S driver claims his parked car moved on its own and hit parked trailer

[RogerHScott]

Misquoting people is a bad idea.

Agreed. What misquoting do you believe you observed? Are you referring to my editorial replacement of "This"
with "[forward]", where I used the standard notation for such an editorial change? I don't see how that's a "misquote".
The original "this" was referring to ".. forward (forward is the default direction of movement)", so plugging in "forward"
for "this" was necessary for the quote to make any sense out of context.

 

[RogerHScott]

He said "this" is not the default, not that "forward" is not the default.

The post to which he was replying said, literally: "forward is the default direction of movement". What does it even mean to say double tapping the park button to activate autopark "is the default"? Defaults are choices (i.e., which of multiple choices to use), not isolated actions. Anyway, I hope we're all clear now.

 

[whitex]

It has shelves, but not in the vicinity of where the car parks. It has nothing on the floor where the car parks, but I'd hope that was true for any garage. It has things hanging, but not in a way that interferes.

I back in to within ~8" to shelf on the right. As I back in, the sensors go from "STOP, STOP" to showing nothing, depending what is on the shelf next the sensor. We also have bikes hanging, so if the car was to pull in too far it would hit one. Space is at a premium around here, my neighbors don't have any bigger garages either. I back in, so that the other car can pull in forward and both drivers exit in the middle (passenger doors are not usable while in the garage).

It sounds like you have plenty of room to comfortably get in and out of the car in the garage. I agree that summon will likely work fine if all it has to do is go straight until it detects a solid wall. Nothing to hit really.

As for my parking ability, as I explained in another thread the reason to use Summon is not for the everyday, typical case when I could certainly do an adequate job myself. It is for that one day when I'm tired, in a hurry, and distracted and left to my own devices would put a multi-hundred-dollar scrape down the side.

Have you considered that if you are too tired or distracted to safely pull out of your own garage, maybe driving on public roads while in that state is not a great idea either?

 

[wdolson]

It sounds like the guy did ignore some things the car was trying to tell him, but with any physical electric switch, there is a thing called bouncing. When a switch closes, it doesn't actually go to the new position and stay there, it opens and closes a few times before settling closed. This usually takes only a couple of milliseconds which is way below what a human can detect, but it's an eternity for electronics.

Any electronic system that looks at the position of the switch needs to have a debouncing system that ignores a lot of changes in a very short period of time. If the debouncing code or mechanism doesn't have a long enough ignore period, it may detect a single action as two or more. It is possible Tesla's debounce ignore period is just a tad too short and it detected a single push of the park button as two.

 

[emchen]

Tesla has even said what I suspect and that is the driver hit the park button twice. I've done this a half dozen times to get out and find that my MS is moving forward. It hasn't hit anything of course but there have been a few concerning moments.

When I pick up my daughter at school, I stop and press the park button once and then a second time to extend the door handles. I then get out to go around to the other side of the car to help her get in and load her 40 lb scoliosis backpack. If she doesn't open the door soon enough while I'm coming to the other side, the car starts moving forward. It's how the feature is designed.

The only indication is the emergency flashers and of course the screen shows summon in activation mode, but if you're getting out quickly to help someone load stuff up after opening up the door handles with the second park press, you're in for a shock the first few times.

I did the same routinely before the last OTA update. Then when they changed the double press of the park stalk to "autopark", it surprised me. Tesla needs to be wary of replacing button press commands already associated with one feature for another that triggers the vehicle to move automatically.

 

[zambono]

Maybe we are mistaking the meaning of "default" (you do have to enable Summon first in settings before you get this feature at all), but double-tap park + get out = the car will begin moving forwards in 3 seconds.

Per the Model S manual:

While sitting in Model S with the vehicle powered on, double press the Park gear.

The instrument panel displays a message indicating that Summon is engaged and the touchscreen displays a popup window. The default direction is for Model S to move forward into the parking space. Touch Reverse if you want Model S to back into the parking space.


This Youtube video demonstrates: Double-tapping Park alone activates Summon AutoPark. You do not need to press anything more.

That warning needs to be much larger

 

[brec]

As to the default direction of Summon when engaged from inside, here is an email I sent to Tesla yesterday morning:

There's been a lot of discussion on the net about Summon recently due to the incident in Utah. One source:
Driver whose Tesla Model S crashed while using Summon was breaking all the rules

I just posted the following at
Summon crash in Utah | Tesla Motors
in response to prior posts noting that when invoked from inside the car that the direction of movement defaults to that previously selected:

"Documentation omission: There is no indication in the Owner's Manual or release notes that when Summon is invoked from inside the car that the movement direction defaults to the same as when it was previously used. On the contrary, the Owner's Manual says, 'The default direction is for Model S to move forward into the parking space. Touch Reverse if you want Model S to back into the parking space.'"

I just tested the "default to previous" with my 85D as follows: car in garage facing inward; with garage door open, shift to Reverse; touch Skip on auto-Homelink drop-down; press Park button twice; observe Summon pop-up on main screen with forward arrow highlighted; touch reverse (rearward) arrow; exit car; observe car back out of garage; stop car with fob press. Then: enter car; invoke Summon with a double-press of Park button; observe that highlighted direction is reverse (rearward).

Now, perhaps the direction on the second invocation would have defaulted to forward under conditions I didn't test, e.g., another geographical location. But perhaps also a change in the Owner's Manual description is warranted.

Note: I don't ordinarily use Summon; I'm just a Tesla owner nerd like 72.3% of the other owners on the forums.

 

[msnow]

As to the default direction of Summon when engaged from inside, here is an email I sent to Tesla yesterday morning:

Thanks for that. Looking forward to their reply.

 

[sorka]

I've never heard of this "feature" -- is is documented? Given that the clearly documented function of double-clicking the park button
is to initiate auto-park it seems like a really questionable idea to use it for this purpose. And racing to touch one of the door handles "in time"? Wow. What can I say?

It has always been documented and is not a new feature. Pressing the park button extends the door handles but only if you're already in park. Therefore it takes two presses of the park button from drive mode to extend the door handles.

 

[sorka]

That warning needs to be much larger

Just any sort of sound would be good other than the clicking of the emergency flasher.s.

 

[sorka]

I did the same routinely before the last OTA update. Then when they changed the double press of the park stalk to "autopark", it surprised me. Tesla needs to be wary of replacing button press commands already associated with one feature for another that triggers the vehicle to move automatically.

But it's worse because they didn't just replace it, the same double press activates both features at the same time.

 

[jeffro01]

Ummm... very adept to picking up objects... but big rig trailer doesn't qualify as an object that should be detected? Come on, I've played with the sensors around the car, had my old son walking around the car, and there are plenty of blind spots. Have you seen the duffle bag demo from Consumer reports? Think kid instead of a bag.

It's been explained why the car didn't detect the trailer. I'm not going to explain it again. I have, as well as my children by accident, gotten too close during summon and every time it detected the object and stopped. I have complete confidence that when the feature is used correctly it wouldn't run over a human of any size that would be near the car, ever.

Jeff

 

[msnow]

It's been explained why the car didn't detect the trailer. I'm not going to explain it again. I have, as well as my children by accident, gotten too close during summon and every time it detected the object and stopped. I have complete confidence that when the feature is used correctly it wouldn't run over a human of any size that would be near the car, ever.

Jeff

In those scenarios I agree with you Jeff but the sensors will miss low objects particularly in the front. I've had it hit a case of water that was on the floor as well as other things so be careful its not as rock solid as you think.

 

[brec]

Thanks for that. Looking forward to their reply.

Sorry to disappoint:

Thank you for contacting Tesla Motors Technical Support with your feedback regarding the Summon explanation in the Owner’s Manual. I have forwarded your feedback to the team that develops the manual for their review.

 

[whitex]

It's been explained why the car didn't detect the trailer. I'm not going to explain it again.

I am not asking you to explain, I understand why - the car's sensors will miss objects, large and small, depending on situation. I was just commenting on your earlier statement which implied it detects all objects - it doesn't. So maybe you should have qualified "detects all objects except the ones you can explain afterwards why it didn't detect it".

I have, as well as my children by accident, gotten too close during summon and every time it detected the object and stopped. I have complete confidence that when the feature is used correctly it wouldn't run over a human of any size that would be near the car, ever.

Since you trust your children's safety with it, I strongly suggest you lower your trust. Watch this video from consumer reports, where the car hits a duffle bag (see picture - the car didn't just hit it - it was pushing it without stopping) or a bike. That duffle bag could be a child on the ground, and then what, you will tell us that you can explain why the car hit the kid, therefore your still have that complete confidence it never will? Or will you tell us that a child tripping in front of a summoning car is simply an incorrect way to use the feature?

 

[jeffro01]

I am not asking you to explain, I understand why - the car's sensors will miss objects, large and small, depending on situation. I was just commenting on your earlier statement which implied it detects all objects - it doesn't. So maybe you should have qualified "detects all objects except the ones you can explain afterwards why it didn't detect it".


Since you trust your children's safety with it, I strongly suggest you lower your trust.

I've seen the video, your point is? I didn't imply it detects all objects, I specifically said the ultra sonics would detect a human without fail and from my testing, whether intentional or in the case of my 6 year old unintentional, this has been the experience all the time, every time. The car is not going to summon itself over human and kill it, end of story. The duffle bag example here is crap as the cars suspension is jacked way up and the bag was put in a clear blind spot to the sensor array. I suppose if you had a baby you sat on the ground in front of the car then initiated summon then my assertion wouldn't be valid but, seriously?

You can live by fear and irrationality, I opt not to.

Jeff

 

[jeffro01]

In those scenarios I agree with you Jeff but the sensors will miss low objects particularly in the front. I've had it hit a case of water that was on the floor as well as other things so be careful its not as rock solid as you think.

No, it's exactly as rock solid as I think. Again you, and others, are completely misrepresenting\misunderstanding my assertion. My point is that the car isn't going to run over someone, the sensor array will pick that up without fail and without question. I'll acknowledge that if you put a baby on the ground right in front of the car and initiated summon that I'd be wrong but we all know that's a ridiculous premise to begin with.

I'm not saying the ultra sonics will detect all objects, all the time, without fail. I would never make such a statement as there is plenty of evidence out there that I would be wrong the moment I staked my claim. I understand the systems limitations, I understand where the blind spots are, I'm not going to worry about fringe examples to base my perspective upon.

Jeff

 

[Canuck]

I have, as well as my children by accident, gotten too close during summon and every time it detected the object and stopped. I have complete confidence that when the feature is used correctly it wouldn't run over a human of any size that would be near the car, ever.

That's precisely why after an accident so many people say things to the effect of: "that's happened so many times before without incident" or "I never thought, in a million years, that would happen."

You can live by fear and irrationality, I opt not to.

Maybe just a little over the edge with the language? No one's living in fear or being irrational.

 

[wallet.dat]

It sounds like the guy did ignore some things the car was trying to tell him, but with any physical electric switch, there is a thing called bouncing. When a switch closes, it doesn't actually go to the new position and stay there, it opens and closes a few times before settling closed. This usually takes only a couple of milliseconds which is way below what a human can detect, but it's an eternity for electronics.

Any electronic system that looks at the position of the switch needs to have a debouncing system that ignores a lot of changes in a very short period of time. If the debouncing code or mechanism doesn't have a long enough ignore period, it may detect a single action as two or more. It is possible Tesla's debounce ignore period is just a tad too short and it detected a single push of the park button as two.

Interesting. I recall "switch bounce" being a huge issue in pro-level paintball back in the late 90s when it made some paintball guns (Smart Parts' original Shocker) appear to fire full-auto.

 

[jeffro01]

That's precisely why after an accident so many people say things to the effect of: "that's happened so many times before without incident" or "I never thought, in a million years, that would happen."

Naturally, I wouldn't dispute that. My point wasn't to be absolute, my point was to be reasonable.

Maybe just a little over the edge with the language? No one's living in fear or being irrational.

Perhaps that's your perspective\opinion, but I don't share it.

Jeff