WARNING: I rear-ended someone today while using Auto Pilot in my brand new P90D!

[peteyswift]

I'm sorry if I haven't read the other threads on this but it doesn't sound like the OP was doing anything wreckless. Seems like he trusted AP/TACC to slow to a stop at a reasonable distance from the car in front. So, in real time: trust, trust, trust, oh sh*t, brake, too late!

It's not that I'm blaming Tesla either. I get that it's beta and the driver is ultimately responsible, especially from behind. But I empathize with OP because I can see how this happened; have had a couple similar incidents where I was just more timid with it and broke earlier.

 

[RDoc]

I've had a couple of close calls similar to this. The car started slowing down, but too gradually to stop, then I hit the brake at the same time the collision warning came on and the car stopped safely. All was well in the end, but it was clearly a TACC error.

I must say though, that since a couple of updates ago, I haven't seen this happen, but still don't trust it and am always watching it warily.

 

[gizmoboy]

That's a lot of distrust towards AP.

I presume you can safely insert the word "blindly" in front of the word trust everywhere he wrote it and still make the point he's making in a way more palatable to you.

 

[asudan]

My question - as others have stated - is why didn't the collision avoidance / emergency braking system step in? I've used AP in stop and go traffic almost every day since I bought the car and it absolutely comes to a complete stop if the car in front of me does, maintaining distance the entire time.

This sounds like a failure of at least 2 systems. First would be the TACC/AP and then second would be the emergency braking system. I don't think it's fair to beat OP up about his driving habits and failure to maintain control of the car. When you drive with AP/TACC as much as I do you do start to trust the car. Maybe I'll be bit someday as well.

My money is still on a system failure - still the fault of the driver - but a system failure none the less. I bet get gets a new nosecone from Tesla in exchange for them to look at the car in depth.

 

[mrElbe]

Yes, the emergency collision warning should have sounded and then kicked in. Was it turned off? What was the ground clearance of the vehicle ahead? By the off chance, did the radar unit look under the car ahead and assumed all clear? That radar unit is quite low to the ground.

 

[Super_Popular]

fix the pic, my neck hurts.

 

[notAmeenPerson]

If you had responded to the situation as any driver would have, you should have stopped on time. You trusted AP until it was too late, and that is a mistaken judgment call on your part. You should not have to trust AP. If you feel like you need to start braking in a given situation, then do it. Don't wait for AP to do it. You are NEVER supposed to trust AP, that is just wrong. You are supposed to be in control of the vehicle at all times, which means you DO NOT trust AP. Ever.

No. That's too convenient of an answer. And there's no need to use absolutes in saying any and every driver would have performed in a manner to avoid a crash. When a person, who may not be as technical or supremely aware as you, uses autopilot features with AEB they're going to make a set of assumptions. They're assuming that there's a certain degree of assured competency in dealing with certain use cases like a car slowing at a reasonable pace in front.

If the situation was almost exactly like OP described then this incident would fall under the reasonable assumption that at minimum AEB would have sounded and at least started the braking, if not bringing the car to a complete stop. The language you're using would leave someone to believe this was a fluke. Your language almost implies that one should disable autopilot and AEB because it can't fill the reasonable assumption of stopping short of a moderately slowing car.

If someone has time to react when after noticing something is clearly wrong they should. However it's not okay to pull out the pitchfork on OP just because he had a legitimate accident in AP mode.

- - - Updated - - -

fix the pic, my neck hurts.

In chrome you can right click to open an image in a new tab. It fixes the orientation.

 

[tinm]

I've been expecting these kinds of mishaps with AP. My car isn't AP-capable, but me personally, even if it was, I wouldn't drive with it, definitely not in traffic. I don't believe AP is anywhere near ready for real-world situations, and I have been unhappy with the company pushing this stuff (and Elon's "in 2 years, you can Summon your car in NY while you're in LA") because the chances of failure are very high.

We're going to see more and more mishaps like this, people trusting AP when, in my opinion, they need to be even MORE on guard and skeptical and alert whenever AP's enabled. One simply cannot trust the technology now, maybe not for a long time, if ever. Some things I am glad to be an early adopter of. AP is not one of them.

I also still fully expect state laws to quickly change over the next 12 months as more and more AP mishaps happen, especially when serious AP mishaps happen. I worry what this will do to the stock. I wish Tesla could've stayed focused on battery improvements and execution and scaling S and X, instead of all this AP stuff.

I know I'm not in the majority with these views. Oh well.

 

[JST]

I've been expecting these kinds of mishaps with AP. My car isn't AP-capable, but me personally, even if it was, I wouldn't drive with it, definitely not in traffic. I don't believe AP is anywhere near ready for real-world situations, and I have been unhappy with the company pushing this stuff (and Elon's "in 2 years, you can Summon your car in NY while you're in LA") because the chances of failure are very high.

We're going to see more and more mishaps like this, people trusting AP when, in my opinion, they need to be even MORE on guard and skeptical and alert whenever AP's enabled. One simply cannot trust the technology now, maybe not for a long time, if ever. Some things I am glad to be an early adopter of. AP is not one of them.

I also still fully expect state laws to quickly change over the next 12 months as more and more AP mishaps happen, especially when serious AP mishaps happen. I worry what this will do to the stock. I wish Tesla could've stayed focused on battery improvements and execution and scaling S and X, instead of all this AP stuff.

I know I'm not in the majority with these views. Oh well.

It is insane to me that there is not a FMVSS on autonomous driving capability. I just don't understand, given the minutiae that NHTSA regulates, why this isn't an area of extreme interest and concern.

 

[green1]

It is insane to me that there is not a FMVSS on autonomous driving capability. I just don't understand, given the minutiae that NHTSA regulates, why this isn't an area of extreme interest and concern.

Maybe because nobody has released a car to the public that has autonomous driving capability yet?

- - - Updated - - -

No. That's too convenient of an answer. And there's no need to use absolutes in saying any and every driver would have performed in a manner to avoid a crash. When a person, who may not be as technical or supremely aware as you, uses autopilot features with AEB they're going to make a set of assumptions. They're assuming that there's a certain degree of assured competency in dealing with certain use cases like a car slowing at a reasonable pace in front.

Do you believe he would have crashed had he been in a pre-autopilot car? If yes, then I suppose we could say that he couldn't have avoided it. But the AP makes no difference in this. the AP wasn't driving, he was. AP doesn't drive, it merely assists.

If someone has time to react when after noticing something is clearly wrong they should.

If someone does not leave themselves enough time to react, they are a dangerous driver. This is simple. He's driving, he failed to brake for the vehicle ahead, he hit them. AP is 100% irrelevant here, he's scapegoating "I couldn't have avoided it" is rubbish, he clearly states there was plenty of time to avoid it, but then blames the AP for not doing so, it's not the AP's job to do so, it's his.

 

[interware.ch]

I've been expecting these kinds of mishaps with AP. My car isn't AP-capable, but me personally, even if it was, I wouldn't drive with it, definitely not in traffic. I don't believe AP is anywhere near ready for real-world situations, and I have been unhappy with the company pushing this stuff (and Elon's "in 2 years, you can Summon your car in NY while you're in LA") because the chances of failure are very high.

We're going to see more and more mishaps like this, people trusting AP when, in my opinion, they need to be even MORE on guard and skeptical and alert whenever AP's enabled. One simply cannot trust the technology now, maybe not for a long time, if ever. Some things I am glad to be an early adopter of. AP is not one of them.

I also still fully expect state laws to quickly change over the next 12 months as more and more AP mishaps happen, especially when serious AP mishaps happen. I worry what this will do to the stock. I wish Tesla could've stayed focused on battery improvements and execution and scaling S and X, instead of all this AP stuff.

I know I'm not in the majority with these views. Oh well.

I'm fully with you on the AP thing and rather concentrate on the stuff that actually is part of their mission statement.
My car is AP-capable but no way in hell am I going to enable it.

I have no problem taking responsibility for my driving, but I want full control over my car.

 

[jeffro01]

I've been expecting these kinds of mishaps with AP. My car isn't AP-capable, but me personally, even if it was, I wouldn't drive with it, definitely not in traffic. I don't believe AP is anywhere near ready for real-world situations, and I have been unhappy with the company pushing this stuff (and Elon's "in 2 years, you can Summon your car in NY while you're in LA") because the chances of failure are very high.

We're going to see more and more mishaps like this, people trusting AP when, in my opinion, they need to be even MORE on guard and skeptical and alert whenever AP's enabled. One simply cannot trust the technology now, maybe not for a long time, if ever. Some things I am glad to be an early adopter of. AP is not one of them.

I also still fully expect state laws to quickly change over the next 12 months as more and more AP mishaps happen, especially when serious AP mishaps happen. I worry what this will do to the stock. I wish Tesla could've stayed focused on battery improvements and execution and scaling S and X, instead of all this AP stuff.

I know I'm not in the majority with these views. Oh well.

Autonomous driving is the future of automobiles, simple as that. While Tesla's gen 1 product isn't perfect, to have such a negative stance towards it just doesn't make much sense to me. AP works outstanding in traffic, it's the best use case for the current iteration of the technology at this point in time. Someone has to be first through the wall on anything that's new, Tesla chose to be the first in this regard and in the long run you'll see that it was a very appropriate decision.

You really should be cautious in jumping to conclusions based on one side of the story where there is a vested interest by the party telling the story to shift blame elsewhere. Given what we have been told, I believe the OPs story to be extremely hard to believe. That's my opinion from the experience I've gained using TACC\AP in a multitude of situations to date.

I'd hate innovation to be stifled by government regulation, so at least from my perspective, I'd look very carefully at any legislation that's introduced to restrict\inhibit\alter this functionality. Autonomous driving, which AP is not, is the future, it'll save thousands of lives if it's allowed to do so.

Jeff

 

[GasKilla]

As I stated in the previous thread, why didn't Automatic Emergency Braking kick in?

I am wondering the same thing. Also, I'm not trying to shirk responsibility, but if the car stops at a two car distance twenty times in a row, and on the twenty-first time it doesn't, you won't have enough time to stop. You either trust AP or you can't use it.

Where did you have the collision warning set? Early, normal, or late? I have mine set on early and it has come on unnecessarily a few times but I prefer that over late. My DS recommended a car following length of at least 4 or 5 and that's where I keep it even in heavy traffic. Have you always used the 2 car length setting?

 

[jeffro01]

I'm fully with you on the AP thing and rather concentrate on the stuff that actually is part of their mission statement.
My car is AP-capable but no way in hell am I going to enable it.

I have no problem taking responsibility for my driving, but I want full control over my car.

Why is AP not a function of their mission statement? I'd argue that working towards full autonomous driving fits very nicely with Tesla's stated goals. Your fear is completely unjustified but you are well within your right to decide not to use it, currently it's entirely your choice. The end goal of this technology will save thousands of lives annually, and when we get to that point from a technology standpoint, I hope people are able to appreciate the benefits.

Jeff

 

[sandstruck]

WRONG. If you don't have enough room to stop, then one of 2 things is happening:
1) you aren't paying enough attention to what it's doing, and failed to intervene early enough
2) you have it set to follow too close and need to back it off so that you have enough time to react.

As autopilot is currently only a driving aid, and not self driving, there is currently only one possible way for AP to cause a collision, and that's by failing to relinquish control to the driver when requested. As you haven't suggested that the car did this, then you must take FULL responsibility, not just the type of responsibility where you say "it's me but I couldn't have prevented it"

Again, I take FULL RESPONSIBILITY for the collision!!! I have no problem paying for all the damage even if Tesla discovers there was a glitch in the system. And maybe I'm delusional about my reflexes and driving ability and I've been profoundly lucky never having been in an accident in my life. But I can tell you, there was a system malfunction and I didn't have enough time to brake. You can argue all you want that I was irresponsible to have been caught in this situation, but the point is it malfunctioned. I want to be able to confidently use AP again and trust in it (albeit extremely cautiously). Tesla is currently studying the logs from my car and they say they will tell me what happened. I really wouldn't fixate on my guilt, but rather on how to improve this system.

 

[RDoc]

My question - as others have stated - is why didn't the collision avoidance / emergency braking system step in? I've used AP in stop and go traffic almost every day since I bought the car and it absolutely comes to a complete stop if the car in front of me does, maintaining distance the entire time.

I also use it regularly in stop and go traffic and it's wonderful and I've never had a close call using it like that.

However, the times it's scared me are just like the OP's case, on the highway with the car in front slowing, then stopping. For some reason, the TACC has a problem with this use case. Maybe on highways it's optimized to maintain minimum following distance and assumes cars won't go from 70 to 0 in a few seconds? Who knows, but I do think there's something wrong with TACC in these circumstances.

I wonder if there should be a button on the display that the driver could push if something seemed broken in cases like this? Perhaps with a short audio recording that would be sent with the last few seconds of logging back to Tesla for analysis. Perhaps a few buttons for different subsystems.

 

[JST]

Maybe because nobody has released a car to the public that has autonomous driving capability yet?

- - - Updated - - -


Do you believe he would have crashed had he been in a pre-autopilot car? If yes, then I suppose we could say that he couldn't have avoided it. But the AP makes no difference in this. the AP wasn't driving, he was. AP doesn't drive, it merely assists.


If someone does not leave themselves enough time to react, they are a dangerous driver. This is simple. He's driving, he failed to brake for the vehicle ahead, he hit them. AP is 100% irrelevant here, he's scapegoating "I couldn't have avoided it" is rubbish, he clearly states there was plenty of time to avoid it, but then blames the AP for not doing so, it's not the AP's job to do so, it's his.

I actually think the OP was quite forthright here. I don't see any attempt to "blame" AP; I see the OP acknowledging his (or her) responsibility, but asking a very reasonable question about why the AP behaved the way that it did in this circumstance and not in others (and, of course, warning that others should be aware of this failure case).

As for "autonomous" versus AP, fine. I think that's hair-splitting, based on the way that people are using AP, but I take your point. So, let me revise my statement:

Given the number of automakers (and others!) working on autonomous vehicles, and the profusion of "driver assistance" technology that allows cars to take over more and more of the tasks associated with driving, it is insane to me that there is no federal safety standard on how these technologies are to be implemented.

 

[sandstruck]

WRONG. If you don't have enough room to stop, then one of 2 things is happening:
1) you aren't paying enough attention to what it's doing, and failed to intervene early enough
2) you have it set to follow too close and need to back it off so that you have enough time to react.

As autopilot is currently only a driving aid, and not self driving, there is currently only one possible way for AP to cause a collision, and that's by failing to relinquish control to the driver when requested. As you haven't suggested that the car did this, then you must take FULL responsibility, not just the type of responsibility where you say "it's me but I couldn't have prevented it"

Where did you have the collision warning set? Early, normal, or late? I have mine set on early and it has come on unnecessarily a few times but I prefer that over late. My DS recommended a car following length of at least 4 or 5 and that's where I keep it even in heavy traffic. Have you always used the 2 car length setting?

I had collision warning set on "normal." I have always used the 2 car length (as recommended to me by my DS so other cars wouldn't encroach). I will definitely change these settings going forward. But as I've been spouting in my previous posts, the car in front of me stopped gradually (not suddenly) and my car had been performing this same maneuver flawlessly.

 

[Cosmacelf]

What's a "2 car distance setting". You mean you set it to 2? Those numbers aren't a car distance setting, just a sliding scale of how closely the car keeps to the car in front.

For myself, the few times I set it to 2, I was hyper alert since I thought that it gave me too little time to react should the car make a mistake. 3 or 4 is the right amount most of the time for me.

 

[kort677]

I find it scary when using AP on a road with traffic lights, at 45 mph the car comes up too fast on cars stopped at a red light ahead of me, while I've let the car stay in control it has always stopped properly but IMHO it comes up on those cars too fast and brakes harder and later than I would.