Some may argue otherwise, but I agree completely. We'll all be better off if we have easy, native, access to both Supercharger and CCS, certainly looking 2-3 years ahead if not right now. I imagine that it might cost $100 or so to do that, with extra wiring and physical connectors. Somehow I think it would be unlikely.
I believe VW says in their plans that all DC chargers will support both CHAdeMO and CCS during the first 2.5 year investment cycle. The overall legal settlement does not require this and they are free to build some CCS-only chargers in future years if CCS vehicles come to dominate the roads.
Link?
CCS uses HomePlug Green PHY for communication.
None of that is required. Tesla could be getting by with only analog pilot pin signaling support for J1772. There is zero evidence on the record today that existing Tesla products support Green PHY signaling.
You seem insistent so I'll give up. The only point is that IEEE 1901 established the base for AC communication. That is what the J1772 uses, this is not complex stuff, although the requirements do need precise standards. All it is is simple AC signaling, carrying a bit of data, just enough to communicate charging authorization and payment. Almost every POS credit card reader uses the same standard with a security overlay. If you want to think it will be harder, be my guest, but Tesla does have the capability today. Ask somebody there, this part really is not rocket science.
I suspect they could do it and I think they will find a way to do it. No disagreement there. I'm just saying there is no existing evidence that they have done it yet. I'd love to be proven wrong!
This is all true. However, it is all standard (i.e. nearly zero coding intelligence needed) so one need only follow the instructions. That is easy. The only questionable part for CCS is that there is no provision for an adapter because European utilities , equipment manufacturers and vehicle makers are all very concerned with the potential disasters that could happen when a high power charge comes unraveled and causes a fire or electrical outage. They have been distinctly uninterested in having idiot drivers fool around with multiple connections. It's hard to argue with the logic isn't it? A friend who's involved in the process told me he thought that they might allow an adapter for non-European deployment but never in Europe. He suggests that Europe will have very fast charging, >300A by 2020 but they doubt NA will be there then, and they're less concerned with NA anyway. If he's correct there might be a Tesla adapter by then. In Europe we can expect Tesla to make CCS standard including Superchargers since the existing pin-play in Europe will not allow non-Tesla high power DC anyway and it's going to be the law in the EU.
I'm an experienced systems software developer and am familiar with IP network stack and TLS implementation code. I can guess at what the Green PHY code would look like. It's not in any way easy and getting it right takes a lot of skill and time.
There will be 350A charging at an EVgo station in Baker, CA by the fall of this year. VW's Dieselgate EV charging infrastructure plans call for sprinkling 350A chargers (they call them 320A) across the USA by 2020 although most plugs will be 150A since that is all most cars will need in the near-term.
I think @rypalmer's point is that there may not be legal ground to prohibit an adapter. The adapter may not get a CharIN sticker on it. And there may be legal ground for CharIN to sue based on patents of the connector itself and/or protocols. But there's not an actual law that says you can't build electrical adapter. There difference between what is physically possible, and what someone else says you should or should not do.
I think any of the major charging networks would be interested in such data.
Even without changing the body panel: just make the charging port flap bigger. CCS could fit closer to the tail on S/X.
