And? Are we going for least common denominator?
.
No it doesn’t. A standard handle with Auto Unlock which crash detected is all you need. You can break glass maybe but you still can’t open the door.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
[UPDATED] 2 die in Tesla crash - NHTSA reports driver seat occupied
- Thread starter diplomat33
- Start date
.
No it doesn’t. A standard handle with Auto Unlock which crash detected is all you need. You can break glass maybe but you still can’t open the door.
Needsdecaf
Active Member
Jeez, it's almost as if I'd been saying this for a week.
Needsdecaf
Active Member
It was reported by the Harris County Constable, who was not the first responder as was previously discussed.
This post is purely speculation so take it for what it is (my guess)...
I'm only sharing this because I'm a software developer and this is how I might design the system.
Video:
We already know the MCU saves video from all cameras for the last X amount of time: for the Model 3, it's 10 minutes. This is likely cached (rolling cache that is overwritten over time) on the SD card inside the MCU so that when you press the dashcam button and save the footage, it copies the cached internal footage to the external SD card.
Driving Data:
We also know that driving data such as throttle position, steering angle, brake usage, speed, GPS location, seatbelt status, and even stuff down to the weight on each seat is recorded. We know that driving data is sent to the Tesla server(s) at least periodically or perhaps, real-time. If I were designing the system, I would have this data sent either real time or at periodic intervals (say every 10 seconds) because no video and just sending important parameters would result in a relatively small upload. While lots of small uploads from lots of cars would add up data-wise, the data could be very valuable to the company.
Crash Data:
When a crash is detected, if the 12v system is still alive, they likely send more detailed information to the server including video from the cameras. This is the part that may be missing if the system lost the ability to upload after the crash: but they may still have the real-time data from before the crash. This might explain why Elon said "so far" and how they can have some data but not all of it (at least yet): because the cached data that would have been stored in the MCU but not yet uploaded cannot be recovered. They may still have some of the smaller non-video periodic or real-time data from just before the crash.
My view on the seatbelts being unbuckled is this. If they were found unbuckled, I see two possibilities. Either they were never buckled or they were buckled and then unbuckled after the crash. If they were never buckled, that rules out AP. If they were buckled and then unbuckled after the crash, it means at least one of the people in the car was conscious to be able to unbuckle them: and if neither got out, it increases the likelihood that one of them was looking for a way out and ended up in the back seat in doing so.
Mike
I'm only sharing this because I'm a software developer and this is how I might design the system.
Video:
We already know the MCU saves video from all cameras for the last X amount of time: for the Model 3, it's 10 minutes. This is likely cached (rolling cache that is overwritten over time) on the SD card inside the MCU so that when you press the dashcam button and save the footage, it copies the cached internal footage to the external SD card.
Driving Data:
We also know that driving data such as throttle position, steering angle, brake usage, speed, GPS location, seatbelt status, and even stuff down to the weight on each seat is recorded. We know that driving data is sent to the Tesla server(s) at least periodically or perhaps, real-time. If I were designing the system, I would have this data sent either real time or at periodic intervals (say every 10 seconds) because no video and just sending important parameters would result in a relatively small upload. While lots of small uploads from lots of cars would add up data-wise, the data could be very valuable to the company.
Crash Data:
When a crash is detected, if the 12v system is still alive, they likely send more detailed information to the server including video from the cameras. This is the part that may be missing if the system lost the ability to upload after the crash: but they may still have the real-time data from before the crash. This might explain why Elon said "so far" and how they can have some data but not all of it (at least yet): because the cached data that would have been stored in the MCU but not yet uploaded cannot be recovered. They may still have some of the smaller non-video periodic or real-time data from just before the crash.
My view on the seatbelts being unbuckled is this. If they were found unbuckled, I see two possibilities. Either they were never buckled or they were buckled and then unbuckled after the crash. If they were never buckled, that rules out AP. If they were buckled and then unbuckled after the crash, it means at least one of the people in the car was conscious to be able to unbuckle them: and if neither got out, it increases the likelihood that one of them was looking for a way out and ended up in the back seat in doing so.
Mike
Needsdecaf
Active Member
Electrek goes on to say that Autopilot was involved because TACC is an "Autopilot feature". Hmm.
Well, TACC and Autosteer are the two features that are included in basic Autopilot so.....
Although those (basically smart cruise control and staying in lane) aren’t the particular features the media and public associate with autopilot.
In my mind the public, who has little or no knowledge of how a Tesla operates or Tesla’s Autopilot really — outside of news stories reporting cars crashing on AP into stalled or stopped vehicles on the road and cars driving on the highway with sleeping drivers — thinks of it as not detecting stationary objects and confuses Navigation on Autopilot and FSD travel in general with the term Autopilot.
I have to wonder if after years of the press constantly stating in every article basically that Elon/Tesla have made the point that AP and beta FSD have never been intended to replace a driver’s attention to the road and that it is required, if the public isn’t aware of this by now. If you own a Tesla you know this already. Tesla’s Autopilot does not equal driverless driving. Seemingly every news story also continues to mention one if not all 3 of the most publicized fatal accidents (2 in Florida both involving a semi trailer and the 1 in Calif. crashing into a highway barrier). While there’s a slim chance John Q. Public may have missed all of these news stories in their lifetime, if they ever were to actually shop and buy one of the cars they would know at the time of ownership. Isn’t that the crucial point — that the actual drivers of the cars know the capabilities and restrictions of the hardware/software?
Since actual owners know what Autopilot means and does and doesn’t do, I think the naming of it is not the huge issue made out to be. Not like Non-owners are driving the cars.
This is factually untrue. At least 10 non-owners have driven my Teslas without me in it. Teslas get rented (Enterprise rents them and so do owners on Turo). Teslas get driven by 16 year olds loaned to them by their parents. Drivers do not have to be owners. It's just a car, and I can't imagine you'd say "Nissans only get driven by owners."
Last edited:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Yes - who else would drive them ?
Pick apart the semantics of what was said but you know what was meant and any driver who gets in an unfamiliar car, especially one these days with new tech, is responsible for understanding how it works. That’s why loaner cars and rentals have the manuals in them and why Tesla has the manual available through the screen and why new to Tesla owners are to watch the basic videos and read through the manual. When I had my Avalon into the dealership a few years back and they gave me a loaner I was unfamiliar with I sat with the manual to check out some of the newer features and how they worked and how to access them. Cars these days with different driver assist systems and how they get activated pretty much demand that attention.
Not very responsible to let people drive your car without being educated on it’s functions and certainly would expect any parent letting their young driver operate theirs would make sure they knew how to operate it safely. Cars today simply aren’t like the cars of the past where driving one is like driving another. Non-EV owners have a learning curve just with adjusting to regen. With onscreen controls for most functions it gets even more complicated.
In a perfect world yes. Your mileage may vary but we've rented cars in Florida, Kingston, and Calgary that didn't have any manuals. Made it tricky for a first-time Prius rental. There was a manual in the Dublin car thankfully to find the silly Nissan Qashqai reversing ring.
The sheer number of differences nowadays makes it so difficult to just hop in another car and find simple controls that used to be just in front of you. As you say having them onscreen adds more complications - but at least they are in one place. Or several (Mercedes EQS, Audi Q8...)
One night I asked one lady at the stoplight beside me to turn on her lights as the car was completely black. She said "It's not my car, I don't know how", and drove off. Well, that's ok then.
FSD Beta is the only instance I know of that you have to accept a disclaimer to drive (and I hope Beta drivers don't give that version to anyone else without supervision). Otherwise most other cars should not actively try to kill you with their technology, so long as you have your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road you should be ok. Pull over and stop if you need to look something up.
I have never once found the manual for a rental car in the vehicle anywhere, and Tesla has never made me watch a video when they gave me a Model S loaner when my Model 3 was in for service, nor did they show me this video when I bought any of my 4 Teslas. When I got my first Tesla the manual wasn't even up to date on the SW in the car for about a year.
Can you show me the Tesla training video that explains the limits of Autopilot? Even Tesla doesn't make you accept the AP disclaimer every drive- so once one spouse accepts it, the other spouse never sees it nor any future operator.
Iain
Member
I love my spouse. I showed her all about the autopilot before letting her drive the car. I take responsibility since I own the car and think it’s pretty stupid to expect others not to do the same. That’s just my opinion mileage may vary.
Electrek goes on to say that Autopilot was involved because TACC is an "Autopilot feature". Hmm.
TACC + Autosteer = Autopilot
TACC on its own ≠ Autopilot
So, if one wants to call TACC an “Autopilot feature”, I guess they can. (Although I wouldn’t, since adaptive cruise control is a common stand-alone feature.)
But to say TACC is Autopilot, or to say that anytime someone uses TACC that “Autopilot is involved” (which is what Electrek said), I think that’s just plain false.
(BTW, the Electrek article still hasn't been updated, surprisingly.)
Last edited:
CyberGus
Not Just a Member
I had a very different experience on my first Tesla drive.
teslamotorsclub.com
How it all started - What turned you on to EV's?
I was working a nothing assignment around 2001, basically cost plus contract and they needed a body to charge against. (I left within 2 months) Being young in the '70's gas crisis, I had laid awake in bed as a boy thinking of a way to separate the H2 and the O in water to run a car, that would...
teslamotorsclub.com
I'm guessing from your signature that you drive a LOT of rental, loaner, and airport cars.
Do you read the manual before operating each and every one?
Would you fly a Cessna 172 with a Garmin 530 before reading the full 288 page manual for just that GPS unit?
As a pilot, you know the FAA does tons of human factors research and won't certify an airplane that requires extraordinary pilot reaction time or skill to operate. You can't just say "it says so in the manual, so it's your liability." Airplanes are full of failsafes and human protections. Why don't we hold automotive "autopilots" to the same standard?
Last edited:
Soda Popinski
Member
For what it's worth, all modern cars have collapsible steering columns, which act as "crumple zones" in a crash. So someone hitting that in addition to an airbag might still be capable of moving around the cabin under adrenaline. For all we know, he could have been a big yoga fanatic and had no problem squeezing around the cabin.
Soda Popinski
Member
Pretty sure everyone agrees cars bursting into flames is a bad thing. It's just hard to sustain 1000+ posts of everyone agreeing.
Iain
Member
I do drive a lot of rental cars, airport cars etc. granted non are Tesla’s but for arguments sake if I got into a Ford Mach E I would be familiar with any of its auto driving tech before I ever attempted to operate it. As far as the FAA goes I’ll tell you something you may already know. If you are unfortunate enough to have an incident and the FAA investigates you you will be asked and held accountable to everything in the aircraft manual and your operations manual. It would be nice to have the same fail safes and redundant systems aircrafts have but it’s not remotely possible. We are highly trained and certified, prior to operating those systems and driving would be prohibitively expensive.
I'm pretty sure if I was conscious at all and the car was on fire, I'd find a way to fit in the glovebox if I thought it'd save my life. There's no question that a fear-driven driver could make it to the back seat if they had to, even with some injuries.
Mike
Apparently the Y dose. Just watched a video on how to dissemble my car, add key chain loops and reassemble to make it take less cumbersome to take apart in the future.
The rear seats don't have the handy window breaking pull switch that the front doors have (and I've covered up to help protect my windows. )
Similar threads
