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

AndreP

Member
Apr 22, 2021
170
139
United States
It's really an extension of the existing investigation into autopilot crashing into emergency vehicles

This is the first letter about the emergency light detection and some FSD Beta questions


And this is the second letter about any NDAs associated with FSD Beta enrolment



Some of the questions in the first letter are interesting. Question 3 is asking for an assessment of whether the changes from the emergency light detection update would have altered the outcome of the previous crashes being investigated.

Question 5 asks to see the agreement between Tesla and vehicle owners in terms of repairs, access to software, OTA updates, and compensation/goodwill available including when it comes to resolving lawsuits or arbitration. Reading between the lines, this almost feels tied to limiting FSD Beta access.
 
Last edited:

DaSwede

Member
Jul 8, 2020
51
107
UK
It's really an extension of the existing investigation into autopilot crashing into emergency vehicles

This is the first letter about the emergency light detection and some FSD Beta questions


And this is the second letter about any NDAs associated with FSD Beta enrolment



Some of the questions in the first letter are interesting
Thanks for the link to the letters, it validates my previous thoughts:

The letter is stating:
"As Tesla is aware, the Safety Act imposes an obligation on manufacturers of motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment to initiate a recall by notifying NHTSA when they determine vehicles
or equipment they produced contain defects related to motor vehicle safety or do not comply
with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard
. "

An improvement of current feature sets such as detection of emergency vehicles is in my opinion not:
a/ a mitigation to a defect
and not
b/ a non-compliance to applicable safety standards

The addition of a feature that could assist a responsible driver further than any other vehicle across all brands is not the same as a recall but rather an evolution of technology.
 

gearchruncher

Active Member
Sep 20, 2016
2,512
3,324
Seattle, WA
We all need to continue spreading the word that Tesla cars are currently Level 2, reporting full attention by the driver at all times....
It's a shame that to do that, we have to push against Tesla's own naming and videos on their autopilot pages. You can't both say "Full Self Driving" is "only a name" and then decide that the word needs to be spread that "Full Self Driving requires driver attention at all times." A simple name change by Tesla here would be massively effective on the safety side, but tragic on the marketing side.

It's really an extension of the existing investigation into autopilot crashing into emergency vehicles
Not quite:

In a separate order to Tesla, NHTSA says that the company may be taking steps to hinder the agency’s access to safety information by requiring drivers who are testing “Full Self-Driving” software to sign non-disclosure agreements.

The order demands that Tesla describe the non-disclosure agreements and say whether the company requires owners of vehicles with Autopilot to agree “to any terms that would prevent or discourage vehicle owners from sharing information about or discussing any aspect of Autopilot with any person other than Tesla.”

They are also starting a new thread asking Tesla about FSD, and how NDAs are blocking NHTSA from keeping an eye on it, and also asking how they pick their "beta" testers.
 
Last edited:

gearchruncher

Active Member
Sep 20, 2016
2,512
3,324
Seattle, WA
contain defects related to motor vehicle safety or do not comply
with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard
. "
There's an OR in there.
If the radio in the car suddenly starts playing a screeching tone at 100dB that can't be turned off, that can be a safety defect even if a radio is not required by FVMSS.

The question here is if "Autopilot" can be safely used by the population of Tesla drivers. If it can't, it poses a public safety risk. The investigation is clearly focused on determining if the rate of accidents on AP is much higher than when the car is driven manually. If it is, then it is important to look into it, because it's not actually a safety system at that point. You can't just claim something is a safety enhancement because it's "Designed to be one". It actually has to work, and work with real human drivers using it, not just perfect ones.
 

Products we're discussing on TMC...

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC