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

[eloder]

I agree, thank you very much for posting OP. I'm one of those people that will very heavily trust the autopilot when I get my Model 3, so I'm interested to know what Tesla says what happened.

 

[Beryl]

On 3 occasions TACC failed to stop, slow down, or remain stopped. I noticed twice where the car image in front would disappear, reappear, and even shimmy even when at a full stop. When the car in front disappeared, my car would surge and then alert (due to sensors?). Each time, I avoided a collision, thank God.

Recalibration of the camera and sensors supposedly fixed the problem, per Tesla.

I will continue to use TACC (and the rest of the AP features) with caution -- distance set at 1 per 10mph, hands on steering wheel, and foot ready to brake if it doesn't slow down or remain stopped properly. Even in this cautious mind frame, I find highway driving far less stressful with AP and I enjoy using it.

 

[JenniferQ]

(Cross-post of a reply of mine at teslamotors.com)

As to terminology, here is Tesla's:

Autopilot, which includes:

--Autosteer

--Autopark
----parallel
----perpendicular
----Summon

--Traffic-Aware Cruise Control (TACC)

The hierarchical levels are as indicated in the 7.1 Release Notes.

Yes, I agree. I realized after I posted that I should have said TACC failed. Period. I have never personally had TACC fail. But, yes, after reading some of these posts, I suppose a sensor could have caused the issue.

However, I still subscribe to Occam's Razor, and think it's probably human error.

But I will keep reading this thread and see what the logs come back with.

 

[KirkDavis]

I'll quickly chime in here with my 7.1 AP experiences. I've driven about 2000 miles with 7.0 AP. I got 7.1 last night. One of the features is better right lane exit detect/ignore. I was testing this on my way home tonight in busy freeway traffic. I was in the right lane and the 2 cars in front on me in the same lane exited but 7.1 detected everything OK and kept going. Good..

Then on the on-ramp just after the exit several cars were merging. I decided to see how it handled it and started watching it very closely. One of the cars started merging into my lane with about 3 feet space. The car was about 1/5 to 1/4 into my lane while continuing to merge. The Tesla continued at normal speed - not slowing - and closed quickly on other car. I quickly looked at the dash and Tesla showed the car. The AP did know it was there but continued as if it wasn't there. I gave it a second and it continued to close the distance. I hit the breaks at about 1 foot from the other car. There wasn't a big enough speed differential for there to be a problem fortunately. I'm fairly strongly convinced that if I didn't intervene there would have been a collision. Bad...

It's hard for me to say from experiencing just one event. But based on my experience with the 7.0 AP quirks it's my option this is a new bug.

 

[JenniferQ]

On 3 occasions TACC failed to stop, slow down, or remain stopped. I noticed twice where the car image in front would disappear, reappear, and even shimmy even when at a full stop. When the car in front disappeared, my car would surge and then alert (due to sensors?). Each time, I avoided a collision, thank God.

Recalibration of the camera and sensors supposedly fixed the problem, per Tesla.

I will continue to use TACC (and the rest of the AP features) with caution -- distance set at 1 per 10mph, hands on steering wheel, and foot ready to break if it doesn't slow down or remain stopped properly. Even in this cautious mind frame, I find highway driving far less stressful with AP and I enjoy using it.

Good plan. But don't "break" your foot. Just 'brake." :wink:

And at 1 per 10 mph, does that mean you set it at 7 on the freeway if going 70+? I am curious, because I usually keep it at about 4 to avoid people getting pissed off and passing me thinking I'm not "going fast enough" even though I'm going exactly the same speed as the car in front of me at those points. But that could be a CA thing. They drive super fast here, and I cut my teeth driving on Houston freeways.

 

[dhanson865]

This is sage advice. It was definitely a bad idea to set my distance at 2 for highway driving. I was too cavalier, too starstruck and trusting of the technology. It simply never ocurred to me that the car would fail to stop. That was foolish.

Thanks for the warning. I'll try to remember to check and keep the setting higher than 2 the next time I get in a AP Tesla.

 

[theslimshadyist]

Personally, I commend you for coming forth and sharing your experience. This has totally changed my opinion/outlook to be more sensitive and aware when my car arrives. This is the kind of baseline of information that provides great value especially when a new software update has been pushed out. I'm terribly sorry that you experienced this mishap, especially since the car is brand new and my hope is that this incident doesn't reflect negatively on Tesla and the some of the nuances of being an early adopter.

I too am hopeful that Tesla with be very forthcoming with the information that they extract from the data logs. In the end, if something in the code has been identified at being a "bug" or some other malfunction, this instance MAY provide valuable real world information so that the software or electronics can be addressed, patched, and resolved sooner than later.

Thanks again for sharing!

 

[Beryl]

Good plan. But don't "break" your foot. Just 'brake." :wink:

And at 1 per 10 mph, does that mean you set it at 7 on the freeway if going 70+? I am curious, because I usually keep it at about 4 to avoid people getting pissed off and passing me thinking I'm not "going fast enough" even though I'm going exactly the same speed as the car in front of me at those points. But that could be a CA thing. They drive super fast here, and I cut my teeth driving on Houston freeways.

I actually typed "break" instead of "brake"? That is what I get for posting so late.

Yeah, I've gone up to "6" and only once "7". Houston drivers do go around me even though I drive "limit+5mph" but I rarely drive in the extreme left-hand lane so I don't mind.

 

[theslimshadyist]

I may get blasted for this statement but stay with me and absorb what I'm about to say. IMO, Tesla is a technology company who happens to manufacture automobiles. The other traditional auto companies are automobile manufactures first, who happen to incorporate technology into their vehicles.

Again, just let that set in for a moment and I think that you will tend to at least partially agree with my statement.

 

[donv]

I think it should be emphasized that this is NOT autopilot! This was TACC which didn't do it's job. Clearly auto-steer was not at fault.

TACC is hardly new technology-- Mercedes has offered something very similar since 2005-- that's over 10 years!

 

[Andyw2100]

Yes! the icon turned red and the car made a horrible sound. I asked the technician at Tesla why the collision avoidance system wouldn't have kicked-in, and he promised to have results within the next 48 hours. I hope I can count on the company to be forthright if they can uncover the problem.

AEB is not designed to avoid collisions, only reduce the impact. OP said it made noise before the crash, so it seems to have worked as designed. AEB works between 5 and 85mph and will only reduce your speed by a maximum of 25mph before it disengages (this is all in the manual) Due to the low amount of damage to the vehicle, it looks like it was quite likely down to 5mph at time of impact. AEB success!

Actually there is no indication from what the OP wrote as to whether or not the AEB functioned. The icon turning red and the "horrible noise" are indications that the Forward Collision Warning system alerted. From the manual:

--
Warning: Forward Collision Warning is designed only to provide visual and audible alerts. It does not attempt to apply the brakes or decelerate Model S. When seeing and/or hearing a warning, it is the driver's responsibility to take corrective action immediately.

--



The Automatic Emergency Braking system is a different system. Again, from the manual:



--
When Automatic Emergency Braking applies the brakes, the instrument panel displays a visual warning and you'll hear a chime. You may also notice abrupt downward movement of the brake pedal. The brake lights turn on to alert other road users that you are slowing down.

--

The visual warning is a small warning, as per the picture in the manual, and the sound is a chime. It's possible the small visual was displayed and the chime sounded and the OP either didn't notice them or hasn't mentioned them, but what the OP did describe was very clearly the Forward Collision Warning, not the Automatic Emergency Braking.

 

[Cyberax]

I may get blasted for this statement but stay with me and absorb what I'm about to say. IMO, Tesla is a technology company who happens to manufacture automobiles. The other traditional auto companies are automobile manufactures first, who happen to incorporate technology into their vehicles.

Tesla is a schizophrenic company that pretends to be an automobile company pretending to be a tech company.

 

[GoTslaGo]

I think it should be emphasized that this is NOT autopilot! This was TACC which didn't do it's job. Clearly auto-steer was not at fault.

TACC is hardly new technology-- Mercedes has offered something very similar since 2005-- that's over 10 years!

It was Mercedes technology that got me interested in AutoPilot. Friend of mine showed me how it worked. Almost identical scenario as the OP, except we were only going 45mph. We were following a van using the distronic system on his MB. At the last minute, the van pulled off and right in front of him was a fully stopped truck. The car came to a complete stop. I was impressed. I will also be more cautious given OPs experience, maybe set the distance longer.

Thanks for the post!

 

[Nikxice]

This is sage advice. It was definitely a bad idea to set my distance at 2 for highway driving. I was too cavalier, too starstruck and trusting of the technology. It simply never ocurred to me that the car would fail to stop. That was foolish.

First, I don't have AP. I read here a wide variety of opinions on maintaining safe following distances. I'm puzzled as to why Tesla introduced the concept of using car lengths for determining vehicle separation. This can lead to a false sense of security. If 2 car lengths works well at 30mph then why not use it at 40, and so on. For anyone who uses 2 lengths at 60mph, and hasn't yet had a problem, it's comfortable only because that individual hasn't yet experienced a failure.

Safe separation can be had at any speed over a fixed time interval. There is some debate in the driver education community, but 3, preferably 4 seconds of separation are generally accepted numbers. You learn to judge this by waiting until the vehicle in front of you has passed a road sign, a tree, or anything fixed by the side of the road. Then count up to the number 4. At 4, the front of your vehicle should be passing that same marker. A little practice and this becomes a subconscious life long driving habit.

It would probably take more lines of code, but Tesla could probably program the AP to adopt this method of vehicle separation. Imagine if all you had to do was to set it to 4, as in seconds. Dependent on road conditions, this setting would work most anywhere, anytime. This would eliminate the current guesswork concerning vehicle spacing and the associated distraction, while easing driver workload and increasing the margin of safety.

 

[brec]

First, I don't have AP. I read here a wide variety of opinions on maintaining safe following distances. I'm puzzled as to why Tesla introduced the concept of using car lengths for determining vehicle separation. This can lead to a false sense of security. If 2 car lengths works well at 30mph then why not use it at 40, and so on. For anyone who uses 2 lengths at 60mph, and hasn't yet had a problem, it's comfortable only because that individual hasn't yet experienced a failure.

Safe separation can be had at any speed over a fixed time interval. There is some debate in the driver education community, but 3, preferably 4 seconds of separation are generally accepted numbers. You learn to judge this by waiting until the vehicle in front of you has passed a road sign, a tree, or anything fixed by the side of the road. Then count up to the number 4. At 4, the front of your vehicle should be passing that same marker. A little practice and this becomes a subconscious life long driving habit.

It would probably take more lines of code, but Tesla could probably program the AP to adopt this method of vehicle separation. Imagine if all you had to do was to set it to 4, as in seconds. Dependent on road conditions, this setting would work most anywhere, anytime. This would eliminate the current guesswork concerning vehicle spacing and the associated distraction, while easing driver workload and increasing the margin of safety.

TACC doesn't use car lengths. From the Owner's Manual:

Each setting corresponds to a time-based distance that represents how long it takes for Model S, from its current location, to reach the
location of the rear bumper of the vehicle ahead.

 

[disillusioned]

i see your point. I think i was trying to say that i couldn't do anything ONCE i realized the car wouldn't stop. If i had used more caution (and more distance/time), it sounds probable I'd have avoided the accident. Had i had read something like this string (i haven't perused this site since 2013) or had my DS (or anyone else) advised me to be more judicious, perhaps i wouldn't have collided. I'm not trying to abdicate responsibility (and i know i lack some common sense here) but I'm just suggesting that it couldn't hurt for the DSs to advise customers of these potential pitfalls

I've definitely had a few TACC "oh hey do you really think I'm going to stop in time?" moments. Won't ever do 2 following distance, but all of this aside, I agree that it's frustrating that TACC simply didn't do what it says on the tin in this instance.

That being said, here's the full verbiage in the 7.0 manual:

Warning: Traffic-Aware Cruise Control can not detect all objects and may not brake/decelerate for stationary vehicles,especially in situations when you are driving over 50 mph (80 km/h) and a vehicle you are following moves out of your driving path and a stationary vehicle or object, bicycle, or pedestrian is in front of you instead. Always pay attention to the road ahead and stay prepared to take immediate corrective action. Depending on Traffic-Aware Cruise Control to avoid a collision can result in serious injury or death. In addition, Traffic-Aware Cruise Control may react to vehicles or objects that either do not exist or are not in the lane of travel, causing Model S to slowdown unnecessarily or inappropriately.

Warning: Traffic-Aware Cruise Control may be unable to provide adequate speed control because of limited braking capability and hills. It can also misjudge the distance from a vehicle ahead. Driving downhill can increase driving speed,causing Model S to exceed your set speed. Never depend on Traffic-AwareCruise Control to slow down the vehicle enough to prevent a collision. Always keep your eyes on the road when driving and be prepared to take corrective action as needed. Depending on Traffic-Aware Cruise Control to slow the vehicle down enough to prevent a collision can result in serious injury or death.

I get that the manual is thick and one would expect the DS to cover this in detail, but the manual specifically calls out potential limitations of the system, not just from a liability perspective, but also from a technical perspective. While it may read as cover-your-ass language that can be disregarded because that's the whole point of the feature, it's also there because they know they can't guarantee it'll work 100% of the time.

Curious to hear what the logs show: if AEB engaged at all, for instance. Even more curious why AEB has some of the limitations it has on it, though I've had FCW engage a couple of times when I wasn't quite clear on how quickly the person in front of me had stopped, which was nice. I've also had TACC take way too damn long to engage in braking coming up to someone totally stopped (but, per the first line of that manual clip, this is my own damn fault). I've even had FCW engage as TACC was slowing me down and bringing me to a stop, which was... interesting. (It only appeared for a moment until it became obvious TACC was stopping us; AEB didn't engage.)

 

[Beryl]

Warning: Forward Collision Warning is designed only to provide visual and audible alerts. It does not attempt to apply the brakes or decelerate Model S. When seeing and/or hearing a warning, it is the driver's responsibility to take corrective action immediately.

View attachment 107910

This is exactly the picture that appeared after the visual disappeared and my car surged when at a stop light. I was able to brake and avoid the collision. (Note, I only had TACC engaged, not AP. ) Apparently there was a problem with my camera and sensor calibration.

Perhaps the OP had a similar problem and didn't notice the FCW in time.

 

[LetsGoFast]

Taking the OP at face value, it would be a very unusual occurrence. Cases where someone has just entered my lane or where I am approaching stopped traffic at high speed have always been troublesome for TACC. Situations where I'm following a car that comes to a stop gradually are ones where I've grown to trust the car very much and I have never once had to intervene, despite keeping my TACC set on 2 or even 1 in stop and go conditions. Given that this technology has now been in place for many millions of vehicle miles, I'm very curious to learn Tesla's assessment of the root cause.

 

[Matias]

Yes, the emergency collision warning should have sounded and then kicked in..

Was there some speed under which collision emergency braking does not engage?

 

[sorka]

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 willing to bet that the TACC, crash prevention, and the use of AP will prevent far more accidents than these safety features cause when compared to vehicles without these features. Yes stuff is going to happen but I'll bet you the average human is not as good as at keeping an eye on the car in front of them and braking as fast as the crash prevention software can.