Not so far no. Seems like a pretty standard implementation except possible how it handles hold time.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
TACC failed to brake at stop, nearly accident.
- Thread starter Lintrix
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Driving Dynamics Model S
Not so far no. Seems like a pretty standard implementation except possible how it handles hold time.
Lets hypothetically imagine a road that curves to the right, with no road going straight and nothing but a small barricade at the position where you had the stopped car.
In that situation let's say you decide not to follow the blue car in front but decide to keep going straight to the barricade.
Then the TACC behavior looks perfectly right.
In that situation let's say you decide not to follow the blue car in front but decide to keep going straight to the barricade.
Then the TACC behavior looks perfectly right.
Khatsalano
Member
This exact video happened to me yesterday ... as I was demonstrating the TACC to a car full of friends in Napa Valley. It was really embarrassing and unsafe. The target car moved out of lane and the Tesla kept accelerating then did the emergency brake with beeps. I took over immediately and applied maximum braking.
I'm not demonstrating that to friends again until it gets fixed ... I'm trying to convince people to BUY this car! That was a major fail.
I'm not demonstrating that to friends again until it gets fixed ... I'm trying to convince people to BUY this car! That was a major fail.
If anything this shows that Tesla is appealing to a broader demographic. A demographic that has less experience with common car technology and hasnt bothered to RTFM. Sayeth Elon and team in the frickin manual:
"Warning: Traffic-aware cruise control may not brake/decelerate for stationary vehicles, especially in situations when you are driving over 50 mph (80 km/h) and a vehicle you are following moves out of your driving path and a stationary vehicle or object is in front of you instead.
Always pay attention to the road ahead and stay prepared to take immediate corrective action. Depending on TrafficAware Cruise Control to avoid a collision can result in serious injury or death."
"Warning: Traffic-aware cruise control may not brake/decelerate for stationary vehicles, especially in situations when you are driving over 50 mph (80 km/h) and a vehicle you are following moves out of your driving path and a stationary vehicle or object is in front of you instead.
Always pay attention to the road ahead and stay prepared to take immediate corrective action. Depending on TrafficAware Cruise Control to avoid a collision can result in serious injury or death."
So the exact scenario described by the OP is explicitly called out in the owner's manual. Imagine that.
On the other hand, who re-reads the manual after each software update?
As many have pointed out, TACC did not know, that OP wanted to drive straight. It thought that OP was going to turn right. If it would always brake in this scenario, it would also break in those times, when OP indeed would have wanted to turn right. It is almost impossible for TACC to know whether OP was planning to turn right or drive straight.
Theoretically it could track drivers eyes. I believe one would look to right when planning to turn and look straight when planning to continue straight. Turn signals of course would help.
Theoretically it could track drivers eyes. I believe one would look to right when planning to turn and look straight when planning to continue straight. Turn signals of course would help.
Krugerrand
Meow
Not the point. The manual exists so as to inform people how stuff works. If you don't want to read it, it's not the fault of the car, toaster, or can opener if you lose a finger.
It shouldn't matter. All that should be determined by the car is the distance to any object and how quickly the gap closes, then act accordingly. It sounds like the system is fixated on one object and is slow to switch to a new object that comes into view. This can also happen when the car in front of you suddenly passes a slow car in front of them.
One guy said "Don't worry if you don't read the manual. Any product that needs a manual is broken". Any idea who it was?
- - - Updated - - -
What about if there was only one lane and it would turn right (where blue Prius was going) and the white Nissan was a rock. OP would be going to follow the road (and Prius) and not hit the stone. In your scenario TACC would brake without proper cause. Turn signal would not help either, because there would be no need to signal on one lane road without intersection.
Last edited:
Krugerrand
Meow
One guy said "Any product that needs a manual is broken". Any idea who it was?
Yes, I know who said it and he's a) quite intelligent, b) has a good amount of common sense, and c) assumes the same attributes are possessed by the rest of us. Unfortunately, it's quite clear that not everyone is equal in the brain department and therefore the manual is for them. No shame in that and certainly no excuse for not knowing how and when a system such as TACC is appropriate to use. And this coming from someone who doesn't like to read instructions of any kind, that's why I pass them over to my husband and then have him give me the abridged version.
I wish Tesla would give us the ability to see what the car "sees". This would be very helpful for people to understand how the system really works. Here is a video from the Mercedes that shows what I'd like to see in our Tesla.
You should just skip ahead to the 3 minute mark:
You should just skip ahead to the 3 minute mark:
Last edited by a moderator:
jgs
Active Member
It is the point. Proper release notes should provide all the information that was added between the previous edition of the manual and the one you're castigating OP for not reading cover-to-cover. It's not unreasonable to ask people to read the manual carefully, once. It's not unreasonable to ask people to read the release notes carefully when a new edition comes out. It is unreasonable to ask people to reread the manual carefully, in its entirety, every time a new edition comes out.
Or just issue the manuals in .txt format, as God intended, and we can use diff to do the rest.
I've had a lot of cars that have this feature so I'm very familiar with it. The car doesn't know you will turn so it will start braking and if you do turn and the object is no longer on a collision course it stops braking.
Krugerrand
Meow
Oh, please. I didn't castigate the OP, but maybe I should have. Let's remember who came here complaining that TACC doesn't work properly, when it's evident that it works just fine under the circumstances it's intended to be used.
If a person can't retain the information the first time through, then take the time to read it again. If there are updates and you don't bother to read those notes (and refresh about previous notes if required), then that's on you. If you're not familiar with how a system is suppose to work, then read until you're sure. That's just basic common sense before operating a hunk of metal that can kill. A little personal responsibility goes a long way, as God intended.
jgs
Active Member
Point is, the info that actually explained about tracking turning cars vs. stopped cars in front of you (that applied, in detail, to OP's situation) wasn't in the 6.1 release notes. I just went back and checked. I agree with all the "use a little common sense" stuff. It's only the "you are responsible for re-reading the entire manual to discover any new information that may have appeared" position you advanced in #90 that I take issue with -- do you seriously want to defend that position? Keep in mind that OP's original manual was probably 6.0 so your comment about "retain the information the first time through" doesn't apply -- it wasn't there the first time through. OP could have gone over both the 6.0 manual and the 6.1 release notes with a fine-tooth comb and a highlighter and never come across the purported smoking gun language that was quoted in #86 (the parent to the "who re-reads the manual" comment #87 your #90 was in reply to).
U
As for "castigate" you're right, you didn't. I apologize for my choice of verb.
Last edited:
I learned how adaptive cruise works not by reading the manual but simply noticing how it behaves -- on my Toyota from four years ago. When the radar cruise tracks a moving object it thinks you may follow it and need to keep your distance. When it identifies a stationary object it defaults to categorizing it as something that you will turn or drive around to avoid -- not follow it.
If your tracked moving car becomes a stationary car while it is being tracked, it will know that it is a car and you may want to gently slow or stop behind the car.
You notice that pretty quickly in any radar cruise car.
The first time I read the manual for the Tesla was to find and quote the passage above -- predicting correctly that the manual would probably describe this exact situation. No need to read the manual though. Just pay attention and have some curiosity about how it works.
If your tracked moving car becomes a stationary car while it is being tracked, it will know that it is a car and you may want to gently slow or stop behind the car.
You notice that pretty quickly in any radar cruise car.
The first time I read the manual for the Tesla was to find and quote the passage above -- predicting correctly that the manual would probably describe this exact situation. No need to read the manual though. Just pay attention and have some curiosity about how it works.
Similar threads
