Zilla91
Active Member
Unreal you pay over £50k for something that’s now on par with a base spec supermini from a decade ago
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
[uk] UltraSonic Sensors removal/TV replacement performance
- Thread starter randompixel
- Start date
If people don’t kick up a fuss about it Tesla will do as they please.
I just want to know how functional the replacement will be, but there’s not even a peep about it so far which is a bit concerning.
If only Tesla had done a bit of Googling about the different regulatory regimes across the world before
JupiterMan
Active Member
As I recall it was always flagged as being subject to various things including regulatory approval, in fact it still is.
caveat emptor.
The implication is that their system becomes reliable enough to be approved. UK keeps promising to allow self-drive but understandably wants to see systems that can be trusted...
MrBadger
Badger out
The regulatory approval card can only be played if the system was of a satisfactory quality that it was capable of meeting/exceeding reasonable regulations. I see no evidence that it performs better than even the regulations require and thus its deficient in its operation rather than being blocked by any reasonable regulations.
You can't be a novice driver and drive on the roads without restriction until you have proven that you have a satisfactory level of ability. Whilst a novice driver might claim that they are being prevented from driving because of the regs, its not the regs that are the blocker, its the drivers ability. Exactly the same with Tesla. Autopilot in any form is not of sufficient quality to handle many situations right now, let alone be of the quality/scope needed to meet even Level 3 level of operation. I don't think level 3 or even level 4 on divided highways (ie motorways) would be too far off if Tesla chose to go that way, but they haven't. Their choice, not the regs.
JupiterMan
Active Member
which is exactly why the current small print also says "these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience"
Yes, the people who knowingly hand over thousands of pounds for a technology that has no prospect of being able to be used for the foreseeable future really ought to "empt". In the wonderful words of Harry Enfield - "I saw you coming"
MrBadger
Badger out
And exactly why it’s not regulations holding Tesla back. They haven’t even achieved the first 9 (march of the 9’s - % of deemed minimal safety objective) let along getting a full house.
JupiterMan
Active Member
correct.
they need the reliability before getting full certification without a driver/robotaxi.
However, in the meantime the UNECE regs over here do deny us even having the Beta.
MrBadger
Badger out
Which part of the regs? FSD city streets beta is basically Level 2 driver assist, the same level of driver assistance as what we have now, hands on wheel, positively confirm some actions such as stopping at traffic lights.
Any evidence that Tesla is even bothering to test FSD beta in official capacity? Where I use to work, we ran (and probably still do run) a Level 4 car in public facing scenarios in official testing. So it is possible if you cared to try.
Unconfirmed lane change and traffic control stop/start are the only bits I can think of. Easy to overcome, just confirm as per now, not ideal, but there is so much more to FSD city streets beta than anything that does an auto lane change. 95% of it is better than 0% that we get at present.
And from next year, nothing stopping level 3 on some roads - motorways etc. But it doesn't have the functionality and situation awareness to offer level 3 even if it was available right now - giving a clean handback to driver well ahead of encountering a situation that it cannot, or not allowed to handle.
The limit isn’t the problem, not slowing for bends is.
there is B road bend near me (my test track), which it will take at 60 on AP and complain, but it will take it at 55 without bother which realistically, it is what it should do. AP or FSD has no concept of slowing in our software
Do you not agree there should be a limit on cornering force or is it just the threshold?
Well, if SpaceX can exert 3g on an occupant, why not Tesla?
JupiterMan
Active Member
confirmation on lane changes, lane change abort, required gap to commence lane change, acceleration restrictions are others.
Yes there should, but current limit is way too low and would kick out on a roundabout let alone a sharpish corner at surrounding traffic speeds.
It should also not automatically disengage autopilot in such circumstances, that IMHO is frankly dangerous.
So what you are saying is the regulations requiring safety to be the primary factor in automation are preventing Tesla from releasing FSD in Europe - implying that Tesla cannot meet reasonable safety requirements? In which case, no-one in their right mind would pay for FSD in any event if Tesla cannot meet reasonable minimum standards. Unless of course they are happy to see US levels of death / serious injury on our vastly safer roads.
No, that is incorrect. The regulations are built to allow AutoSteer on motorways which have very wide corners. The limit is 3m/s^2, from this you can work out the maximum speed that can be used to take a corner.
The formula is a = v^2 /R where a is acceleration, v the speed, and R the radius of turn. So rearranging this to R = v2 /a
Lets assume you are driving at 15mph when taking a roundabout, 15mph = 6.7m/s. With a limit of 3 m/s^2 for acceleration R = (6.7)^2 / 3 = 14m
Here is a typical roundabout near me, not a mini roundabout but a proper roundabout with a little garden in the middle. As you can see from the measurement there is no way that you could keep on the carriageway at 15mph when using this roundabout.
and here is a miniroundabout
It is physically impossible to self-drive on these type of roads with the 3m/s^2 limit on Autosteer, the reality is that when we are driving ourselves, we pull at least 8 m/s^2 or much more.
Current regulations prevent FSD in the UK and EU.
LiamPope
Member
Why not just go slower then??? Who would take a small mini roundabout at 15 mph anyway?! I disagree humans are pulling '8 m/s^2 or much more' in normal driving - that's almost 1G!! That's about the maximum lateral acceleration a normal road car with standard tyres can achieve in good dry conditions! You generally need a performance car with sticky tyres to get over 1G lateral. Most normal driving manoeuvres will be somewhere less than 2 m/s^2, with 3 being on the limit of reasonable comfort. Hence 3 m/s is a perfectly reasonable limit for comfort and safety for autonomous driving. If that can't be achieved by an autonomous car it arguably isn't good enough!
Which is why I showed the larger roundabout, the normal flow of traffic is easily faster than 15mph. You can't just assume you would travel at increasingly tiny speeds to make your argument work.
15mph is not fast.
Similar threads
