Tesla crash

Author
Discussion

cahami

Original Poster:

1,248 posts

205 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
A tesla on auto pilot collided with a trailer killing the driver.

razbox

905 posts

218 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
cahami said:
A tesla on auto pilot collided with a trailer killing the driver.
Not quite true. The trailer skidded across sideways from the other side of the road and onto the path of the Tesla.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/01...

mrloudly

2,815 posts

234 months

Saturday 2nd July 2016
quotequote all
Pictures I've seen from Google Earth, shows the truck with trailer turned left across a dual carriageway into the path of the Tesla.

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 2nd July 2016
quotequote all
razbox said:
cahami said:
A tesla on auto pilot collided with a trailer killing the driver.
Not quite true. The trailer skidded across sideways from the other side of the road and onto the path of the Tesla.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/01...

Not according to the police drawing of the crash. The trailer turned across the path of the tesla which then drove straight under it and out the other side, removing the roof on the way.

JonV8V

7,175 posts

123 months

Sunday 3rd July 2016
quotequote all
I think the original post is the only thing we know for sure, a tesla collided with a lorry.

Seems Harry Potter may have played a role too.

colin79666

1,808 posts

112 months

Sunday 3rd July 2016
quotequote all
I noticed on my trip to New York earlier this year that many US truck trailers don't appear to have side guards. In the UK just about every trailer has front and side protection to limit the possibility of a car going under. It is the law with a few exceptions for some farm machinery etc.

With bars there is more chance of the car's crumple zone taking the hit than hitting the A pillar and decapitating the driver.

I fear this story is going to focus the media on self driving cars over safety standards that would better protect the occupants of all cars, autonomous or not.

hairyben

8,516 posts

182 months

Sunday 3rd July 2016
quotequote all
colin79666 said:
I noticed on my trip to New York earlier this year that many US truck trailers don't appear to have side guards. In the UK just about every trailer has front and side protection to limit the possibility of a car going under. It is the law with a few exceptions for some farm machinery etc.

With bars there is more chance of the car's crumple zone taking the hit than hitting the A pillar and decapitating the driver.

I fear this story is going to focus the media on self driving cars over safety standards that would better protect the occupants of all cars, autonomous or not.
Underun bars; the powerfull american trucking business lobbies against making them madatory in another example of profit>lives nature of american lawmaking

jason61c

5,978 posts

173 months

Sunday 3rd July 2016
quotequote all
So guy drives a car using autopilot...... He died doing so. One for the darwin award?

Mike_C

984 posts

221 months

Friday 15th July 2016
quotequote all
jason61c said:
So guy drives a car using autopilot...... He died doing so. One for the darwin award?
How so? If you suggest that Autopilot is dangerous and thus by using it he deserves a Darwin Award then that is a pretty stupid assertion. Autopilot is perfectly safe when used correctly, just like cruise control is and other driver aids. When used incorrectly, for instance not paying attention and watching a Harry Potter movie on a portable DVD player, then it becomes unsafe...

campionissimo

578 posts

123 months

Friday 15th July 2016
quotequote all
So what is the point of autopilot then? If you have it switched on, you should still be attentive and ready to take control at a split seconds notice? So why bother with it at all? I just don't see any benefit.

juggsy

1,423 posts

129 months

Friday 15th July 2016
quotequote all
campionissimo said:
So what is the point of autopilot then? If you have it switched on, you should still be attentive and ready to take control at a split seconds notice? So why bother with it at all? I just don't see any benefit.
The technology is still in development, it's a step closer to autonomous driving but Tesla openly admit it's a beta and should be used as a driving aid rather than to chill out/pick your nose/whack one out and let the car do its thing. As the technology improves and Tesla gather more data (regrettably even from horrible events like this crash), the technology will advance. You even have to agree to a disclaimer before being allowed to use it (perhaps doesn't contain the whacking one out bit).

rallycross

12,744 posts

236 months

Friday 15th July 2016
quotequote all
They should have called it advanced cruise or adaptive cruise ( like BMW) calling it auto pilot is just asking for people to make their own accidents by relying on something that is not foolproof.

JonV8V

7,175 posts

123 months

Friday 15th July 2016
quotequote all
juggsy said:
The technology is still in development, it's a step closer to autonomous driving but Tesla openly admit it's a beta and should be used as a driving aid rather than to chill out/pick your nose/whack one out and let the car do its thing. As the technology improves and Tesla gather more data (regrettably even from horrible events like this crash), the technology will advance. You even have to agree to a disclaimer before being allowed to use it (perhaps doesn't contain the whacking one out bit).
I'm tired of this beta test version thing. Does anyone really think an automotive insurer would allow a company issue beta software on mass to a global customer base? Beta is a marketing gimmick to get fanboy buy in to let them think they're aiding the development process and build a brand loyalty. It's Version 1.

We're also in a world where even McDonald's put a disclaimer on a cup of coffee to say the contents may be hot. People ignore them.

But what it does do, as they admit. Is let you drive for over two mins with a noddy text message on the dash saying please hold the wheel, and then crash when they say they will slow and stop a car if they don't detect the driver holding the wheel.

Tesla may have the technology better than anyone else, but they're ability to understand and accommodate human behaviour is sadly missing.


AmitG

3,272 posts

159 months

Sunday 17th July 2016
quotequote all
rallycross said:
They should have called it advanced cruise or adaptive cruise ( like BMW) calling it auto pilot is just asking for people to make their own accidents by relying on something that is not foolproof.
Exactly. As far as I can tell (and I'd love to be corrected here) the Tesla autopilot stuff is basically a combination of radar cruise control, lane correction and speed limit recognition, which other manufacturers already do (even the Prius has it). The difference being that other companies market them as driver aids. Tesla goes and calls it "autopilot" so that they can laugh at all the dinosaur car companies who take decades to do anything, and get loads of publicity. "Hey look at us, we've done self driving cars! Toyota and VW are history! We're changing the world!"

Then they cover it in small print saying it isn't really anything like an autopilot and you shouldn't use it as such. Then when people have accidents they say "hey, we're a tech startup! It's beta software! Stop whining! Give us a break, we're trying to change the world here! This is the FUTURE!"

Bizarre.


FurtiveFreddy

8,577 posts

236 months

Sunday 17th July 2016
quotequote all
The fact Tesla named it 'Autopilot' does not make them responsible for the owners who choose to drive their cars irresponsibly.

Anyone operating a vehicle of any sort has a duty to ensure they fully understand how it operates and what actions they should take if something unexpected happens. Otherwise they're being reckless.

These drivers who've had accidents weren't placing too much faith in the system because of what it's called. They were just placing too much faith in the system.

Mike_C

984 posts

221 months

Monday 18th July 2016
quotequote all
rallycross said:
They should have called it advanced cruise or adaptive cruise ( like BMW) calling it auto pilot is just asking for people to make their own accidents by relying on something that is not foolproof.
I disagree with this, advanced or adaptive cruise control only controls speed, i.e. keeps a safe distance from the car in front. Tesla's Autopilot also takes care of steering and lane changing, as well as allowing features such as 'Summon' to operate.

As anyone who has used Autopilot in a Tesla will know, there's several warnings about using it. There's a disclaimer when you did the software update in the first place, there's messages in the handbook when you read about it's operation, when you activate it it asks you to keep your hands on the wheel at all times, if you don't touch the steering wheel for a couple of minutes it brings up a visual reminder to do so, another minute later an audible reminder and those reminders become more intrusive and aggressive until you take control or the system deactivates (not sure what happens then, haven't tested it that far).

If the human driving it chooses to ignore all those warnings, I can't see how that is Tesla's fault, but that is the nature of humans, and is no different from not braking when using normal cruise control, which has been around for 20 years or more. I don't keep my hands on the wheel all the time when AP is engaged, but I keep them close enough to grab it if I need to! Similarly if a car pulls out in front of me on the motorway I let AP brake, etc. as that's all part of its learning process, but I'm shadowing the brake pedal just in case! Unfortunately you can't always account for human foolishness, for example watching a DVD on a portable DVD player whilst driving your car...

Mike_C

984 posts

221 months

Monday 18th July 2016
quotequote all
AmitG said:
As far as I can tell (and I'd love to be corrected here)
Allow me to. Let's start with a quote from Tesla's website:

Autopilot allows Model S to steer within a lane, change lanes with the simple tap of a turn signal, and manage speed by using active, traffic-aware cruise control.

Nothing contentious here IMO, or over-promising on what it does?

My understanding is as follows: Tesla's Autopilot uses a system of a forward facing camera mounted in the rear view mirror that monitors traffic, road lane markings and speed limit signs. It conjunction with the ultrasonic in the front bumper, it can also distinguish between cars, trucks and motorbikes and will brake and accelerate accordingly to keep a safe distance from the car in front. Radar in the front and rear bumpers and wing mirrors (I believe) also keep a safe distance from other traffic.

All combined, I see that as it being one of the safest cars on the roads in terms of the amount of technology you have to protect you, it's just how use it that matters...

Munter

31,319 posts

240 months

Monday 18th July 2016
quotequote all
AmitG said:
Exactly. As far as I can tell (and I'd love to be corrected here) the Tesla autopilot stuff is basically a combination of radar cruise control, lane correction and speed limit recognition, which other manufacturers already do (even the Prius has it). The difference being that other companies market them as driver aids. Tesla goes and calls it "autopilot" so that they can laugh at all the dinosaur car companies who take decades to do anything, and get loads of publicity. "Hey look at us, we've done self driving cars! Toyota and VW are history! We're changing the world!"

Then they cover it in small print saying it isn't really anything like an autopilot and you shouldn't use it as such. Then when people have accidents they say "hey, we're a tech startup! It's beta software! Stop whining! Give us a break, we're trying to change the world here! This is the FUTURE!"

Bizarre.
You do realise a plane with autopilot isn't an autonomous plane right? Pilots don't set the autopilot and then whip out a book or decide to have a snooze. They have to continue to fly the plane.

So why would you think a car with autopilot is trying to be an autonomous car?

98elise

26,366 posts

160 months

Monday 18th July 2016
quotequote all
AmitG said:
rallycross said:
They should have called it advanced cruise or adaptive cruise ( like BMW) calling it auto pilot is just asking for people to make their own accidents by relying on something that is not foolproof.
Exactly. As far as I can tell (and I'd love to be corrected here) the Tesla autopilot stuff is basically a combination of radar cruise control, lane correction and speed limit recognition, which other manufacturers already do (even the Prius has it). The difference being that other companies market them as driver aids. Tesla goes and calls it "autopilot" so that they can laugh at all the dinosaur car companies who take decades to do anything, and get loads of publicity. "Hey look at us, we've done self driving cars! Toyota and VW are history! We're changing the world!"

Then they cover it in small print saying it isn't really anything like an autopilot and you shouldn't use it as such. Then when people have accidents they say "hey, we're a tech startup! It's beta software! Stop whining! Give us a break, we're trying to change the world here! This is the FUTURE!"

Bizarre.
The only bizarre thing is your assumptions about the marketing. In all driving reviews I've seen of it the journalists say that tesla have told them they need to remain in control, and to keep hands on the wheel. To activate it you have to aknowledge that you understand these limitations.

They don't seem to have hidden anything. Their only comments about crashes seem to be confirming what was activated (or not) and handing over the logs to the relevant authority.





JonV8V

7,175 posts

123 months

Monday 18th July 2016
quotequote all
98elise said:
The only bizarre thing is your assumptions about the marketing. In all driving reviews I've seen of it the journalists say that tesla have told them they need to remain in control, and to keep hands on the wheel. To activate it you have to aknowledge that you understand these limitations.

They don't seem to have hidden anything. Their only comments about crashes seem to be confirming what was activated (or not) and handing over the logs to the relevant authority.
They've also confirmed that on one of the accidents the driver was not holding the wheel for over two minutes and rather than invoke the safety system they state of slowing the car down, they decided to put up a message on the dash that would have only been visible by somebody paying attention, which clearly they were not.

I agree its the drivers responsibility, I disagree that Tesla have decided to not enforce the "paying attention" type rules they know the driver needs to exhibit. They can't have it both ways.