Tesla Begrudgingly “Recalls” FSD Beta for NHTSA

I'm sure this will be a sticky on all of the vehicle forums shortly:

NHTSA Recalls Every Tesla Equipped With 'Full Self-Driving Beta' Over Crash Risks

The safety agency is requiring a software update to Tesla Model S, Model X, Model 3 and Model Y vehicles, saying FSD Beta "may allow the vehicle to act unsafe."

jalopnik.com

(moderator note: related threads here…)
FSD Recall? in Software
Recall FUD in Uk

"Full Self Driving Tesla" by rulenumberone2 is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Admin note: Image added for Blog Feed thumbnail

 

[stopcrazypp]

So, why, do you think, that NHTSA did not require all Teslas to be recalled. TACC/AP allows users to set speeds above the posted limit.

NHTSA's statement to the media (I believe I read it in the Jalopnik article) says they have a separate investigation for AP still ongoing.

Edit, relevant portion here:
"NHTSA will continue to monitor the recall remedies for effectiveness. This recall seeks to address a specific set of concerns identified by the agency. It does not address the full scope of NHTSA’s EA22-002 investigation as articulated in the opening resume. Accordingly, NHTSA’s investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot and associated vehicle systems remains open and active."

That's why I said I'm worried similar changes may eventually hit AP. Anyways, I guess we have to wait to see what the actual changes are, but I'm certainly crossing my fingers it won't come to the worst interpretation.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Had traffic cleared up, the car would have moved into the lane to the left and continued on. Perfectly legal. The point was that the car did not attempt to continue straight in the turn lane, which it could physically have done.

I presumed you were already in the solid line portion of the turn lane, which it would not be legal to change out of it in most states (with California being a major exception)? Once you are in a solid line portion of the turn-only lane technically you need to follow and complete the turn (I presume that is the issue NHTSA is talking about).

 

[Kevy Baby]

TACC/AP allows users to set speeds above the posted limit.

To a maximum of 85 MPH on AP, 90 MPH on just TACC

 

[Tam]

So this OTA fix will come from v10.xx?

It's a software fix but I don't see how they can fix these issues quickly now when these issues have been going on since I used them in 10/2021.

Some fixes are easy such as rolling stop. Instead of writing codes to allow a rolling stop, now do a complete stop.

Same with "stale yellow traffic light."

Other issues might take lots of time and resources.

Going straight from a turn-only lane: It's still doing it after now the 2nd year: It might help if it does pre-mapping like they did in 2016 video demo so the car can avoid choosing a turn-only lane when it wants to go straight.

Tesla already has all the cameras from owners' cars, so pre-mapping should not be a problem. The problem might be that it diverts profits in order to put resources into this project...

 

[alexcue]

This is my concern:

• NHTSA said "the system may respond insufficiently to changes in posted speed limits or not adequately account for the driver's adjustment of the vehicle's speed to exceed posted speed limits."

FSDb is crucial for me because it allows me to override misinterpreted truck speed limit signs (e.g. 30 MPH instead of 55 MPH). Maybe they will limit that the way it's limited to 5 over in AP.

I agree that the car is way too slow in changing speeds when hitting a new limit, and I'm okay with changing that.

interesting, because mine will misinterpret the truckers 55 when I'm doing 75. it'll kick it down to 70, which means sometimes i might get run over.

 

[Supcom]

I presumed you were already in the solid line portion of the turn lane, which it would not be legal to change out of it in most states (with California being a major exception)? Once you are in a solid line portion of the turn-only lane technically you need to follow and complete the turn (I presume that is the issue NHTSA is talking about).

That is incorrect in my state (Texas). You can legally cross a single white line. You cannot legally cross a double white line. It is also legal to change lanes in the middle of an intersection, contrary to popular belief. My Tesla does it quite often.

 

[2101Guy]

"NHTSA will continue to monitor the recall remedies for effectiveness. This recall seeks to address a specific set of concerns identified by the agency. It does not address the full scope of NHTSA’s EA22-002 investigation as articulated in the opening resume. Accordingly, NHTSA’s investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot and associated vehicle systems remains open and active."

Translation: "this ain't over yet, Elon"

 

[JHCCAZ]

[In Texas] It is also legal to change lanes in the middle of an intersection, contrary to popular belief.

Dangerous but legal. Normally that's one of the things I admire about Texas.
But based on experience with FSDb, I really wish Tesla would work harder to reduce lane changes and phntom threatened lane changes, especially at or near intersections!

 

[2101Guy]

this NHTSA action(s) DOES explain why Elons promise to have no more steering wheel nags by end of January 2023, didnt happen.

Then again...based on history, it would not have happened by end of january even if this investigation DIDNT happen...

 

[LiamPope]

The NHTSA saying vehicles are being recalled is a lie.
recall - Wiktionary : To withdraw, retract
No vehicles are being withdrawn. No vehicles are being retracted.
Definition #2: To call back, bring back
No vehicles are being called back. No vehicles are being brought back.
Definition #7: to request or order the return of (a faulty product).
No vehicles are being requested or ordered to be returned.

Must you keep repeating this nonsense? Standard dictionary definitions will frequently not adequately cover technical or industry-specific usage of words. The NHTSA and wider automotive industry uses the term recall when a manufacturer acts to repair a common identified issue on a volume of affected vehicles. The industry still uses the term recall in modern times where many such issues can now be fixed remotely by software update without the need for vehicles to physically be returned to the manufacturer. The article, or the NHTSA are not lying, they are just using industry terminology.

Whether that terminology is potentially confusing, outdated and maybe should be changed is another topic. Personally it doesn't bother me - the type of safety issues that are the subject of recalls has not changed and imho they should have the same gravitas attached to them as the word recall suggests even when they can be repaired by an OTA. Should the exact same issue on two different cars be called a recall on one car that isn't capable of receiving an OTA, but be called something 'less scary' on a car that can receive an OTA?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Must you keep repeating this nonsense? Standard dictionary definitions will frequently not adequately cover technical or industry-specific usage of words. The NHTSA and wider automotive industry uses the term recall when a manufacturer acts to repair a common identified issue on a volume of affected vehicles. The industry still uses the term recall in modern times where many such issues can now be fixed remotely by software update without the need for vehicles to physically be returned to the manufacturer. The article, or the NHTSA are not lying, they are just using industry terminology.

Whether that terminology is potentially confusing, outdated and maybe should be changed is another topic. Personally it doesn't bother me - the type of safety issues that are the subject of recalls has not changed and imho they should have the same gravitas attached to them as the word recall suggests even when they can be repaired by an OTA. Should the exact same issue on two different cars be called a recall on one car that isn't capable of receiving an OTA, but be called something 'less scary' on a car that can receive an OTA?

I agree technically it is correct to call it a recall, but its implications are because it carried over from an era where OTAs were not possible. Previously all recalls of products had to either be brought back to the manufacturer, retailer, or destroyed/disposed of by the consumer. The OTA obviously changed this. Maybe a modifier can be added, like "OTA recall" to differentiate.

 

[DanCar]

... this nonsense?

Who makes sense, those that use the dictionary definition or those that don't?

Standard dictionary definitions will frequently not adequately cover technical or industry-specific usage of words.

What nonsense. Instead of using vehicle recall can simply use software recall. Is that so difficult to speak the truth?

The NHTSA and wider automotive industry uses the term recall when a manufacturer acts to repair a common identified issue on a volume of affected vehicles.

Oh sure, make excuses for ineptness to change, using english inappropriately, spreading wrong information, and confusing people with a lie.

The industry still uses the term recall in modern times where many such issues can now be fixed remotely by software update without the need for vehicles to physically be returned to the manufacturer.

No, just another inept government bureaucracy is using wrong terminology.

The article, or the NHTSA are not lying, they are just using industry terminology.

NHTSA is very much lying. Stating something that isn't true. They can easily state something that is true.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[2101Guy]

If Elon didn’t think a recall was needed or appropriate he should not have authorized Tesla execs to voluntary issue…a…RECALL.

 

[mongo]

Recall:
49 CFR Part 573 - DEFECT AND NONCOMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITY AND REPORTS

 

[drtimhill]

I’m assuming Tesla will just disable FSD OTA and then release an OTA software update? I don’t have FSD and am not really all that interested in it, but I hate for this to give more reasons for anti Tesla/anti EV folks to promote their “long live the ICE” campaign.

No the intent is to fix the issues identified by an OTA .. they are not required to disable anything in the interim. Basically so far as I can see they are addressing issues beta testers (including myself) have noted here and on YouTube: not slowing fast enough in response to new speed limit (no idea why Tesla let that one slip through for so long), too aggressive going through yellow lights, bad lane choices at some intersections (yep) and (weird) not stopping for long enough at a stop sign when no other cars are present (seriously NHTSA???).

Overall, I think this is a good result. I'm sure some of the engineers in Tesla have been concerned about too many rough edges for some time, but have been pushed to work on "big" things instead .. this is going to lead to a more paced and robust effort going forward.

 

[Tam]

It sounded like the FSD beta program started on 5/8/2019:

"Tesla has identified 18 warranty claims, received between May 8, 2019, and September 12, 2022, that may be related to the conditions described above."

I thought FSD beta started in 10/2020 with employees then expanded to a few non-employees with a total to almost 900 by 3/2021: "824 vehicles in the pilot program, including 753 employees and 71 non-employees"

 

[RonAz]

"Cell Phones may cause Pickup Crashes". Whoops,
do Cause Pickup Crashes. Where's the recall for Apple and Samsung?

 

[Silicon Desert]

I read it as the issue being ......

Agree. Side note. The back-and-forth discussions are reminding me that it isn't just Elon that gets accused of being vague. The government isn't entirely clear either

 

[kabin]

Frustrated HW3 FSD owners might want to go the NHTSA website to list safety issues they are experiencing. It's probably the easiest way to encourage Tesla to clean up their FSD act.

 

[Silicon Desert]

Don't give the NHTSA any ideas!

Based on all the discussions about what they said, I'm beginning to think that NHTSA means we are talking about the opinion of a Newly Hired Tesla Service Advisor rather than the government