Tesla slams into stationary fire truck. Driver killed. Police say “unclear” if AP/FSD at fault.

[Wattsisname]

You're implying that we know FSD was engaged (or AP, or TACC). We do not.

Exactly! it's a nice easy out; blame the car. It is very sad when people are killed in car crashes ( I hesitate to call them accidents). Human error such as driving with out care and attention or poor decision making like driving faster than weather conditions would allow a more considered and considerate driver to do.

 

[DP26]

Humans are imperfect, even on a closed circuit and a safety/yellow condition, and professional drivers.

The news goes with sensational topics to sell. Even if all the assist was on, it is still the person who was, or was supposed to be, sitting at the controls.

Cars themselves have never been safer.

 

[MorrisonHiker]

I'm guessing some people put too much faith in the AP/FSD and decide not to pay attention. A red fire truck laid across all lanes in daylight? And this is in a long, straight section of highway. The driver wasn't looking. I'm sorry this person died. But this software is L2 and requires the driver to watch the road. The driver is responsible.

The accident took place at 4 am so I don't think there was any daylight present.

 

[Zythryn]

Update: NHTSA Now investigating this crash

Tesla Fatal Crash With Fire Truck Draws US Regulator Inquiry

The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration asked Tesla Inc. for more information about one of its vehicles colliding with a fire truck in a fatal crash in the San Francisco Bay area.

www.bloomberg.com

This would be at least the 14th time a Tesla has crashed into emergency vehicles with autopilot or FSD engaged, if one were engaged. (moderator edit)

This data point is meaningless without knowing how many total crashes into emergency vehicles there were over the same period.

As I recall, all of the completed NHTSA reports showed that FSD was not a factor. However that doesn't seem to get the same coverage.

 

[zoomer0056]

The report says:

"California Highway Patrol Officer Adam Lane said it was not clear whether the driver may have been intoxicated or whether the Tesla Model S was operating with automation or driving assistance features."

Yup, driving intoxicated has the same risks as not being attentive when using driver assist. This is clearly the fault of the driver who was either drunk, high or just not paying attention.

 

[Big Dog]

Since Tesla has the car's computer data, I do wish Elon would appoint a team who's responsibility it is to quickly pull up the records of the car at issue and report to the police that at 4 am, [date], the Tesla Model ?, was/was not engaged in FSD or EAP or TACC. The information could then be shared with the press if the LEO's so chose.

 

[zoomer0056]

Since Tesla has the car's computer data, I do wish Elon would appoint a team who's responsibility it is to quickly pull up the records of the car at issue and report to the police that at 4 am, [date], the Tesla Model ?, was/was not engaged in FSD or EAP or TACC. The information could then be shared with the press if the LEO's so chose.

Its terrible that this happened. I understand your question. Let's say the driver was not drunk, was not texting, was not tired at this 4AM time, was not otherwise distracted, was able to see firetruck lights and driver assist features were in use and the car would not let driver slow down or steer out of the way. The only conclusion is the car caused the accident.

 

[DP26]

When vehicles took skill to drive, drivers were skilled. No longer the norm. Imagine the average driver today trying to use a manual choke, set the spark advance, or even figure out how to use the third pedal.

 

[PVia]

...driver assist features were in use and the car would not let driver slow down or steer out of the way. The only conclusion is the car caused the accident.

I don't think there has been an occurrence where this has happened, a Cujo event.
Are you worried about that?

 

[dachshund]

The accident took place at 4 am so I don't think there was any daylight present.

My mistake. Thanks.

 

[Wattsisname]

Its terrible that this happened. I understand your question. Let's say the driver was not drunk, was not texting, was not tired at this 4AM time, was not otherwise distracted, was able to see firetruck lights and driver assist features were in use and the car would not let driver slow down or steer out of the way. The only conclusion is the car caused the accident.

If! If! If, If my aunt was a man she would be my uncle...If! If!
Going forward, let's change the rules of evidence at law to prioritising conjecture.

 

[zoomer0056]

I don't think there has been an occurrence where this has happened, a Cujo event.
Are you worried about that?

yeah . . . and lets say the driver was not distracted by a rabid Saint Bernard in their lap with his head hanging out the window . . .

The report says:

"California Highway Patrol Officer Adam Lane said it was not clear whether the driver may have been intoxicated or whether the Tesla Model S was operating with automation or driving assistance features."

Yup, driving intoxicated or distracted has the same risks as not being attentive when using driver assist. This is clearly the fault of the driver who was either drunk, high or just not paying attention.

 

[Big Dog]

yeah . . . and lets say the driver was not distracted by a rabid Saint Bernard in their lap with his head hanging out the window . . .

The report says:

"California Highway Patrol Officer Adam Lane said it was not clear whether the driver may have been intoxicated or whether the Tesla Model S was operating with automation or driving assistance features."

Yup, driving intoxicated or distracted has the same risks as not being attentive when using driver assist. This is clearly the fault of the driver who was either drunk, high or just not paying attention.

The report said no such thing. (It basically said they know nothing.). Hence my point earlier: at least Tesla's computers could definitely say whether any of the driving features were engaged and/or whether emergency-braking kicked in. (Note, emergency braking is not emergency stopping.)

 

[zoomer0056]

The report said no such thing. (It basically said they know nothing.). Hence my point earlier: at least Tesla's computers could definitely say whether any of the driving features were engaged and/or whether emergency-braking kicked in. (Note, emergency braking is not emergency stopping.)

That is a direct quote from the news article. Read it:

 

[Big Dog]

That is a direct quote from the news article. Read it:
View attachment 911334

Yeah, this requires critical reading skills. He said it was "not clear"...in other words they do not know (at the time of this report). (How could it be "clear" to CHP if driver assist was engaged? Only Tesla would know that.). What is so difficult to understand?

 

[Wattsisname]

That is a direct quote from the news article. Read it:
View attachment 911334

Yep! Totally unclear at this stage.
If only all that energy spent jumping to conclusions could be harnessed for some useful purpose....

Driving assist features may have been involved but for now the jury is not only not out, it has not even heard the evidence.

 

[2101Guy]

DETROIT (AP) — “U.S. investigators suspect that a Tesla was operating on an automated driving system when it crashed into a firetruck in California last month, killing the driver and critically injuring a passenger.

The Model S was among the nearly 363,000 vehicles Tesla recalled in February because of potential flaws in “Full Self-Driving” a more sophisticated partially automated driving system.”

 

[Wattsisname]

DETROIT (AP) — “U.S. investigators suspect that a Tesla was operating on an automated driving system when it crashed into a firetruck in California last month, killing the driver and critically injuring a passenger.

The Model S was among the nearly 363,000 vehicles Tesla recalled in February because of potential flaws in “Full Self-Driving” a more sophisticated partially automated driving system.”

Suspect? OK! Please keep us up to date with the process and eventual decision;
guilty or not. Until then it remains a suspicion.

Apparently, if Tesla announce that they need to download a software fix, it counts, in the USA as a recall. The term needs to be updated; it is misleading; 363, 000 cars were not physically recalled to have a fault repaired in a service centre. Also, a nice bit of sophistry here; tie the " recall" into the crash.
As the EV market grows, software fixes will become a regular occurrence and new terms will have to be created in place of the emotive "recall".
Once Ford and GMC have enough EV vehicles requiring a software fix, they will get behind the need for a less sensational term for an innocuous S/W fix.
In the meantime, joe public will have the image of 300k cars off the road. You have to wonder at the motivation of those who post these stats without qualifying what they really mean. Such statements must delight the legacy ICE makers.....for now.
I would have expected better from AP.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, one must have sympathy for the friends and families of the deceased whose grief is hardly going to be alleviated by the usual press sensationalism.

 

[Daveb25]

The problem with that article is it says the vehicle involved is part of the recall for full self driving. It also states it is a 2014 model S. Those two statements can’t both be true as there’s (virtually) no chance (unless someone retrofitted hw 3.0 on a non 2.0 car) that it could have FSD and need to be recalled.

 

[brkaus]

Very sad. Two people in the car and they could not see a bunch of flashing lights right in front of them and do something.