Tesla Supercharger network

[scaesare]

I agree, but what I don't get is how after all that planning they could post a new map with multiple errors and omissions. Either someone is very sloppy and should be fired, or they are testing to see how many owners react to the removal of what they consider to be "marginal" locations.

Fired? Really?

Tesla is moving fast. They are pushing on many fronts. They are acting with agility. They are undertaking an enormous challenge the likes of which has Never. Been. Attempted. They give every indication of caring about their customers and trying to do 'what's right' while balancing a significant number of other obligations.

When's the last time you've dealt with a company who's CEO accepts and answers email from individual customers and adjusts product plans accordingly? (I have one from Elon in my inbox where he did just that). When's the last time you've seen a CEO speak frankly in his blog as is the case with Tesla? When's the last time you've had a company say "We believe in our product so much we'll extend the warranty to accidental battery damage outside of our control"?

Now does that mean they are perfect? Obviously not. But they are working to avoid the slow behemoth-like movement that other major companies exhibit. I suspect in many cases we are hearing about some things almost real-time. Oh and by the way, little things like car fires and NHTSA investigations might be a bit of a distraction as well.

What does all this have to do with your post? You assume that the map omission was deliberate on the part of the supercharger team in to see if they could get away with a reduction of sites and our reaction, or such an egregious omission on the part of the web content management team, that somebody should be fired. I'll give you option #3: things are moving fast and furious within Tesla and there was a fumble between teams.

I've been in IT for nearly 25 years. If you think that it's unreasonable to EVER deploy the wrong file from source control, power up the wrong system, accidentally copy the wrong file, aim at the development DB rather than the production DB, etc... then you must be a fun guy to work with.

Should they learn from their mistakes? Yes. Can they improve on QC in communication? Sure. Does the web guy deserve to get fired for deploying the v2.01 version of the content instead of the v.2.02 that was checked in at 2am that morning? I hope not. Especially when we have a company responsive enough to answer the email within hours, and get a correction up shortly thereafter.

 

[JST]

I assume everyone at SpaceX should be fired, too. I mean, two launch delays? Haven't they been planning ANYTHING?

 

[Zythryn]

...

+1000!!

 

[JakeP]

Agree with Zythryn, JST and Scaesare...Tesla is doing an incredible job on a task that prior to a year ago, people accepted as fact to be utterly impossible, and the primary reason EVs could never succeed. Tesla is proving them utterly wrong, in an incredibly short timeframe. Do they have every possible route gap covered on the current plan? No. But I will wager they will cover those gaps in reality long before we expect. This coverage is already significantly better than we expected after the initial announcement, which was unbelievably optimistic at the time, to any casual observer. Lesson learned: If given the opportunity, do not bet against Elon Musk.

As for the map not being updated properly, people need to chill. Tesla's internal maps have a couple dozen status tracking stages (I caught a glimpse of one once), and I am sure that the missing dots just happened to be excluded because they selected a group of dots and certain ones failed to meet a certain readiness threshold. Tesla doesn't need to show all its cards just yet...they can underpromise and overdeliver, which is wise and prudent in this case.

 

[scaesare]

Instead I see poor planning. As you noted, the plan for SCs has to have come up at the same time they were designing the Model S. Since they knew (or should have known) that each state has it's own rules about licensing it should have been accounted for in the deployment plan.

There are things you know you know.
There are things you know you don't know.
There are things you don't know you don't know.

Not everything can be accounted for before it's been accomplished once. (see also: going to the moon)

Example: Jurisdiction 'X' in Podunk, provides you with an estimate permit lead time of 30 days. You allow for 60. Instead it takes 120.

What do you do, miss your target date? BZZT - Customers scream
Change the location? BZZT - Customers scream
Extort/bribe the county officials? BZZT- Jail time

And the excuse of Tesla being a new company just doesn't work

Maybe. But the bigger issue is "a project never before attempted". Can you reasonably anticipate a county planning commission's reaction to building a barn? Yes in probably almost all cases.

Can you reasonably account for their reaction to "some sort of big power station thingy they wanna put in the parking lot of the local Cracker Barrel"? Maybe not as much as they had hoped.

any one ever heard of PMP and/or INCOSE? Execute proceses from either organization and these items (amongst a whole bunch of others) would have been identified and accounted for early on.

LOL. Yes. I have PMP certified folks on my team. It works well for what it works well for. But to imply it removes these sorts of issues completely isn't grounded in reality, IMO..

(seems Peter beat me to the punch)

My sympathies.

 

[demetri]

@scaesare +infinity can't find symbol on iPad.

Tesla is doing an unbelievable job!!!! Can't expect 100% perfect execution from any company. But I believe the are truly trying their best.

 

[PeterK]

I assume everyone at SpaceX should be fired, too. I mean, two launch delays? Haven't they been planning ANYTHING?

You guys are quick to react yourselves, and you missed my follow up post. I have a lot of patience for the challenging and groundbreaking things Tesla is trying to do, and Elon is amazing in how he drives himself and leads by example. As a result I would expect him to hold his people to high standards and not tolerate sloppy work.

And unlike SpaceX, updating a map on a website isn't rocket science (sorry couldn't resist).

 

[Nathan Smith]

There are things you know you know.
There are things you know you know you don't know.
There are things you don't know you don't know.

Net everything can be accounted for before it's been accomplished once. (see also: going to the moon)

No disagreement here...

Example: Jurisdiction 'X' in Podunk, provides you with an estimate permit lead time of 30 days. You allow for 60. Instead it takes 120.

What do you do, miss your target date? BZZT - Customers scream
Change the location? BZZT - Customers scream
Extort/bribe the county officials? BZZT- Jail time

Or more appropriately at 30 days and still no permit, tell customer the likelyhood of missing the stated date for said location has grown significantly and we are implementing our contingency plan (if appropriate and the risk wasn't just assumed). Result, customer unhappy -- but not necessarly mad (they have a chance to adjust thier own plans).

Maybe. But the bigger issue is "a project never before attempted". Can you reasonably anticipate a county planning commission's reaction to building a barn? Yes in probably almost all cases.

Can you reasonably account for their reaction to "some sort of big power station thingy they wanna put in the parking lot of the local Cracker Barrel"? Maybe not as much as they had hoped.

The communities may have different ways to get to the end goal, but the end goal is pretty much the same. How is it going to affect me/my community, what are the safety risk, how is it going to look, is it going to create a lot more noise, etc. Come prepared to address these concerns and your 90% there. The Macedonia, Ohio example everyone is pointing to is a prime example of that. So why does everyone think is is SOOO new? It's basically a parking lot with power outlets. In fact during the Macedonia discussion (about 22:50) he mentions that the transformer is a run of the mills 500KVH setup (and that eliminated those concern from the group). So what questions were brought up during said meeting? I saw safety twice (12:58 & 15:56 or there abouts), Landscaping (around 19) and appearance (around 22 -- make box look like the rest of the building which are brick, not wood). Pretty standard stuff, still not seeing this being hard. BTW: Tesla rep did a pretty good job addressing the issues, just wish he had atleast come in with a tie (rule of thumb, dress as well if not better than the person you are briefing -- in this case the major).

 

[scaesare]

If true...and I m hopeful that it is...then we should all start driving our Teslas to all the places that we want Superchargers. I'm actually hopeful that Tesla will roll out a second wave of non-supercharger sites (less expensive HPWCs) located strategically at hotels, shopping centers and valet supported medium-term parking area to fill in holes in the national network. While not as fast as Superchargers, these enable road trips that are simply not possible without them.

We could flat-bed them around to places with no charging infrastructure just to give Tesla some data to chew on!


Your point about HPWC's is a good one. I bleive that Tesla has a program to give a second HPWC for free to any hotel that purchases one... I wonder how that's shaping up?

 

[Cottonwood]

Your point about HPWC's is a good one. I bleive that Tesla has a program to give a second HPWC for free to any hotel that purchases one... I wonder how that's shaping up?

They do, but I think that it is too small an incentive. The install cost can easily equal or exceed the cost of an HPWC. Tesla should give HPWC's to hotels and other public establishments if they pay the install cost. This could easily be handled with a 100% rebate or the such with verified installation.

 

[scaesare]

Or more appropriately at 30 days and still no permit, tell customer the likelyhood of missing the stated date for said location has grown significantly and we are implementing our contingency plan (if appropriate and the risk wasn't just assumed). Result, customer unhappy -- but not necessarly mad ...

But that's what Tesla has done. A number of dots that were planned-for sites on the map (the gray dots) have been removed... perhaps due to logistical reasons.


People here are pissed off. To paraphrase one poster: "Tesla has said 'to hell with us'". Others are calling for firings...


Here's the other option: Tesla does all of this anyway behind closed doors, and never shares it's interim planning and progress along the way, and only announces once complete.


It will still take just as long. They will still have to readjust when *&^# happens. They will still update things as they gather more experience and data. They won't have to put up with the attitude of folks on TMC who don't realize that this is a pioneering effort that will have some speed bumps. And we will all get to be in the dark and have little opportunity to provide constructive guiding feedback.


Incidentally, that's is how all the other car companies do most things. I don't know about you, but I'd rather be part of the process (even if it's just the opportunity to observe), and have a company that's willing to be quick on it's feet and work with it's customers.

 

[PeterK]

You guys are not getting me. I understand and appreciate they're working hard. All I criticized was how they could go through the effort of re planning and publishing new maps and then immediately say "oops that was a mistake" when asked about multiple changed/missing dots.

On top of that, those of us in cold New England aren't pleased that two of our few locations disappeared in the refresh I hope those were errors as well. I just completed a Thanksgiving trip about a mile or so past zero remaining after hitting snow and traffic delays that reduced my L2 charging time window. A trip that would have been a breeze with the "Fall 2013" charger in southern New Hampshire, that now doesn't appear even in 2015, or the "Winter 2013" charger that's now 2014.

 

[scaesare]

You guys are not getting me. I understand and appreciate they're working hard. All I criticized was how they could go through the effort of re planning and publishing new maps and then immediately say "oops that was a mistake" when asked about multiple changed/missing dots.

How so?

I explicitly addressed this in POST 2442.

As a matter of fact I specifically quoted just that portion of your earlier post.

 

[SFOTurtle]

While delays are a big part of what I am addressing - so to is thier identying of sites. Delays happen, but they shouldn't be happening due to something you have control over. You don't have control over how long a permit takes, but you do have control over when you start working to get it. As mentioned earlier, we all speculate that Tesla knew the requirement for acquiring permits 2-3 years ago (as soon as they decided they wanted a nation-wide netowork). Which means they should have known it would be in the crtical path for deployment. Given the risk of local communities dragging thier feet, the appropriate mitigation is to START EARLY. Like as soon as you know the requirement exist, early. Sure - you might only know the design goals of the car these chargers will be supporting, and the full design of the SC might not be quite there yet, and they may have lacked the captial to build out at the present pace -- but they did have enough info to create a plan/schedule and begin working permits. If they had done that, we wouldn't be here talking about this now.

Whatever you say, Armchair! The only thing you've pointed to so far are delays and the fact that one Tesla employee showed up at a city council meeting not wearing a tie. I actually agree with you on the last point -- maintaining a professional appearance when facing these entities is important. But your underlying assumption is that Tesla should have had all of these Superchargers rolled out and operational already. Why? Why is Tesla's business judgment to not devote all of its valuable resources to having the Superchargers operational even more there are cars on the road to use them with frequency not a reasonable, rational approach? What does Tesla need to make a public statement every time there is some delay in rollout? That is absurd.

 

[Nathan Smith]

Scaesare,

1st off, have to say I appreciate the thoughtful discourse going on here - it's nice to have a discussion without worrying about people *@#! on you cause you are voicing a different opinion.

Now that said :smile:, the reason Tesla really doesn't have the right (maybe the wrong way to say it, but I hope to get my meaning) to go behind closed doors is because we all are, in effect, providing them a loan. We gave them money, they promised us a future feature - access to Super Chargers that will make long distance travel possible. Since we invested money in that effort, it would be responsible of Tesla to show how that effort is proceeding.

Now, the "Tesla is saying to hell with us" statement I believe is a bit out of context. My interpretation of said statement is;

Tesla charged a flat fee to buy into the Super Charger game - yet my money is being valued less than someone elses. People in CA are enjoying the benefits of promised feature now, and locations that would have allowed me to enjoy it were removed. And to make matters worse, Telsa's priority seems to be about a publicity stunt - rather than fulfilling thier promise to people who have already given them thier money. BTW: aren't they having trouble keeping up with demand anyways???

Now, I'm on the fence with this sentement (I personnally haven't seen an SC) as I didn't expect to see one useful for me any time soon.

(wow, 2 post from the time I started this post till the time I finished it -- got to qet quicker at this, I suppose)

 

[markb1]

IMHO, Ontario was a bad location to begin with. Glad the 395 superchargers are back though!

I would like a supercharger somewhere between San Diego and Barstow. The 15/10 interchange seemed like a good location, since it serves two routes, and there's a big mall right there. But perhaps that location would get overrun with locals?

 

[SFOTurtle]

Or more appropriately at 30 days and still no permit, tell customer the likelyhood of missing the stated date for said location has grown significantly and we are implementing our contingency plan (if appropriate and the risk wasn't just assumed). Result, customer unhappy -- but not necessarly mad (they have a chance to adjust thier own plans).

Sorry, but I don't think Tesla needs to or should make a public statement every time a utility or city council takes an action that delays the rollout of any particular Supercharger. The Supercharger map was always subject to change, and will be. The Company has enough challenges to deal with on a daily basis, and issuing real-time updates on the status of every Supercharger rollout is just not something a public company should be doing. Write to Tesla if you want an update on a particular station. Otherwise, take a step back and appreciate how far and fast we've come given the resources and priorities the Company has in front of it.

- - - Updated - - -

Scaesare,

1st off, have to say I appreciate the thoughtful discourse going on here - it's nice to have a discussion without worrying about people *@#! on you cause you are voicing a different opinion.

Now that said :smile:, the reason Tesla really doesn't have the right (maybe the wrong way to say it, but I hope to get my meaning) to go behind closed doors is because we all are, in effect, providing them a loan. We gave them money, they promised us a future feature - access to Super Chargers that will make long distance travel possible. Since we invested money in that effort, it would be responsible of Tesla to show how that effort is proceeding.

Now, the "Tesla is saying to hell with us" statement I believe is a bit out of context. My interpretation of said statement is;

Tesla charged a flat fee to buy into the Super Charger game - yet my money is being valued less than someone elses. People in CA are enjoying the benefits of promised feature now, and locations that would have allowed me to enjoy it were removed. And to make matters worse, Telsa's priority seems to be about a publicity stunt - rather than fulfilling thier promise to people who have already given them thier money. BTW: aren't they having trouble keeping up with demand anyways???

Now, I'm on the fence with this sentement (I personnally haven't seen an SC) as I didn't expect to see one useful for me any time soon.

(wow, 2 post from the time I started this post till the time I finished it -- got to qet quicker at this, I suppose)

Tesla has been providing updates on the progess of the rollout. There have literally been thousands of posts over the past 6-9 months on that progress. But as I stated in another post, Tesla should not be in the business of providing real-time updates on every single Supercharger project in America. Tesla has, however, been incredibly responsive in responding to written inquiries on whether certain Superchargers that had been identified in its map were still in the long-term plans. I don't think Tesla should have to tell us the exact status of where each of those projects is, and what hurdles have yet to be cleared.

 

[brianman]

Extort/bribe the county officials? BZZT- Jail time

There is a better way to manage such expectations. Instead of listing "ready for use" times, list "construction complete" times with a gigantic asterisk "expect N weeks for paperwork, certification, etc. between construction complete and ready-for-use".

- - - Updated - - -

You guys are quick to react yourselves, and you missed my follow up post. I have a lot of patience for the challenging and groundbreaking things Tesla is trying to do, and Elon is amazing in how he drives himself and leads by example. As a result I would expect him to hold his people to high standards and not tolerate sloppy work.

And unlike SpaceX, updating a map on a website isn't rocket science (sorry couldn't resist).

Indeed. Your response to my post clarified well. I agree that website updating shouldn't be hard, but I still disagree (I think) that firing is a bit extreme for a hiccup unless it directly costs significant money (like a script typo that takes down Amazon for a week).

- - - Updated - - -

the fact that one Tesla employee showed up at a city council meeting not wearing a tie. I actually agree with you on the last point -- maintaining a professional appearance when facing these entities is important.

I don't think showing up tie-less is an "unprofessional" appearance. If so, every tech show on the planet would have a lot of key note speakers with unprofessional appearances. Times change; it's not the madmen era anymore.

But tactically, yes it's a good idea to wear the tie (rarely hurts and can sometimes help).

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, but I don't think Tesla needs to or should make a public statement every time a utility or city council takes an action that delays the rollout of any particular Supercharger.

Very very very bad idea. This will just rub them wrong, just like the NHTSA was rubbed wrong on the 5.4 thing and the "best" thing and the ...

But the spirit of what you're saying I think is a great idea. Here's what I would love to see:
1. Keep the existing "theory maps" but provide a link to an interactive "live map".
2. On the live map, list all the stations that exist -- meaning there is at least some Tesla hardware physically installed.
3. For each entry in #2, make them clickable with the target taking you to station information. Address, some pictures, contact information if appropriate, maybe nearby points of interest (like ADK's site), etc.
4. For each entry in #2, on the clickable target page list the status, an ETA (that might be a huge swag and have padding in it), and the latest information. That latest information should have stuff like "breaking ground starts Monday, <date>" or "some components installed" or "everything installed, but no power connected" or "installation complete, powered, waiting for permitting" or such.

If they did these things then it would address a lot of what people are complaining about. Not all of it, but some of it.

Of course, it would be yet another "My Tesla" page status hassles potentially if it was stale, wrong, and useless for many. But that's an execution issue not a design/plan issue.

Edit:
Also, another thought that struck me: They could just provide a station-specific link to the construction company at each "in progress" supercharger and make it part of the contract that updates should be provided on installation and permitting status. That distributes the load (and blame) to the construction company (which might make it difficult to get them to sign though).

 

[PeterK]

How so?

I explicitly addressed this in POST 2442.

As a matter of fact I specifically quoted just that portion of your earlier post.

Yes , but that was after I had already responded to Brianman admitting that my statement about firing was an exaggeration for drama and brevity (e.g. instead of typing "should be reprimanded or have his/her performance rating downgraded" or the like).

The people doing the map likely aren't also dealing with the NHTSA, negotiating with local authorities etc. They could best help the cause and their struggling colleagues by ensuring their work is error-free or as close to it as possible. If nothing else, that would reduce the number of emails and calls that their Ownership colleagues have to deal with. But enough on this already.

 

[Zythryn]

...
Tesla charged a flat fee to buy into the Super Charger game - yet my money is being valued less than someone elses. People in CA are enjoying the benefits of promised feature now, and locations that would have allowed me to enjoy it were removed. ...

Are they really?

Just how many Model S cars are there in the northeast?
I believe California has about half the sales so far? So I am guessing that they are actually the ones who's money is being valued less IF you want to look at it that way.