NTSB Wants Information on Tesla Autopilot Accident

A Model S using Autopilot crashed into a firetruck near Los Angels on Monday prompting inquiry from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, according to a report from Bloomberg.

The Tesla driver was reportedly traveling at 65 mph when he rear-ended the truck. There were no injuries in the crash.

The Bloomberg report says the NTSB has not decided if it will launch a formal investigation. The agency is currently “gathering information.”

The Culver City Fire Department shared a photo of the accident.

https://twitter.com/x/status/955529991319560192

The NTSB announced earlier this year findings of an investigation into the first known fatal crash involving a car using an automated driver assistance system. The agency said that “operational limitations” of Tesla’s Autopilot system played a ‘major role’ in the 2016 crash that killed one person. The driver’s 2015 Tesla Model S collided with a semi-truck while the car’s Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer lane-keeping assistance features were being used.

Tesla’s repeated line on accidents is that “Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver.”

And, the NTSB noted in multiple reports that the driver kept his hands off the wheel for extended periods of time despite repeated automated warnings not to do so. Further, NTSB said the drivers hands were on the wheel for just 25 seconds during a 37-minute period that Autopilot was engaged. Still, the agency said Tesla’s system needs more safeguards – better systems to alert drivers and detect surrounding traffic.

Monday’s collision reportedly occurred while the firetruck was parked in an emergency lane at the side of the highway attending to another accident.

 

[TechOps]

FYI on a reddit post: Tesla allegedly on Autopilot hits firetruck with 65mph • r/teslamotors

And software update to change minimum AP following distance to "3" in 3..2..1..

 

[Barklikeadog]

FYI on a reddit post: Tesla allegedly on Autopilot hits firetruck with 65mph • r/teslamotors

Let me guess, the person posting that allegation is named Rob Blutz.

 

[Az_Rael]

And software update to change minimum AP following distance to "3" in 3..2..1..

Oh, I figure they will just adjust the distances unannounced. So you will still have a “1” but it won’t follow as close anymore.


The fellow had to be using a lower setting to not be able to see around a pickup truck.

 

[rxlawdude]

Without autopilot, what makes anyone believe this driver would still not have plowed into the fire truck? He couldn't see around/over it? Yet he didn't maintain safe following distance?

Pilot error.

 

[Jays200]

Would have been nice if the fire truck parked diagonally with the nose out and the tail against the wall. This would have created a glancing collision instead of an endo whilst still protecting emergency services crew.

Better still, one of those freeway trucks with the built in crash absorber on the back.

 

[chillaban]

Would have been nice if the fire truck parked diagonally with the nose out and the tail against the wall. This would have created a glancing collision instead of an endo whilst still protecting emergency services crew.

Better still, one of those freeway trucks with the built in crash absorber on the back.

Right, or if one or more Police Interceptor SUVs blocked the lane, or if there were more cones set up so that you'd notice running over the cones, etc etc etc.

A lot of things played a factor in the collision happening, but because it's a Tesla and was on Autopilot, the focus of the investigation will undoubtedly be centered around that.

 

[bhzmark]

Absolutely right. The NHTSA may even conclude that additonal contributing causes were:

1. Fire truck blocking highway travel lane without appropriate cones/ lights prior to blockage.

2. Fire truck only partially blocking lane making it hard to see from a distance that is in lane... Police and fire do this all the time. Park haphazardly blocking lanes when it appears they don't even need to. And often partially blocking lanes which can make it harder notice from a distance that they are fact blocking some of the lane. They also don't seem to make it a priority to clear the traffic lanes so as to not cause additonal accidents on top of the one they are responding to.

3. Deploying a firetruck when there is no fire. In some jurisdictions this happens all the time. Fire trucks go to medical emergencies when there is no need to for the fire equipment at all.i think this is an artifact of building codes nearly eliminating fires to respond to, and the FD needs an excuse to exercise their response drills.

Would have been nice if the fire truck parked diagonally with the nose out and the tail against the wall. This would have created a glancing collision instead of an endo whilst still protecting emergency services crew.

 

[Big Dog]

The NHTSA may even conclude that additonal contributing causes were:

1. Fire truck blocking highway travel lane without appropriate cones/ lights prior to blockage.

Ain't gonna happen. First responder trucks straddling an emergency lane is SOP in California. Moreover, a rear-ender is almost always the fault of the driver, with or without AP. Hard to prove otherwise.

 

[1208]

In the UK they are called fire and rescue because fire crews are called to road traffic accidents more than fires.

 

[Smfl2628]

Hope they weren't trying this. Thanks Tesla for making a safe car for my family.View attachment 275316

 

[beyoung307]

Anyone who owns a Tesla and has used AP 1 or 2 knows you have to pay attention to the road. No doubt in my mind this driver was not looking at the road. When I use AP I am like a attentive passenger ready to take over at any minute.

 

[RCardona68]

A Model S using Autopilot crashed into a firetruck near Los Angels on Monday prompting inquiry from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, according to a report from Bloomberg. The Tesla driver was reportedly traveling at 65 mph when he rear-ended the truck. There were no injuries in the crash. The Bloomberg report says the NTSB...
[WPURI="https://teslamotorsclub.com/blog/2018/01/23/ntsb-wants-information-on-tesla-autopilot-accident/"]READ FULL ARTICLE[/WPURI]

As a retired commercial pilot this crash reminds me of the first crash of an Airbus A-320, a fully modern computer controlled plane designed to minimize the most common of pilot mistakes. In short, the pilot violated many rules and the engineering saved all from crash injuries. This driver's life was saved in a similar way as, apparently, he was asleep at the wheel! The car braked to a slower speed BUT if he had been watching ahead, as expected and required as per Tesla, this would not have happened. Relying on technology can be foolish. While he survived the fight shall be in court as to several subjects. Clearly, the car is not at fault.

 

[Jmpman]

There used to be a classic insurance scam where 3 cars working together would box in the victim in the far left lane. The two scammers would drive in front of the victim, with the third to the victim’s right. The front vehicle would slam on their brakes, and the car behind would swerve to the right, out of the way. The victim, blocked in by the car to its right has no option but to slam on their brakes, without enough time to avoid a collision. The scammers would then sue for person injury, and split the profits.

Let me know when auto driving cars can avoid this type of maneuver, and I’ll be willing to risk my family’s life in one.

I suspect this fire engine scenario could have been avoided simply by swerving out of the way if there was sufficient room.

Anyone who says this is unavoidable is defending an immature technology that should be sued out of existence.

If people start pulling this insurance scam on Teslas, it’s better for society to unmask this threat.

 

[Robert831]

This seems a lot like the adaptive cruise control that I have in my non-Tesla. It's great for slow-and-go traffic. But if there is stopped traffic some distance ahead, it keeps cruising along at full speed. I always have to take over manually and apply the brakes. I assume my car would also crash just as the Tesla did. But how often do you hear about a car with adaptive cruise control crashing? Never, because it happens all the time and it's not Tesla.

 

[W2JO]

I believe we all know that Tesla HW1 and HW2 on AutoPilot cannot recognize a fully stopped vehicle as you come up behind one at high speed. For example, at a red light on a main highway intersection. However, if the car if front of you is running at (say) 20mph and you approach at 60mph, then your car will do the right thing and slow down. Fully stopped (stationary) objects are all over the highways. Signs, abutments, etc.. With current technology, if the Tesla slowed for every "apparently hazardous" stationary object with the present HW1/HW2 technology, WE would all be screaming!

 

[Ray95120]

I'm a new owner but have noted from my own experience that if I approach a stopped vehicle at high speed, with Traffic Aware cruise control on, I have to brake the vehicle because the range of the radar (or delays in processing the camera feed) does not seem long enough to start braking soon enough for my own comfort level. I'm sure it would have eventually braked, but possible only enough to minimize the severity of the accident, not avoid it. I assume this would be the same as when Auto Pilot is active.

Even Tesla's user manual does not claim that Emergency braking will avoid and accident.

" Warning: Automatic Emergency Braking is not designed to prevent a collision. At best, it can minimize the impact of a frontal collision by attempting to reduce your driving speed. Depending on Automatic Emergency Braking to avoid a collision can result in serious injury or death."

and

" When Automatic Emergency Braking has reduced the driving speed by 25 mph
(40 km/h), the brakes are released. For example, if Automatic Emergency Braking applies braking when driving at 56 mph
(90 km/h), it releases the brakes when the speed has been reduced to 31 mph (50 km/h) "

This would explain why the Tesla hit the fire engine, but the accident was not fatal.

I'm just wondering how this all pertains to Tesla's ability to perfect a fully autonomous driving mode. Does the system really have the detection range and processing speed necessary?

 

[Peter Lucas]

"... an immature technology that should be sued out of existence."

Well, Jumpman, thankfully for the rest of us new, immature technologies have not generally been "sued out of existence", despite their shortcomings.
For example, while many said that the human body would melt if it traveled faster than 30 mph, most everyone else said; "No, I think that trains will turn out to be good things." And didn't sue the railroads out of existence.
And while many said that a new communication device was the work of the devil, everyone else said; "No, I think telephones will turn out to be good things." And didn't sue the phone companies out of existence.
12 technologies that scared the world senseless | TechRadar

In the early 1900's, the automobile itself was "an immature technology" with traffic accidents a "menacing problem" in Detroit among other cities. Fortunately, the immature technology known as the motor car was not sued out of existence.
1900-1930: The years of driving dangerously

The future may be coming faster than you would like. But it won't wait for you to get on board.

 

[Canuck]

I can actually see how this could happen. Tesla in carpool lane right behind another car at 65mph. The car in front saw the fire truck and pull out last second and now Tesla autopilot could see it but braking late.

So how do you explain this one?:

TACC is not designed to detect STOPPED traffic when there is nothing between the car and the stopped object. Warnings about this abound, but some still try to test Darwin's theory.

Warnings scwarnings. They are so overused these days no on really pays much attention to them.

The bottom line for me is that no AP or TACC should drive into a parked vehicle on the road, in the lane of travel of the vehicle, and easily seen or detected. That's just unacceptable. Period.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s maddening to me that our society refuses to place blame solely on the human(s) responsible. When the user interface and user documentation clearly state that technology is beta, that the user must pay attention at all times, and that the user be fully prepared to take control at any time, it’s absolutely insipid to ask how responsible the technology is for the accident.

Tesla, in calling it "autopilot", brought it upon themselves. To anyone other than pilots, that term is taken literally. Calling it "driver's assist" would do much more than any warning.

Whenever some idiot wrecks their Tesla while on autopilot we get the media yelling that the sky is falling, useless government pinheads justifying their salaries by “asking for information” and spending taxpayer money assessing blame, and even members of this forum wringing their hands and gnashing their teeth. Asking how much blame the car holds for an autopilot accident is like asking how responsible the chainsaw is for the chainsaw juggler’s severed hand.

Regulations are vital for a safe, civil and just society. Letting corporations run amuck, accepting rubels for overtly political ads without oversight will lead to the downfall of our society. I'm for more regulations -- not less. They are what separate us from our ancestors.

But your chainsaw analogy is a good one. As I said in another thread on this crash, that's probably why my uncle gave me a long lesson on using a chain saw before we got firewood as a kid and it took a lot of watching and learning before I got to use it. He probably didn't think I was an "idiot" just that the danger associated with it required more than me just reading a warning label.

I also don't consider Joshua Brown, a former Navy Seal, to be an "idiot."

My mother is getting a Model 3, and like a lot of people out there she's looking forward to it automatically piloting her around. She's also an absent minded person. Fortunately, I'm here like my uncle was for me with that chain saw telling her she will have to pay attention at all times, and showing the video of it crashing into a parked truck so she understands the risks. But who's out there protecting all the other idiots, like the one who died in the video I posted above? A warning? That's absurd.

I used to be on the other side of this issue so I'm ready for the disagrees. I just think a lot of people would quickly change their tune if they lost a loved one to this insane flaw. At the very least, Tesla should immediately change the name.

 

[bhzmark]

Ain't gonna happen. First responder trucks straddling an emergency lane is SOP in California. Moreover, a rear-ender is almost always the fault of the driver, with or without AP. Hard to prove otherwise.

I don't know what "straddling an emergency lane" is. From the photos it looks like the truck was parked, not just in the travel (HOV?) lane or just on the shoulder, but facing ass out (instead of ass in,presenting a glancing blow) in both shoulder and travel lanes partially obstructing traffic in the travel lane.

If I parked my own truck in the middle of the highway sticking my ass partially out into a travel lane, and someone hit it, I wouldn't be at fault?

CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 22500-22526

22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle whether attended or unattended . . . (g) Alongside or opposite any street or highway excavation or obstruction when stopping, standing, or parking would obstruct traffic.

And was it really necessary for them to obstruct traffic? Sometimes it is. But sometimes they just create more unnecessary road hazard for longer time period, and in more lanes, than they need to.

 

[pacifico]

Having operated autopilot on my Model S since the first day it was released, a few things are clear. One, it is extraordinary for a beta release and has improved over time. Second, while I can't claim strict adherence to hands on the wheel at all times, you must be aware of the road and surroundings at all times. There are glitches. More than a few times, the system failed. I do not know if I had not corrected if there would have been a crash, but one continuing flaw is at dusk when the sun is shining directly on the lane markers. Another is one of the reasons for the fatal crash - the perfect storm of a white vehicle, sun, and vehicle height. Of course in that crash, the driver was to blame from all reports and was simply negligent to the extreme. Bottomline - it is an amazing elevation of the driving experience but you must still watch the road, and as the instructions say - be prepared to take over at any time.