ready for prime time.

Clear as mud? I’m happy to help clarify if you have more questions.

 

[TresLA]

I had the beta, I’d say the cabin camera monitoring works pretty well, surprisingly well. When I had the beta, even the “old” highway NoA code was using the cabin cam. If I fiddled with music, took my eyes off the road, it would warn you. Worked pretty well.

I’ve had mixed reliability with this in cabin camera monitoring (both highway and surface streets). It’s generally good, but sometimes (not often) wrong and blares sirens when I’m looking straight ahead, or wearing sunglasses seems to fool it more easily, etc.

 

[emmz0r]

Not much warning time. Maybe they should have upgraded to high resolution cameras sooner...

Be curious to see what cars of those involved in crashes had radar still and it if was working at the time of the crash. Best advice I ever heard on this forum is assume AP is out to kill you. I would follow the same logic with FSD.

It seems to me they are too busy making the real FSD and have left the old legacy unchanged for years.
They should have hired a 2nd team to improve and maintain the legacy autopilot / FSD

 

[akhavanr]

IMHO, Technology is an enabler which can make os humans function a lot better by removing repetitive tasks humans do not do well overtime. Like any application developed for a major enterprise, you always have an operations team monitoring health of the infrastructure supporting the application and application itself as there are always cases software is not able to take care of.

AV SW is similar in nature, but, a lot more complicated software than a typical software developed for an enterprise. Human behind the wheel will always be needed as an operations specialist who is licensed to operated the vehicle where either hardware of software fails to do its job. We human can augment AV technology to make it by far the safest experience on the road. Our engagement becomes monitoring the environment as opposed to do the repetitive driving tasks.

Taking human out of the picture is similar to not having an operations team for an enterprise IT. Possible, but, not advisable.

 

[2101Guy]

One thing I think we ALL can agree on. Whomever made the decision to name things "autopilot", "Full Self Driving", "Full Self Driving Beta", made horrid decisions with those names.

 

[DayTrippin]

I think they used the same naming conventions as governmental bills/acts. Always name them something that sounds nice but has only a tangental relation to what it actually does, or often the polar opposite.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

A woman just won a multimillion dollar claim from geico. Why? She contracted an STD while in the insured’s car.

It’s america. Welcome to the land of many lawsuits.

GEICO denied coverage so failed to defend the claim, and it was found that they covered it.

Had they accepted coverage, and examined the case properly they would have held their insured driver liable.

Seems stupid that that would be included, so expect to see an interesting policy amendment.

 

[akhavanr]

One thing I think we ALL can agree on. Whomever made the decision to name things "autopilot", "Full Self Driving", "Full Self Driving Beta", made horrid decisions with those names.

I do agree Autopilot and FSD are poor choices. Staying with Level 3, 4, and 5 would have made it less controversial. What we have today are various sub levels of Level 3. Auto pilot is like Level 3.5, FAD is like 3.85.

 

[flutas]

A woman just won a multimillion dollar claim from geico. Why? She contracted an STD while in the insured’s car.

It’s america. Welcome to the land of many lawsuits.

No, the reason she won was Geico pushed it to arbitration and then no-showed, assuming they would win by default.

The real lesson here is always show up to court and/or arbitration.

Geico tried to appeal but lost because it was binding arbitration, which means they have no recourse to an appeal.

 

[DocRob]

One thing I think we ALL can agree on. Whomever made the decision to name things "autopilot", "Full Self Driving", "Full Self Driving Beta", made horrid decisions with those names.

Agreed. The Tesla website should list the option as SAE level 2 "Driver Support Systems” and a link to the SAE website. Under the option, Tesla can also list the capabilities of the driver support.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Most people in this subforum are extremely entrenched on their position, whatever it is, on this topic.

Can you tell me what mine is?

I'm conflicted between the desire for drivers to take responsibility, and the desire to push L2 manufactures to do a better job. Tesla and other manufactures have known for a LONG time that their radar based L2 vehicles struggled with detecting stopped vehicles. In the case of Tesla people in the community have observed that it really struggles with a car being offset in the lane. I certainly wouldn't expect my car to correctly handle an offset vehicle in the lane.

I don't see anyway to fix AP1 vehicles
The only way I see to improve AP2 or AP2.5 vehicles is to upgrade them to HW3 purevision. Then demonstrate to the NHTSA that purevision solves the problem. This would be assuming it does

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

No, the reason she won was Geico pushed it to arbitration and then no-showed, assuming they would win by default.

The real lesson here is always show up to court and/or arbitration.

Geico tried to appeal but lost because it was binding arbitration, which means they have no recourse to an appeal.

I agree that it was more of a procedural failing.

But, still I don't think anyone of a rational mind would think a judge would take the case seriously.

It's probably not a good idea to be in the insurance industry during a zombie apocalypse.