Scary acceleration, how to reduce?

[MrBadger]

I don't think it has nothing to do about hw3 or fsd, it's just that it's easier to just pin one settings e do it well instead of multiple parameters with multiple problems,

So why haven't they nailed it yet then? Look at other cars with similar feature sets and its silky smooth transitions, plus they can adjust for speed limits (coming with FSD later this year apparently as current one sure does not seem to work reliably enough for me to risk my license on or worse) and tight corners, all silky smooth transitions. Admittedly it doesn't help that Europe have crippled some AP features so maybe Tesla are playing catchup, but even features long touted as being fantastic by some are just so flakey that many people seem to have given up on them. These things need to work reliably, predictably and consistently - its not a computer game. Maybe there is a reason why some manufacturers don't have OTA - they don't need them. Don't get me wrong, continuous improvement is good, but I think if some of the features were more stable and things didn't regress so often, which seems a common occurrence, many people would be happy with LTS designated versions and update less frequently. But they cant because they often want a newer version to fix a problem they are having, which then introduces its own problems - vicious cycle.

 

[cronosx]

Well, we are justo supposing, so we don't have the fact, just for a little background i work in automations control so set acceleration, pid etc are the bread for me, so i'm not really throwing word left and right, but again.. we don't know.
Said that, you need to consider what the AP of mercedes and similar does, and what does the Tesla AP, because.. well, there is a huge difference.

AP NEEDS to stop in time, NEED to take turn in the highway at a correct speed, so if i were in Tesla i would have been more aggressive in the speed adjusment so you can never be wrong, while if you are more "fluid" you could end up in a situation where you have to brake harder at the last moment since you didn't decelerate with the right force.
And then, when all is set "ok" i would slowly raise the bar and be more smooth with a feedback from the fleet that give you the info "you were too smoth! i had to brake harder at the last second!" and pint he righ parameters and if this isn't possible i would set parameters based on distance you want to keep.

It doesn't help that they use LA as a reference probably, most of the people in this topic likes a more smooth transition and it's a good things if you are in a non super-congestionated highway, but in LA you will end up in a crash since someone would stole your place in the line ( in the wrong way ) etc

I think they would nail it, it just that they don't want to mess with this right now when they focus their time on safety and fsd, maybe they are tweaking it month by month and it's just subtle and we don't catch it, if you are tweking two things at the same time you don't know what get you in the wrong direction while working on one thing at time you know what's got you in a problematic situation

 

[Fernand]

Oh, I think overall it's damned good, I wouldn't want any castration. The Teslas are fast cars for people who like fast cars. The Model 3 is mostly a small nimble sports sedan with great handling and power, not a cushy luxury ride for fat asses. The automation is not designed for set it and sleep driving; that's not available at this time, on any car, anyway. People who try that are simply idiots.

The ideal driving style for all occasions for all people will never exist. So in time the range of options will surely increase, as it has with various other updates. Right now the tuning of manual driving is flexible enough for me. On the AP, updates bring refinements. I'd like something like a "damping" parameter, that perhaps could take its cue automatically from how the user is making max speed adjustments. That would go a long way to addressing "style". All that in time.

But the AS and NOA deal with truly complicated decision trees. It currently handles high density multiple freeway NOA navigation, with periods of stop-and-go and stretches of high speed 4 lane open driving remarkably well. California driving is pretty balanced, with clearly designated lanes, not too crazy, no Roman "hit the gas hit the brakes" stuff, but not too slow. An overly passive style, or even widening the gap, as @cronosx points out, can create other risks. The current software works well here, and every update improves it, I notice it on streets that I travel often. Our surface roads are wider and better marked than say in the UK. In time it will gradually be optimized for a wider range of road situations.

You know, @VanillaAir_UK, I drive this car a bit, I know it pretty well, I use its various automation modes all the time, I drive manually when I want, and I get more enjoyment all around than I ever expected from a car. Occasional bugs and regressions are normal, if you know anything about software. I don't know what fantasy car you're talking about that does even a fraction of what this car handles and does it so well that it even needs no updates.

Nicki is named after Tesla, if Tesla lived today. Sometimes more feminine, sometimes more macho.

I may be hallucinating, but after dropping the Acceleration to Chill (which I had largely avoided to date), it does seem the style is more laid back. Or maybe I'm feeling pushier. We'll see. It would make sense for that setting to limit both foot and computer initiated acceleration. Of course having more than 2 settings would be ideal.

 

[cronosx]

Oh, I think overall it's damned good, I wouldn't want any castration. The Teslas are fast cars for people who like fast cars. The Model 3 is mostly a small nimble sports sedan with great handling and power, not a cushy luxury ride for fat asses. The automation is not designed for set it and sleep driving; that's not available at this time, on any car, anyway. People who try that are simply idiots.

I don't want any castration, i just want to be less jerky, not for me.. but for my children and my wife since we are full of morons that drive like "brake, ohh fast fast, brake!!!! fast!!! brake!!!"
When there is really no need and as it is they will end up vomiting, so i need to drive myself, not a "real problem", but having a feature that manage the distance and not using it.. it's a waste
My point is: if i set a long distance it's because i don't want to be so strongly influenced by someone in front of me if it's not necessary so i'm expecting the car to drive accordingly, while if i am in a rush hour i would set the distance to short, in this case it needs to be jerky

 

[Fernand]

Yes, I understand. So we're both looking for what in control systems can be called "damping", adjustable in software, ideally automatically, but if not, then by the driver. How you set distance could tell the car you want less "coupling", but you might want distance and acceleration damping to be 2 separate things?

There are also specifics of driving styles in different countries. Something Tesla will have to gradually learn. I've driven in Italy and in California we really don't see that Roman style much. Many Europeans think Californians drive like cattle. But people here spend a lot of time stuck in their cars on 4 lane freeways and most have learned it's pointless to push, it just creates clusters, and we all get there faster with a little courtesy. But as the climate gets hotter, who knows ...

 

[MrBadger]

You know, @VanillaAir_UK, I drive this car a bit, I know it pretty well, I use its various automation modes all the time, I drive manually when I want, and I get more enjoyment all around than I ever expected from a car. Occasional bugs and regressions are normal, if you know anything about software. I don't know what fantasy car you're talking about that does even a fraction of what this car handles and does it so well that it even needs no updates.

Actually, I know a hell of a lot about software and a hell of a lot about transport, especially software in transportation systems. The last group that I worked in developed the core software that controls a large amount of road users, probably even influenced you at some point in your life. We would never, ever, ever, ever have released software in the manner that Tesla appear to do. The consequences when things go wrong are just potentially too serious. And ex colleagues who worked on critical infrastructure, air traffic control systems or avionics, would probably think the same about our traffic systems.

I do applaud what Tesla are doing, I have shares in them not to make any money, because I believe in what they do and want to support that. But I do not think that Tesla have got the balance right yet in the way they are releasing software.

Even though they have an early adopters to take the biggest risk, they do not seem to have the equivalent for people who might want long term stability. imho, they should have a release that works well and remains stable, with no extra features, just bug fixes, and allow people to stick with that for significant amounts of time. Just like people are use to with other cars.

In addition, assumptions that roads are the same in other parts of the world as they are in California seem to be causing major differences in the way things behave. Shame so many people forget this is a car in a global market, so all the odd use cases that people bring up which are often dismissed by people having little or no issues, are genuine issues for people. This does not seem to be a problem for other vehicle manufacturers. Its a car for most, not a test bed.

 

[Fernand]

Well, I've likely as much software team development under my belt as you do, much of it big machine control with potential for human demise, like people movers and automated cranes. There are, as you know, different approaches to software staging. Your implication is that Tesla is atypically reckless, and we disagree. Who are the exemplary manufacturers of a car with something like NOA that you allude to?

Re: staging. The display subsystem is indeed changeable, but it's a separate computer with narrow interfaces to the control machine. The main control branch appears to currently be feature-frozen, and the updates are what in other types of software would be called bug fixes, like correcting the handling of certain types of lane merging - fixes I welcome as improvements. Even the lifting of mandatory explicit confirmation of lane changes in NOA, while functionally huge, and welcomed, did not change the underlying mechanisms. It's also optional, the default is OFF, "for people who might want long term stability". Advanced Summon, the last of the EAP features, has been (wisely) held in Alpha for months. I think Tesla's staging is pretty good on the whole.

As to localization, it's logical that, building a whole car company in a few years with finite resources, they would start with the easier software tasks, like handling autobahns with their well-delineated roads/lanes. Well marked surface roads are next. I consider the respectable performance on surface streets a wonderful bonus. It's rather odd to take Tesla to task over its limitations, when they clearly tell you it's not ready for prime time.

I don't even think it's a case of American provincialism, as you seem to imply. It would be too difficult to simultaneously address venues like the UK's byzantine streets with their ambiguous markings and ad hoc conversion from 1 to 2 to 3 lanes that were created in horse and carriage days. On surface streets with chaotic delineation, I turn off the automation. You should too. In regions where all roadways are like that, reading and following the clear warnings is appropriate - don't use the current versions of AP, or just get the base model, enjoy the car as the fast electric sports sedan that it is.

I don't understand what you want. You don't have to download every update. I don't update my critical computers with every OS release. Same for using every feature. And I for one don't think we need government mandate to limit where we can use automation, any more than we need it for other common sense limits, like not driving in manual on the wrong side of the road blindfolded at 140 KM/h.