Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

The D thread Australia & New Zealand

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Last night I went to Bunnings and brought home a cardboard box to carry my stuff in.

This arvo I came home from work and noticed that my 10 year old daughter had turned it into a car:

IMG_0375.JPG


I tell ya... these 10 year olds... they notice everything!

I commend her choice in cars though.

(Bit worried if in the future she brings in a husband who is just like me though!)
 
Gudday Ztrekus,

If the guy can afford a P650D with twin overhead lasers in 20 years time he is probably a worth candidate as a son-in-law. Your daughter on the other hand has limited her possible choices to about 1% of the available population who work hard and smart to afford such a beast. All this pre-supposes that anyone will OWN a car in 20 years. There is a better than even chance that personal transport ownership will simply cease to exist as we know it today. You just ''call" a transporter and a autonomous vehicle will rock up and take you anywhere. Ive had many discussions over the years with several scientific friends of mine about a constant vehicle population model that assumes the above.
 
All of these parking issues MAY soon be solved if we get the full software implementation of self parking. Position near the spot - get out - let the car park itself. On return, summons the car out of the spot - get in - drive off.
 
All of these parking issues MAY soon be solved if we get the full software implementation of self parking. Position near the spot - get out - let the car park itself. On return, summons the car out of the spot - get in - drive off.


I have wondered a lot about that but my fear is that when the sensors say stop then the car will just give up. So it's either programming or the accuracy of the sensors that may present a difficulty in tight spots
 
Gudday Ztrekus,

If the guy can afford a P650D with twin overhead lasers in 20 years time he is probably a worth candidate as a son-in-law. Your daughter on the other hand has limited her possible choices to about 1% of the available population who work hard and smart to afford such a beast. All this pre-supposes that anyone will OWN a car in 20 years. There is a better than even chance that personal transport ownership will simply cease to exist as we know it today. You just ''call" a transporter and a autonomous vehicle will rock up and take you anywhere. Ive had many discussions over the years with several scientific friends of mine about a constant vehicle population model that assumes the above.
Sounds a bit like communism to me. Equality for all etc.
 
I have wondered a lot about that but my fear is that when the sensors say stop then the car will just give up. So it's either programming or the accuracy of the sensors that may present a difficulty in tight spots
I think the programming will likely not allow the car to go into the 'red' zone of the sensors so it either won't try to go in a tight parking space or will give up when things get too tight.
 
Gudday Paulp,
I very much doubt an equitable system is likely to evolve. The idea seems like a logical extension to the increasing car population worldwide and the fixed amount of real estate for roads.

As for Autopark- I would not expect to get a spot inside the red zone alarms. But the radar and sonar can evaluate the available shape well before it attempts to navigate in. Just the same it might be necessary to close ones eyes and say a little prayer to the god of navigation to not crunch my nice shiney new toy.:scared:

The real question as yet still unanswered is just how accurate the software is for autonomy- we humans problem solve some stuff very efficiently and adaption requires huge computational capacity as well as software with minimal 'bugs'. I grant you some humans dont problem solve to well- looking at some of the parking youtubes......
 
For all those interested in having to reverse into really tight spots, today I did a little experiment.

I drew two parallel chalk marks on the ground at the rear of the Tesla-from literally the outside of both the rear wheels - the inner part of the chalk mark literally touching the tyres. Here is a photo:


IMG_0379.JPG


I then jumped in the car and put it in reverse. I took a picture of the touch screen to see how aligned the auto parallel reverse parking lines were with the actual extremities of my car. Here is the photo:

IMG_0380.JPG


As you can see, the passenger side is the one that is the concern - being the blind spot to the driver. The computer white line IS WELL WITHIN the actual chalk mark. Which means that the outer boarder of the white line DOES NOT represent the outer boarder of the car! An allowance needs to be made!

Not so with the Driver's side lines - it is well outside the chalk mark.

So there is a slight calibration problem here - AT LEAST ON MY CAR. If this is standard, then all I can say is that for LHD cars, the conservative error benefits the blind spot, but NOT SO WITH THE AUSSIE CARS...

Anyway - the lesson I guess is not to rely on the parallel lines when the obstacle you are trying to avoid is JUST OUTSIDE of them - BECAUSE THE CAR ISN'T!!!


(Acknowledgment: I think Dborn has already made this point earlier - but I wanted photographic proof of it!)

UPDATE: I just noticed that the writing on the floor is laterally inverted - mirror image. Wonder why?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0378.JPG
    IMG_0378.JPG
    2.3 MB · Views: 267
  • IMG_0376.JPG
    IMG_0376.JPG
    2.5 MB · Views: 276
This may simply be a calibration issue. The amount of shift appears to be equal on the two sides. May be worth asking the boys if they can adjust.
I spoke to them about my windscreen wiper "knuckle" being visible from the drivers seat. Was told they all come that way, but they could easily adjust it for me if I wanted. I may well ask them to do it, because as it is, I think it is a design flaw.
 
Two things, ZTrekus- how far apart are the lines you've drawn from the lines projected? 2-3cm, at a guess?
secondly, I suspect the real width of the car is GREATER than the tyre width, so there could be a MUCH greater disparity between projected "safety" and the edge of the metalwork on the Tesla, esp. the mirrors, when you're navigating around walls, posts and poles etc rather than objects of tyre height.
 
Last edited:
The body of the car is much wider than the width of the outer edges of the tyres. Mine seem to be correctly aligned as I use them when parallel parking and I match the concrete line where the gutter joins the asphalt. I have my mirrors adjusted in reverse to show me the tyre edges. Ztrekus, have you adjusted your mirrors in reverse? Have you enabled the feature?
 
The body of the car is much wider than the width of the outer edges of the tyres. Mine seem to be correctly aligned as I use them when parallel parking and I match the concrete line where the gutter joins the asphalt. I have my mirrors adjusted in reverse to show me the tyre edges. Ztrekus, have you adjusted your mirrors in reverse? Have you enabled the feature?


Yes Dborn, I have and the tilted passenger side mirror is absolutely essential. On balance I don't think it is worth calibrating / centring the reversing lines since, as you say, the car is still wider than them...ie, back wheel arches.

The only practical solution is that side mirror really...

- - - Updated - - -

Two things, ZTrekus- how far apart are the lines you've drawn from the lines projected? 2-3cm, at a guess?
secondly, I suspect the real width of the car is GREATER than the tyre width, so there could be a MUCH greater disparity between projected "safety" and the edge of the metalwork on the Tesla, esp. the mirrors, when you're navigating around walls, posts and poles etc rather than objects of tyre height.


Yes doc, I agree... The bottom line is to just make allowances for all that. Wouldn't trade the car for the world though....


As the saying goes:

Got a new Tesla for the wife... Fair trade!
 
Yes Dborn, I have and the tilted passenger side mirror is absolutely essential. On balance I don't think it is worth calibrating / centring the reversing lines since, as you say, the car is still wider than them...ie, back wheel arches.

The only practical solution is that side mirror really...

- - - Updated - - -




Yes doc, I agree... The bottom line is to just make allowances for all that. Wouldn't trade the car for the world though....


As the saying goes:

Got a new Tesla for the wife... Fair trade!
great experiment ZTrekus. Are you absolutely certain that your steering wheel was dead straight? The lines seem to slightly curve in one direction, which would explain the calibration issue.
 
Gudday Ztrekus,
Well done. Good bit of logically analysis. A little irritated I didn't think of it myself....

The concept of the test is valid but part of the issue is that you have a visual image from the rear camera from a highly convex lens. The visual of the flat screen vs image distortion source plus the on screen line generation to simulate depth needs a little work as the errors are cumulative.

I will have a little shot on the weekend at reproducing your result on my beast and we can see if this is a standard offset issue or an individual vehicle calibration issue. My guess is that its in the visual line simulation software setup.