Well, I don't know about you but I don't like being slow. Also it's unsafe to drive slower than the traffic.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla.com - "Transitioning to Tesla Vision"
- Thread starter run-the-joules
- Start date
Same thing with airbags or a seat belt, amirite!?
Reminder: Power brakes and power steering are features.
Hell, so are non-power brakes and steering.
I think you nailed it,... must be the covid making us nuts.
Yes,.. all part of the checkout routine,.. know the machine you operate.
Agreed,.. did the radar removal limit how fast you can drive,.. or just the AP speed ? Modern cars are too good at insulating average drivers from their surroundings, ie horrendous accidents.
Tesla is adding a new '4D' radar with twice the range for self-driving
We’ve learned that Tesla is looking to add a new “4D” radar with twice the range of its current radar...
electrek.co
So what was the point of the "4D radar" last fall?
Tesla is adding a new '4D' radar with twice the range for self-driving
We’ve learned that Tesla is looking to add a new “4D” radar with twice the range of its current radar...
So what was the point of the "4D radar" last fall?
Oh man I'm so torn because I dislike Electrek but I also dislike Elon. I don't know whose side to take here
Are you basing this on experience? I didn't look it up, but there is probably something like 100 miles worth of roads that are >75 mph in TX. So, 0.00000000000001%? I've driven a lot of Texas and a big chunk of "the south" in general. If you're regularly going 90 you're not in the flow of traffic.
powertoold
Active Member
Yes, hopefully they up it to 90mph soon. But my point was that it isn't anywhere as horrible as the AP2 transition. During that AP2 transition period, not only was the max speed useless but the lane keeping and TACC performance sucked as well.
Then again, I'm speculating as well. We'll have to see once these vision-only cars are tested.
pitabun
Member
Cheburashka
Active Member
Did they limit it to 75mph to reduce injury when the new hastily made AP plows you into a wall?
radar removal does not affect me because radar is not being removed from my car.
I am basing this on experience. I tried to drive 75 mph to Atlanta once (70 mph posted speed limit) for consumption testing purposes, EVERYBODY including trucks were passing me. and they were not happy I had to be sitting there in their way.
Even when I drive 90 mph many people pass me, including various minivans and whatnot.
Well, hopefully not any sooner than it's actually safe to do so! Sadly Tesla is known to pay lipservice to safety and then blatantly disregard it when it's convenient. (to people that are going to jump on me for examples - remember when they disabled AEB on model 3s to test the new radar out? Instead of you know, holding deliveries to deliver functioning cars.)
Have you seen any evidence that they are going to drop the use of radar data from all cars anytime soon?
Half the people here are mad they aren't getting vision only ASAP and the others never want it.
Well, interesting idea...
Tesla says the main camera can do "up to 250m". Let's say it's 75% that in an average situation.
188m @ 120 KMH (75 MPH) is 5.6 seconds.
Tesla doesn't count an accident as on AP if AP was off within 5 seconds of the impact. So they can use the camera to realize an accident is going to occur and disconnect AP, and then it won't be in the statistics
I think you nailed it.
This might also explain why car deliveries slowed down so much in April-May. They might not have had enough radars to put in new cars, or they just want to cut cost in the cheaper models.
After some brainstorming they decided to prepare folks early of the radar removal so Elon started hyping pure vision, while engineers were tasked with recovering as much of the lost information as possible purely from cameras.
They haven't quite figured it out yet but they can't hold up deliveries any longer so they will just run a limited version of Autopilot on the cars without radar and hope they'll have a full solution soon.
All good, Elon has already publicly trashed everyone else who uses lidar or radar, so face is saved!
Meanwhile S and X cars will still get the full suite of sensors. We might soon see Autopilot branching to two versions: incredible autopilot (S&X) and pretty sexy autopilot (3&Y).
they are obviously not going to do it. The proof is literally in Tesla statements themselves: if you do not have radar you are having degraded experience. Also they'll force autohighbeams and autowipers on you if you don't have radar (when on autopilot, I guess when not on autopilot they don't care if you crash as much?)
I can't believe I never even considered the fact that vision only means that AEB can no longer see things you can't, so yeah, if you don't have your high beams on at night or there is a raindrop over the camera but not the whole windshield, you have no sensing that radar would have been immune to.
In fact the radar is no substitute for vision in inclement conditions. Automotive radar has come a long way, but it is far from presenting what we would think of as an "image" that you would want to rely on to guide the car. As an adjunct to cameras, it can certainly identify that there's something out there roughly x feet ahead, and in advanced systems roughly y degrees off-axis. So I'd say it can reinforce where not to go, but with blinded cameras it won't really tell you where you can go.
Another way to express this: if you are fool enough to plow ahead into fog or rain where you cannot see, the radar might save you from a collision or from running someone over. But you absolutely have no business proceeding ahead under those conditions, and neither does a sensor-loaded AV.
Proper conclusion: we can debate the radar Pros e.g. safety-backup warnings and unquestionably superior presence-of-hazard detection in poor-vision conditions, and Cons e.g. false positives causing phantom responses, but it's quite wrong to think that Radar can "take over" in case of camera-vision failure.
On the other hand, cameras with sophisticated frame averaging / noise reduction, and with some IR sensitivity outside human perception, actually do have the potential to see real images better than humans in poor weather. This is an interesting and very pertinent topic, and I wish it would share the discussion bandwidth with Lidar and Radar debates.
If AI was on the level of a really good human driver, then a few cameras would be enough.
However computer vision and AI are still way behind human vision and intelligence. If a few cameras were enough to build robots that can safely navigate in our complicated lives, we'd have robot butlers already.
Similar threads
- Article
