Model 3 crash on autopilot

[kambites]

I've never seen any "eight times safer" statistic. I've just seen overall crash rates (in the US, for what that's worth). The figures I read were's the statistics when using auto-pilot, simply the difference in accident rates between different models of car. Of course that still skews by driver demographic and usage.

Clearly you're right "autopilot" does, to a significant number of people, imply full autonomy. I'm just curious as to why. I guess it's an interesting moral/cultural argument as to how much responsibility a company has to make sure people don't hurt themselves by blatently misusing their products. It's interesting that this situation has arisen in the US of all places where companies are generally so careful about these sorts of things.


I'm certainly no great proponent of Tesla (to start with I can't stand Musk) or autonomous systems (my daily driver doesn't even have ABS) but in this case I think people are too quick to blame Tesla and too slow to put things into perspective.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 12th December 14:27

[mcdjl]

kambites said:

NDNDNDND said:

The public perception of 'Autopilot' (especially given the vast majority of people do not encounter or use an autopilot in any setting) is that an autopilot controls the vehicle for you without intervention..

That was my question really -if that really is what the public think autopilot means... why? Where on earth does that perception of the meaning come from?

Ignoring subject matter knowledge and focussing on the language, I think "cruise control" implies every bit as much automated control as "auto-pilot". Is it just that people are familiar with one term and not the other? In which case you could argue that any new term for a driver aid is dangerous unless it's extremely specific.

I have no particularly subject matter experience of auto-pilots. I've used them on sailing boats a couple of times and vaguely know what they do on aeroplanes but it had genuinely never have occured to be that the term might imply complete automation until people started complaining about Tesla's name.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 12th December 13:45

Auto pilot is short for automatic pilot. I can't think why people might think that it would mean that it would automatically pilot the vehicle.
Most peoples perception of autopilot in a plane is that the (human) pilot can press a button and the computer will do the rest, including take off and landing. Hence they expect the car to do the same. When it then valet parks itself, that perception is reinforced.
Theres always the urban legends about cruise control as well: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-uncontrol... which while not being true work and spread on the basis of sounding plausible.

[kiseca]

mcdjl said:

kambites said:

NDNDNDND said:

The public perception of 'Autopilot' (especially given the vast majority of people do not encounter or use an autopilot in any setting) is that an autopilot controls the vehicle for you without intervention..

That was my question really -if that really is what the public think autopilot means... why? Where on earth does that perception of the meaning come from?

Ignoring subject matter knowledge and focussing on the language, I think "cruise control" implies every bit as much automated control as "auto-pilot". Is it just that people are familiar with one term and not the other? In which case you could argue that any new term for a driver aid is dangerous unless it's extremely specific.

I have no particularly subject matter experience of auto-pilots. I've used them on sailing boats a couple of times and vaguely know what they do on aeroplanes but it had genuinely never have occured to be that the term might imply complete automation until people started complaining about Tesla's name.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 12th December 13:45

Auto pilot is short for automatic pilot. I can't think why people might think that it would mean that it would automatically pilot the vehicle.
Most peoples perception of autopilot in a plane is that the (human) pilot can press a button and the computer will do the rest, including take off and landing. Hence they expect the car to do the same. When it then valet parks itself, that perception is reinforced.
Theres always the urban legends about cruise control as well: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-uncontrol... which while not being true work and spread on the basis of sounding plausible.

they would be correct, but will be forgetting that, for landing, the pilot will still have to do stuff like (I think) give the autopilot details that make it follow a holding pattern because it won't do it all by itself - or at least it won't respond to instructions from ATC by itself. Also, autopilot won't avoid collisions with other aircraft but that's not really a problem because air traffic is so much less dense than road traffic, and you're miles less likely to come across someone parked in your way. Being unable to avoid traffic just isn't a concerning limitation in an aircraft because ATC, on board collision warning systems and the pilots themselves are all in place to fill that need. And collisions still happen but each time one happens, the industry learns and plugs a gap. So yes, an autopilot can get a plane from start to finish of its journey without pilot intervention, but just like the car, you'd risk a collision if you left it to its own devices.

I'd say, with that in mind, Tesla's autopilot is actually pretty darn close to what's in an aircraft and may well have more decision making control over the vehicle's heading and speed. Only significant difference for me is that Tesla's AP safety improvement process is entirely down to the company and not regulated as it is in the air industry. Then again, the consequences are lower.

[MarkwG]

kiseca said:

they would be correct, but will be forgetting that, for landing, the pilot will still have to do stuff like (I think) give the autopilot details that make it follow a holding pattern because it won't do it all by itself - or at least it won't respond to instructions from ATC by itself. Also, autopilot won't avoid collisions with other aircraft but that's not really a problem because air traffic is so much less dense than road traffic, and you're miles less likely to come across someone parked in your way. Being unable to avoid traffic just isn't a concerning limitation in an aircraft because ATC, on board collision warning systems and the pilots themselves are all in place to fill that need. And collisions still happen but each time one happens, the industry learns and plugs a gap. So yes, an autopilot can get a plane from start to finish of its journey without pilot intervention, but just like the car, you'd risk a collision if you left it to its own devices.

I'd say, with that in mind, Tesla's autopilot is actually pretty darn close to what's in an aircraft and may well have more decision making control over the vehicle's heading and speed. Only significant difference for me is that Tesla's AP safety improvement process is entirely down to the company and not regulated as it is in the air industry. Then again, the consequences are lower.

You're sort of right, with some adjustments: the technology exists for a suitably equipped aircraft using suitably equipped airports, to take off, fly to destination, hold, approach & land autonomously, ie without human intervention - currently the trickiest bit is safely taxiing to & from the runway. However, it still requires the crew to monitor for deviations, take action in the event of anything unforeseen, & cannot yet account for separating from other aircraft - collision avoidance being a different thing to being safely separated. However, doing it for just one aircraft inconveniences all the others, hence why we're still at the early development stages. To reach "free flight", aircraft will need to deconflict from each other & that's a long way from production ready. Bear in mind, when we're talking about scheduled airline traffic, the crew are the last line of defence, ATC & collision avoidance systems are there to ensure collision avoidance is taken care of, hence collisions of such aircraft are infinitely rare. To keep everyone safe in the sky takes a lot of support on the ground, which none of the automotive systems I know of seem to take into account.

I actually hope Tesla (& the other manufacturers systems) are much more advanced than the systems available in aviation: they'll need to be. Whilst aviation is complex, the system is set up to be operated by well trained & well qualified professionals, & operate in a known safe environment. Aircraft don't need to take account of Granny in her Micra pulling out at the wrong moment, or suddenly finding roadworks on the journey home. Trees don't get blown across airways, & cows don't wander out of fields into controlled airspace. The number of variables is significantly smaller than on the open roads. The only way to truly have total autonomy will be when all vehicles can account for all the fixed & mobile obstacles, whilst interacting safely with all the vehicles around them too. Whilst I'd love to have a nap on the way home from work, I suspect it's a long way off.

[kambites]

kiseca said:

I'd say, with that in mind, Tesla's autopilot is actually pretty darn close to what's in an aircraft and may well have more decision making control over the vehicle's heading and speed. Only significant difference for me is that Tesla's AP safety improvement process is entirely down to the company and not regulated as it is in the air industry. Then again, the consequences are lower.

I think the argument is that the single biggest difference is in the level of training of the people using the systems. Anyone flying an aircraft is likely to have been trained on the exact suite of electronic aids fittted to their aircraft and hence have a very good idea of what they can and can't do (with the unfortunately exception of the 737MAX); car drivers have generally passed a comparatively basic test in a completely different vehicle.

[RobDickinson]

ruprechtmonkeyboy said:

RobDickinson said:

I posted the data on the previous page.

But yes teslas are safer than other cars if they do crash

Any other car?

I'm not sure that is 100% true.

Best results in USA crash testing and EuroNcap say otherwise.

[MarkwG]

RobDickinson said:

ruprechtmonkeyboy said:

RobDickinson said:

I posted the data on the previous page.

But yes teslas are safer than other cars if they do crash

Any other car?

I'm not sure that is 100% true.

Best results in USA crash testing and EuroNcap say otherwise.

https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings - good, but not the best.

[anonymous-user]

RobDickinson said:

ruprechtmonkeyboy said:

RobDickinson said:

I posted the data on the previous page.

But yes teslas are safer than other cars if they do crash

Any other car?

I'm not sure that is 100% true.

Best results in USA crash testing and EuroNcap say otherwise.

Unless I am reading the website incorrectly both Mercedes and BMW are placed higher than Tesla on the Euro NCAP list for 2019?

[mcdjl]

ruprechtmonkeyboy said:

Unless I am reading the website incorrectly both Mercedes and BMW are placed higher than Tesla on the Euro NCAP list for 2019?

2nd and 3rd best (electric/hybrid car) this year: https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/hybrid...
Still plenty better.

[kambites]

Curious that Tesla (and pure EVs in general) fair so badly in the pedestrian impact tests. You'd have thought the lack of engine in the front would help compared to conventional cars.

[kiseca]

kambites said:

Curious that Tesla (and pure EVs in general) fair so badly in the pedestrian impact tests. You'd have thought the lack of engine in the front would help compared to conventional cars.

Yeah. I'd have thought it would help in frontal collision tests too. Don't have to design your crumple zones around a large, solid, very uncrumply engine.

It's an opportunity at least.

[jamoor]

mcdjl said:

kambites said:

NDNDNDND said:

The public perception of 'Autopilot' (especially given the vast majority of people do not encounter or use an autopilot in any setting) is that an autopilot controls the vehicle for you without intervention..

That was my question really -if that really is what the public think autopilot means... why? Where on earth does that perception of the meaning come from?

Ignoring subject matter knowledge and focussing on the language, I think "cruise control" implies every bit as much automated control as "auto-pilot". Is it just that people are familiar with one term and not the other? In which case you could argue that any new term for a driver aid is dangerous unless it's extremely specific.

I have no particularly subject matter experience of auto-pilots. I've used them on sailing boats a couple of times and vaguely know what they do on aeroplanes but it had genuinely never have occured to be that the term might imply complete automation until people started complaining about Tesla's name.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 12th December 13:45

Auto pilot is short for automatic pilot. I can't think why people might think that it would mean that it would automatically pilot the vehicle.
Most peoples perception of autopilot in a plane is that the (human) pilot can press a button and the computer will do the rest, including take off and landing. Hence they expect the car to do the same. When it then valet parks itself, that perception is reinforced.
Theres always the urban legends about cruise control as well: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-uncontrol... which while not being true work and spread on the basis of sounding plausible.

Who watches the plane when autopilot takes over on a plane? They don’t walk off for a nap

[AW111]

NDNDNDND said:

You're being deliberately ignorant.
The technical definition of 'Autopilot' is irrelevant.
The public perception of 'Autopilot' (especially given the vast majority of people do not encounter or use an autopilot in any setting) is that an autopilot controls the vehicle for you without intervention.
You know this. You're just pretending that you don't.

Rubbish.

You may think "autopilot" means something different in a car than a plane or boat, and clearly some other idiots do too, but we're not all that stupid.