TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

V2V (Vehicle-to-Vehicle) Communication in FSD-Ready Teslas

Discussion in 'Model S: Driving Dynamics' started by amujtaba, Dec 14, 2016.

  1. amujtaba

    amujtaba Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Corona, CA
    As NHTSA pushes for implementation of V2V communication in new vehicle, what does this mean for the current Tesla's being marketed as hardware ready for FSD? Are any of those opting for full-FSD at purchase (as opposed to an upgrade later), concerned with this potential requirement being put in place? Can Tesla leverage existing hardware or easily upgrade current FSD-ready vehicles to comply with this requirement? I understand that a lot of this is speculative, and that even the communication protocols have not been defined yet, but am interested in seeing what others know about it, and the likely ability to incorporate it.
     
  2. bob_p

    bob_p Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,715
    This is a really, really good question.

    While Tesla believes the AP 2.0 hardware will be capable enough to achieve FSD, they have stated FSD is contingent upon passing validation testing (which Tesla is confident will happen) and in getting regulatory approval, which may require additional hardware.

    This is why Tesla should modify their FSD purchase option.

    Someone purchasing FSD with the car should be guaranteed that Tesla will make whatever hardware and software upgrades are required to allow FSD to be used in the car.

    For owners waiting to upgrade later, the upgrade price should not be guaranteed. Initially the upgrade price could be low (like it is listed on the order page today). But if Tesla finds additional hardware upgrades are needed, then the upgrade price should be increased to cover the cost of those retrofits.

    If V2V communication hardware is needed, then anyone ordering FSD now should get that for free. And anyone that waits to activate FSD should be expected to pay for that additional hardware.

    Getting regulatory approval to enable FSD - and resolving the liability issues (so that Tesla will not be held liable for any accidents while the car is operating in FSD mode) could require hardware changes - and Tesla really hasn't addressed that in how they are framing the FSD option on the order page.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. amujtaba

    amujtaba Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Corona, CA
    Bob, I agree with you. Since TM is stating that those who buy the FSD hardware now will have full-FSD, pending regulatory approval, all additional hardware and software development costs should be covered by TM.

    I am also curious if new Model S owners are being quoted a firm, non-adjustable upgrade price for FSD. Is there anything in your contract that defines what the upgrade cost will be for full-FSD if purchased / upgraded later?
     
  4. apacheguy

    apacheguy S Sig #255

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    4,558
    Location:
    So Cal
  5. amujtaba

    amujtaba Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Corona, CA
    FSD = Full-Self Driving
     
  6. Max*

    Max* Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    6,424
    Location:
    NoVa
    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

    Sorry, this brings me back to the empty promises for AP1. Hands free. On ramp to off ramp. Meets at the front door. etc. etc. etc.

    And you know what Tesla did? Nothing! They just released AP2.0.

    So you know what'll happen when they can't achieve FSD? They'll release AP3.0.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1
    • Disagree x 1
  7. amujtaba

    amujtaba Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Corona, CA
    That is indeed my fear. While I was able to predict that AP 2.0 would be launched when it was, as I'm sure others were as well, I was shocked with the full FSD claim. I don't think TM has factored in everything, and this could lead to lawsuits down the road. It was stated by several leading authorities that FSD vehicles will require back-up/redundant hardware to ensure safety--I don't see any of these in these cars, unless camera and ultrasonics are considered as such. I also don't see compliance to V2V or V2I communication, and lastly I do not understand how effective the cameras are in extremely bright (sun directly ahead) and dark (poor light) environments.
     

Share This Page