Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Hawkmoon on April 02, 2018, 10:20:02 AM
-
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/01/ntsb-unhappy-with-tesla-release-of-investigative-information-in-fatal-crash/
Tesla autopilot steers $70,000 car into Jersey barrier, destroying vehicle, killing driver, and starting a fire. Tesla blames it on the driver.
Tesla said Huang had not followed guidelines intended to ensure drivers are paying attention while the vehicle is in Autopilot mode.
“The driver had received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier in the drive and the driver’s hands were not detected on the wheel for six seconds prior to the collision,” Tesla said. “The driver had about five seconds and 150 meters of unobstructed view of the concrete divider with the crushed crash attenuator, but the vehicle logs show that no action was taken.”
I completely fail to understand why anyone would pay big bux for an "autopilot" that requires the driver to keep his hands on the steering wheel and continuously monitor the "autopilot's" functionality. If I have to constantly be doing nothing other than being prepared to drive the car, I might as well drive the car.
-
Tesla's Autopilot (and the newer "Enhanced Autopilot") are not actually self driving cars. They are, and are marketed as, advanced driver aides. The implied task there being you still need to drive the car, and they will aide you.
Guy should have RTFM. (as should Uber's "I'll watch my phone while being a safety driver").
As far as I am aware, there are no actual self driving cars cleared for retail sale and use in America. They are all still in the testing phase.
-
Tesla's Autopilot (and the newer "Enhanced Autopilot") are not actually self driving cars. They are, and are marketed as, advanced driver aides. The implied task there being you still need to drive the car, and they will aide you.
That was my point.
-
Because it makes long drives easier and safer? ???
I paid for Blind spot radar, parking sensors, and forward collision warning for the same reason. That doesn't mean I never hit the brakes until the beeper goes off, or just ignore my mirrors. The aids help. People pay big bucks for Tesla's driver assist packages because they are the best driver's aides currently on the market. (sadly saddled in an overpriced ride, but that's a different issue). Why would you not get the best drivers aides you can afford?
-
This is why you should always keep your hands on the wheel...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1UxZJ9owXY
-
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/01/ntsb-unhappy-with-tesla-release-of-investigative-information-in-fatal-crash/
Tesla autopilot steers $70,000 car into Jersey barrier, destroying vehicle, killing driver, and starting a fire. Tesla blames it on the driver.
I completely fail to understand why anyone would pay big bux for an "autopilot" that requires the driver to keep his hands on the steering wheel and continuously monitor the "autopilot's" functionality. If I have to constantly be doing nothing other than being prepared to drive the car, I might as well drive the car.
And my $30 million plane, that has a real autopilot, will fly me into the side of a mountain unless I take control. It is a safety feature, not a failsafe.
-
By that logic cruise control is totally useless drivle also because you have to still have to pay attention to needing to slow down, speed up, or stop.
It's an aide ment to make driving easier and allow you to hand over some of the details to the vehicle to make your life and trip more comfortable. I'm not super familiar with the tech but perhaps it's even enough to let you multi task a bit or something, but it's clearly still intended for you to not be taking a friggin nap or whatever the dude was doing so you can take full control when needed.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
There should be a very clear distinction in responsibility between the automated systems and the driver. I think the danger presented by some of these systems is that they blur that line and lull the driver into the sense that the automated systems are responsible for more than they are intended to handle. It's hard to maintain alertness, awareness, and readiness without an actual need. So, if the automated system correctly handles steering and speed control to maintain lane position and a safe following distance, it's easy for someone to start leaning more and more on the automated systems instead of being constantly prepared to intervene.
By that logic cruise control is totally useless drivle also because you have to still have to pay attention to needing to slow down, speed up, or stop.
Cruise control requires the user to maintain positive control and awareness. It maintains a given speed, but still requires you to be directly involved in driving the vehicle at all times or you will crash in short order. When we're talking about systems that can handle all direct control (speed, steering, obstacle avoidance, etc.) of the vehicle in certain circumstances, it is hard to maintain that mindset. If everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.
-
There should be a very clear distinction in responsibility between the automated systems and the driver.
There is. The driver is 100% responsible for the operation of the vehicle. The automated systems have 0 responsibility.
If everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.
Which is why only the driver is responsible for control of the car.
-
Plus you may get stuck with a lemon from a company that is out of business. Tesla is burning through cash, it doesn't look like they can raise any more from either bonds or stock issues due to downgrades from Moody's and the stock price tanking. They only have enough cash on hand for a few more months and they are no where near the 5,000 Model 3's per week production number.
If you have Tesla stock or bonds; run, do not walk, to the exits...
-
Why would you not get the best drivers aides you can afford?
Speaking only for myself .. because I enjoy driving, and the best driver's aids I know of are my own eyes, hands, and feet.
The only technological driver's aid I want is a forward-looking tactical laser.
-
There is. The driver is 100% responsible for the operation of the vehicle. The automated systems have 0 responsibility.
Which is why only the driver is responsible for control of the car.
I don't disagree, however as systems become more capable it is easier and easier for drivers to forget that fact.
-
Speaking only for myself .. because I enjoy driving, and the best driver's aids I know of are my own eyes, hands, and feet.
The only technological driver's aid I want is a forward-looking tactical laser.
Dual 50 caliber machine guns would be nice as well. It would certainly make me feel better if not anyone else.
-
For myself, I would like a backing-up warning radar or irdar. Fully half of my accidents have been backing accidents.
The rest have just been fronting accidents.
-
I don't disagree, however as systems become more capable it is easier and easier for drivers to forget that fact.
That is a training issue, not a technology issue. Also, it is part of the downward trend of taking responsibility for one's self.
Maybe the driving technology needs to come with mandatory instruction.
-
Maybe drivers licenses need to be harder to get...
-
Maybe drivers licenses need to be harder to get...
That has been true for many years.
Everything about this event boils down to a lack of personal responsibility.
-
For myself, I would like a backing-up warning radar or irdar. Fully half of my accidents have been backing accidents.
The rest have just been fronting accidents.
I have that on my F150 along with the camera. It helps a lot. The F150 rides high on the back end and the rear seat head rests don't help. Having the camera makes me wish they had cameras looking at my blind spot also. I am amazed how many people will see you backing up out of a parking spot and just walk right behind you. I figure there will eventually be 360 degree camera views with radar in all directions.
-
And my $30 million plane, that has a real autopilot, will fly me into the side of a mountain unless I take control. It is a safety feature, not a failsafe.
If you can sleep through "TERRAIN PULL UP TERRAIN PULL UP TERRAIN PULL UP" then you likely need to be smacked with a mountain.
Though watching this video: https://electrek.co/2018/04/02/tesla-fatal-autopilot-crash-recreation/ I don't hear any audible warnings over the road noise. Considering everybody else is offering some combination of (at least) forward LiDAR, sonar or radar based collision avoidance, I suspect Tesla's going to have to break down and add something to their visual-only system soon.
-
If you can sleep through "TERRAIN PULL UP TERRAIN PULL UP TERRAIN PULL UP" then you likely need to be smacked with a mountain.
Though watching this video: https://electrek.co/2018/04/02/tesla-fatal-autopilot-crash-recreation/ I don't hear any audible warnings over the road noise. Considering everybody else is offering some combination of (at least) forward LiDAR, sonar or radar based collision avoidance, I suspect Tesla's going to have to break down and add something to their visual-only system soon.
From tesla.com:
Advanced Sensor Coverage
Eight surround cameras provide 360 degrees of visibility around the car at up to 250 meters of range. Twelve updated ultrasonic sensors complement this vision, allowing for detection of both hard and soft objects at nearly twice the distance of the prior system. A forward-facing radar with enhanced processing provides additional data about the world on a redundant wavelength that is able to see through heavy rain, fog, dust and even the car ahead.
It would seem they are ahead of you.
-
I have that on my F150 along with the camera. It helps a lot. The F150 rides high on the back end and the rear seat head rests don't help. Having the camera makes me wish they had cameras looking at my blind spot also. I am amazed how many people will see you backing up out of a parking spot and just walk right behind you. I figure there will eventually be 360 degree camera views with radar in all directions.
My car has back up cam, top down cam, and two cams on the front bumper that can peek around blind corners. The back up cross traffic sensors are ultra sonic. The whole system is really handy. Like a good HUD, it's something I thought would be a gimmick, but use everyday.
-
That has been true for many years.
Imagine if all the states had to upgrade DL standards to parallel FAA pilot licensing standards:
- Mandatory training on recognizing and handling common equipment failures, including actually demonstrating the ability in a simulated emergency. Skid, brake failure, front tire blowout at speed, etc.
- Additional training and certification required to drive in inclement weather.
- Certification for major classes of vehicles: no more passing the test in an automatic Fiesta on rural roads one day and dragging a 40' trailer through downtown Atlanta behind dad's 1-ton dually the next. (Yeah, I passed in a Geo Prism and pulled a 40' flatbed through town behind a 3-on-the-tree 3/4-ton within a week.)
- Driver held responsible for checking all vehicle equipment regularly
- Whole other set of requirements to be paid for driving, even in a small passenger car
- Regular medical checkups required to show driver isn't blind, psychotic or actively addicted to alcohol or drugs
- Functional English skills
- Driver deviation investigation process that might cost your license instead of pay-the-court-take-an-online-class-and-forget-it traffic tickets.
As a bicycle mechanic in the only bike shop within 30 miles, the above would likely make me a fairly wealthy man in short order...along with any of the local cab and intercity shuttle drivers who manage to keep their jobs, and the makers and sellers of good walking shoes. As a daily cyclist and occasional pedestrian, I'd feel a hell of a lot safer on the roads, too.
-
From tesla.com:
It would seem they are ahead of you.
Then it would seem either their sensors or the processing software are crap, since they ran one car straight into a fixed solid object at speed, and then tried to do exactly the same to the one in the video I posted, and at least the one in the video never gave any warning other than the subtle (and timer based, not triggered by a hazard) "put your hands back on the wheel" blink.
-
The car lobby will never let common sense laws like that through.
-
Then it would seem either their sensors or the processing software are crap, since they ran one car straight into a fixed solid object at speed, and then tried to do exactly the same to the one in the video I posted, and at least the one in the video never gave any warning other than the subtle (and timer based, not triggered by a hazard) "put your hands back on the wheel" blink.
It's crap because it doesn't unfailingly keep you in a lane in all conditions, despite it explicitly saying in the manual that it won't and you need to drive the car?
Here's the long and short of it: if this guy had been texting and smeared a Camry into the wall at 80 because he didn't notice the lane keep assist beep, we wouldn't be talking about it. He tried to use a Tesla as a self driving car, which it isn't. It's the drivers fault he plowed into a barrier at speed because he couldn't be bothered to A. drive the car, and B. RTFM and understand what the systems he was trying to use actually do.
-
Here I am not 100% sold on ABS. I know how to use it, but I know how to use nonn abs too. I think the driver aids we have enable enough confidence that a higher terminal velocity is attained before the oops. I decided that engine off while driving will be part of my kid's learning curve. Whether a one ton truck downhill with a trailer, or the Mercedes at 80 mph in a curve when the belt spit things get sporty in a hurry without power steering and brakes.
-
It's the drivers fault he plowed into a barrier at speed because he couldn't be bothered to A. drive the car, and B. RTFM and understand what the systems he was trying to use actually do.
QFTMFT
Until the driver's seat is removed, or all of the driving controls are removed, it is not a self-driving car. Therefore, a trained operator must be in position to control the car. If there is a driver, the driver is 100% responsible for driving the car regardless of the technology being used to assist the driver.
To put it into aviation terms: The Driver in Command of an automobile is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that automobile.
-
Maybe a few more people can give opinions on who is responsible for the operation of the car. I still don't get it. =D
I was curious on this if all the automated systems in the car were actually working as designed. I am still not sure. They did say there was unrepaired damage to the front bumper if I read it right. Either way, it sounds like this particular driver has had issues with the car before and should have learned his lesson. Too late now.
What surprises me a little is I see ads showing all the automated safety features in these cars and I would think even a partially automated car could avoid the worst collisions. Then again, I deal with automated systems at work. They function great.....most of the time.
-
There is no automated system that's going to avoid a collision for the driver. There are, however, automated systems that make it easier for the driver to avoid a collision.
If the driver is to busy picking his nose with one hand and scratching his balls with the other to pay attention and take back control of the car when the situation demands it, that's not the cars fault.
Collision radar isn't there to bring the car to a full stop. Lane drift detection isn't there to keep the car locked in one lane. Etc etc. It's there to warn you, and perhaps broaden the abilities of the automated system. Much like cruise control however it's there to aid the driver under normal, safe, non-noteable conditions. When something noteable pops up the driver needs to be able to take control back from the vehicle to deal with that. If they don't cause they're to busy to bother, that's their problem and fault.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
There is no automated system that's going to avoid a collision for the driver. There are, however, automated systems that make it easier for the driver to avoid a collision.
If the driver is to busy picking his nose with one hand and scratching his balls with the other to pay attention and take back control of the car when the situation demands it, that's not the cars fault.
Collision radar isn't there to bring the car to a full stop. Lane drift detection isn't there to keep the car locked in one lane. Etc etc. It's there to warn you, and perhaps broaden the abilities of the automated system. Much like cruise control however it's there to aid the driver under normal, safe, non-noteable conditions. When something noteable pops up the driver needs to be able to take control back from the vehicle to deal with that. If they don't cause they're to busy to bother, that's their problem and fault.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
But I'm old and technology is scary! :old:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Who's responsible for the operation of your car.
Republicans -- The driver!
Democrats -- The manufacturer!
Libertarians -- It's none of your goddamned business who's operating my car!
Ultraliberals -- The state will operate your car for you!
Bernie Sanders -- The government should give everyone a car!
Tea Party -- Make American cars great again!
Donald Trump -- It will be the greatest American car ever!
Hillary Clinton -- What does it matter anymore who's operating your car?
Al Gore -- We're all going to die from car-related global warming.
David Hogg -- It's a high school student massacre, we need to have common sense gun laws that will make cars safer!
-
But I'm old and technology is scary! :old:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
No, you just can't see over the steering wheel without a pillow under your ass. :rofl:
-
Maybe a few more people can give opinions on who is responsible for the operation of the car. I still don't get it. =D
OK, one more time. And I will use small words:
The sheriff is near.
Understand now? :-*
-
To put it into aviation terms: The Driver in Command of an automobile is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that automobile.
Right; I'm not saying the driver wasn't an idiot. However, if someone posted video of themselves gently scraping the belly of a 320 across a cornfield while GPWS indicated no issues whatsoever, wouldn't you want a full investigation and some programmers' heads to roll if such a major and obvious bug could be isolated and identified? How about if they proved that some not-uncommon condition can cause the radar altimeter to read 50 feet high or the GPS miscalculates everything 150 feet to the left on alternate Tuesdays between 3:17 and 3:19 PM? Sure, you should be able to find a runway and land it entirely with charts, windows and standby instruments, but you know damn well if all those helpful electronics give you plausible but false readings at a critical time, it's likely to get rough, and that's not too far from what happened with the Tesla's much-touted collision avoidance system not detecting a crash barrier. Heck, the guy in the video didn't have a lot of room to spare when he got stopped, and he was somewhat expecting exactly what happened.
Of course, my other observation on the situation is that Tesla should have set the stupid thing to refuse to cruise in the left lane. AFAICT, the current software doesn't auto-pass, so it should be looking for the rightmost through lane at all times.
-
Who's responsible for the operation of your car.
Republicans -- The driver!
Democrats -- The manufacturer!
Libertarians -- It's none of your goddamned business who's operating my car!
Ultraliberals -- The state will operate your car for you!
Bernie Sanders -- The government should give everyone a car!
Tea Party -- Make American cars great again!
Donald Trump -- It will be the greatest American car ever!
Hillary Clinton -- What does it matter anymore who's operating your car?
Al Gore -- We're all going to die from car-related global warming.
David Hogg -- It's a high school student massacre, we need to have common sense gun laws that will make cars safer!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
Right; I'm not saying the driver wasn't an idiot. However, if someone posted video of themselves gently scraping the belly of a 320 across a cornfield while GPWS indicated no issues whatsoever, wouldn't you want a full investigation and some programmers' heads to roll if such a major and obvious bug could be isolated and identified? How about if they proved that some not-uncommon condition can cause the radar altimeter to read 50 feet high or the GPS miscalculates everything 150 feet to the left on alternate Tuesdays between 3:17 and 3:19 PM? Sure, you should be able to find a runway and land it entirely with charts, windows and standby instruments, but you know damn well if all those helpful electronics give you plausible but false readings at a critical time, it's likely to get rough, and that's not too far from what happened with the Tesla's much-touted collision avoidance system not detecting a crash barrier. Heck, the guy in the video didn't have a lot of room to spare when he got stopped, and he was somewhat expecting exactly what happened.
Of course, my other observation on the situation is that Tesla should have set the stupid thing to refuse to cruise in the left lane. AFAICT, the current software doesn't auto-pass, so it should be looking for the rightmost through lane at all times.
I think you are thinking along the same lines I am. Not trying to say the driver isn't responsible, but if all those electronic gadgets are supposed to help avoid collisions and such, I want to know if they did what they were supposed to. If some of the sensors were out of commission, should the automated stuff refuse to work and force the driver to drive? It sounds in this case like they may have worked well enough if the driver was paying attention and took action.
-
OK, one more time. And I will use small words:
The sheriff is near.
Understand now? :-*
Pardon me while I whip this out...
-
I think you are thinking along the same lines I am. Not trying to say the driver isn't responsible, but if all those electronic gadgets are supposed to help avoid collisions and such, I want to know if they did what they were supposed to. If some of the sensors were out of commission, should the automated stuff refuse to work and force the driver to drive? It sounds in this case like they may have worked well enough if the driver was paying attention and took action.
If collision avoidance is out, then it really shouldn't allow hands-off at all since it's hardly more than old fashioned cruise control at that point. But then, the guy in the video didn't get any alerts either, and his was supposedly working fine.
-
If collision avoidance is out, then it really shouldn't allow hands-off at all since it's hardly more than old fashioned cruise control at that point. But then, the guy in the video didn't get any alerts either, and his was supposedly working fine.
It doesn't. It specifically says DON'T take your hands of the wheel. And then if you do it both dings and flashes at you to tell you to put your hands back on the wheel.
From the Model S Manual:
Warning: Autosteer is a hands-on feature. You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times.
Warning: Autosteer is intended for use only on highways and limited-access roads with a fully attentive driver. When using Autosteer, hold the steering wheel and be mindful of road conditions and surrounding traffic. Do not use Autosteer on city streets, in construction zones, or in areas where bicyclists or pedestrians may be present. Never depend on Autosteer to determine an appropriate driving path. Always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause serious property damage, injury or death
(bolding mine)
And the next page:
Hold Steering Wheel
Autosteer uses data from the camera, sensors, and GPS to determine how best to steer Model S. When active, Autosteer requires you to hold the steering wheel. If it does not detect your hands on the steering wheel for a period of time, a flashing white light appears around the instrument panel and the following message is displayed on the instrument panel: [There's a picture of the graphic here]
Autosteer detects your hands by recognizing light resistance as the steering wheel turns or from you manually turning the steering wheel very lightly (i.e., without enough force to retake control). When your hands are detected, the message disappears and Autosteer resumes normal operation.
Note: Autosteer may also sound a chime at the same time that the message is initially displayed.
Autosteer requires that you pay attention to your surroundings and remain prepared to take control at any time. If Autosteer still does not detect your hands on the steering wheel, the request escalates by sounding chimes that increase in frequency
If you repeatedly ignore hands-on prompts, Autosteer displays the following message and becomes disabled for the rest of the drive. If you don't resume manual steering, Autosteer sounds a continuous chime, turns on the warning flashers, and slows the vehicle to a complete stop.
There is no hands off mode in a Tesla. Both the dead guy, and the guy in the video operated their car in a manner that the manufacturer explicitly says not to do, and indeed will cause the car to stop in the middle of the road if continued.
Perhaps the sensors or software could be tweaked to make it less likely to need your intervention, and I'm sure Tesla is looking at that. But if you do exactly what the instructions tell you not to, and then ignore the car's warning to stop doing that, and then wreck, it's not the software's fault.
Not trying to say the driver isn't responsible, but if all those electronic gadgets are supposed to help avoid collisions and such, I want to know if they did what they were supposed to.
They did better then they were supposed to. They got him all the way to the scene of the accident. =D
-
Side note: While reading the Tesla Model S manual I noticed these two gems:
Canceling Autosteer
Autosteer cancels when:
•
You start steering manually.
•
You press the brake pedal.
•
You push the cruise control lever away
from you.
•
You unbuckle the driver's seat belt.
•
The maximum speed that Autosteer
supports (90 mph/150 km/h) is exceeded.
•
You shift out of the Drive gear.
•
An Automatic Emergency Braking event occurs (see Collision Avoidance Assist on page 85).
That seems a touch excessive.
also, the first line in the Autosteer section:
Note: Autosteer is a BETA feature.
:laugh: Perhaps the software needs a little massaging yet after all.
-
Pardon me while I whip this out...
You’ve got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons.
And Driver Assist =/= Driver Replacement. I wouldn't even trust a car to "Self Park", whether it be parallel, backing, or even pulling straight in. Driver aids (reverse camera/sonar warning system, etc) I'm fine with. I've had them in rental cars, but the ones that "take over" for you...Umm no.
-
I was curious on this if all the automated systems in the car were actually working as designed. I am still not sure. They did say there was unrepaired damage to the front bumper if I read it right.
I don't think the unrepaired damage was to the bumper of the car, I think it was an unrepaired section of the Jersey barrier that he crashed into. Could a gap in the barrier have fooled a sensor in the autopilot system? Dunno, but possible, and I'm sure the investigation will look into that.
I'm just admittedly negative on the whole Tesla Autopilot concept. I think they call it "Autopilot," then in the fine print they explain that it's not really "autopilot." Well, if it isn't autopilot, why do you call it Autopilot? And if I have to keep my hands on the steering wheel and my eyes on the road -- what's the point of Tesla's [non]Autopilot system?
-
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/04/02/tesla-fatal-crash-autopilot-recreation-near-collision/
-
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/04/02/tesla-fatal-crash-autopilot-recreation-near-collision/
So the the semi-auto driving mode doesn't handle all road conditions. Good to know. Looks like there were visual warnings. I didn't hear the audible.
-
And if I have to keep my hands on the steering wheel and my eyes on the road -- what's the point of Tesla's [non]Autopilot system?
The same point as cruise control, even though you shouldn't go ahead and stick your feet out of the window to air out, cause they should be by the brake and gas peddles in case you need to use them? Just because the system will do it for you under the expected conditions it was designed for doesn't mean you shouldn't be in a position to take over for it should those conditions change. Tesla seems to pretty well explain that.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
Watched the linked video again.
Look at the dash from :28 on. The car tells him that it's lost the right hand lane marker as the lane widens, and is only following the left side. (The side of the road goes from blue to grey on the dash.)
Plenty of time to look up and see that's not the line to follow.
-
Watched the linked video again.
Look at the dash from :28 on. The car tells him that it's lost the right hand lane marker as the lane widens, and is only following the left side. (The side of the road goes from blue to grey on the dash.)
Plenty of time to look up and see that's not the line to follow.
Indeed. And watching the video the driver seems to let it go quite a bit longer than most folks who are paying attention, even had they leaned back and relaxed a bit, would have before intervening. I'd imagine for the sake of testing? Even so he's able to stop the vehicle instead of plowing head long into the barrier.
Looks like the car is indicating pretty clearly that it's loosing it's sensing ability and that you should take back control.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
I was curious on this if all the automated systems in the car were actually working as designed. I am still not sure. They did say there was unrepaired damage to the front bumper if I read it right. Either way, it sounds like this particular driver has had issues with the car before and should have learned his lesson. Too late now.
Reading up, it wasn't the car's bumper, it's that the barrier had a bumper itself - you know those wavy metal things on the sides of many bridges? Those are designed to bend, absorb energy. Same idea with placing barrels of sand/water before bridge supports - they're supposed to bend to help save the lives of anybody hitting it.
That had been crushed by a car like a week earlier, but the highway department hadn't fixed or replaced it yet.
What surprises me a little is I see ads showing all the automated safety features in these cars and I would think even a partially automated car could avoid the worst collisions. Then again, I deal with automated systems at work. They function great.....most of the time.
From what I'm hearing, tesla's features have cut the accident rate in half. So as bad as they are, they still help. They really reworked things after the one Tesla hit the trailer.
But yes, they're very much NOT self driving cars.
-
[EDIT, guess MechAg beat me to that last part. What I get for forgetting I was posting something until I woke up to turn the heater on and decided to check the time on the laptop rather than get my phone from its "I have to get up and go all the way over there to snooze the alarm" spot.]
Indeed. And watching the video the driver seems to let it go quite a bit longer than most folks who are paying attention, even had they leaned back and relaxed a bit, would have before intervening. I'd imagine for the sake of testing? Even so he's able to stop the vehicle instead of plowing head long into the barrier.
Now imagine he's been driving for hours, and happened to choose just the wrong 3-5 seconds to work a few kinks out of his neck. Or got distracted by something in the wing mirror.
1) The car should begin to slow, pull over and shut down after no more than 2-3 seconds of no-hands.
2) Collision avoidance should...hell, do something. Even if it's the wrong thing, there's a ginormous impact attenuator a few seconds ahead at current speed and the car is just happily blasting along straight at it. I'm pretty sure those aren't made from surplus SR-71 parts.
3) VERY LOUD audible warnings for any danger scenario, that can't be muted without shutting off all automation features completely. I'm talking painfully loud; it's less painful than smashing the car into stuff, after all.
Hawkmoon; my understanding is that the "unrepaired" damage was an impact attenuator that hadn't been replaced after being hit more than a week before. It would still have been a big hollow plastic object that visual and sonar should spot easily. There's no repairing those; the whole point is that they rupture and crush to absorb the energy of an impact. The replacement process is straightforward, and I can't see any legitimate excuse for it not happening within 24 hours of the responsible (ha!) agency becoming aware of the damage: bring out the replacement from the storage yard, and anchor it in whatever way is used there, if any, then roll out a tanker to fill it with water. Plenty aren't anchored; 4+ tons of water in a plastic tank doesn't usually need to be tied down to stay put. If they don't have the right size/shape/whatever on hand, then construct a temporary one from water barrels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_attenuator#Water-filled_attenuators
The one in question appears to be one or more larger, special-shaped containers similar to the one in the picture at Wikipedia rather than a series of barrels, but that should make it even easier to replace as it's fewer parts, all of which are easily carried on a normal flatbed truck and can be deployed by 2-3 men when empty. The one in the video is black, with no obvious reflectors, which makes me want to replace it with the people who approved that, duct taped into immobility, but it's still no excuse for an "advanced collision avoidance system" to think it's a good place to drive through at highway speeds.
-
Hawkmoon; my understanding is that the "unrepaired" damage was an impact attenuator that hadn't been replaced after being hit more than a week before. It would still have been a big hollow plastic object that visual and sonar should spot easily.
There are a number of different types of impact attenuators. We don't know which type this was. In my corner of my state, they seem to have switched from wedges of sand-filled plastic barrels to some sort of telescoping contraption. Neither one leaves much after being hit at any significant speed. However, the post or Jersey barrier or whatever that the attenuator was supposed to protect people from is still there and a functioning collision-avoidance system should still, like, avoid the collision.
-
So a system designed to keep you in your lane at highway speeds on a limited access highway is now a malfunctioning "collision avoidance system?
Tesla Model X's do have Automatic Emergency Braking system. However, one of the things that disables that system is sharp steering input so not sure how that would impact avoiding a traffic barrier.
-
Sorry for the tangent, but I'm curious - are these systems also designed to step in for adverse weather conditions, like driving (and more importantly stopping) in snow and ice?
-
Other than ABS? Don't think so.
I confess I'm not a Tesla expert, I'm just reading the manual online.
https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/model_x_owners_manual_north_america_en.pdf
It explains in detail what the systems are supposed to do, and where the drivers went wrong.
-
So a system designed to keep you in your lane at highway speeds on a limited access highway is now a malfunctioning "collision avoidance system?
Tesla Model X's do have Automatic Emergency Braking system. However, one of the things that disables that system is sharp steering input so not sure how that would impact avoiding a traffic barrier.
Well, you would think it would do something rather than just giving up telling the driver "you got this, right?". Even continuing to follow the right or left lines (whichever it still senses) would avoid the barrier. A minimum default might be to let off the gas and apply brakes if the driver doesn't take control. That would get someone's attention if the other alerts did not.
The system apparently did what it was designed to do. I just think they could design in a fail safe or two without changing things a great deal. However, this is still fairly new tech so things like this will come up that fall outside the computer's programming. It doesn't mean the driver's isn't still responsible, just that Tesla can do it a little better going forward.
-
Well, you would think it would do something rather than just giving up telling the driver "you got this, right?". Even continuing to follow the right or left lines (whichever it still senses) would avoid the barrier. A minimum default might be to let off the gas and apply brakes if the driver doesn't take control. That would get someone's attention if the other alerts did not.
Go back and watch that recreation video again, especially from :27 to :35. Your suggestion that I bolded is exactly what the car did. It lost the right hand line because the lane widened out of it's spec and the right hand line was dashed and faint. It locked on the left hand lane line and tried to keep the car in the lane. When the highway split, what should have been a triangle with hashmarks up to the barrel was actually one nice bright line, and some faint hashmarks. The left lane line of the lane he was trying to be in doesn't exist. So the car followed the one lane line it could see which, due to IL DOT negligence, ended up becoming the right hand line of the diverging lane. The car followed that line right into the barrier. Perhaps if the lane lines had actually existed, the Tesla could have followed them.
If you freeze it at :29 you can pretty clearly see the car locked onto the left hand line, which is diverging from the highway, and will hit the barrier. You can also see that the left hand line of the lane that he was trying to be in doesn't exist. You can't track something that doesn't exist.
-
Go back and watch that recreation video again, especially from :27 to :35. Your suggestion that I bolded is exactly what the car did. It lost the right hand line because the lane widened out of it's spec and the right hand line was dashed and faint. It locked on the left hand lane line and tried to keep the car in the lane. When the highway split, what should have been a triangle with hashmarks up to the barrel was actually one nice bright line, and some faint hashmarks. The left lane line of the lane he was trying to be in doesn't exist. So the car followed the one lane line it could see which, due to IL DOT negligence, ended up becoming the right hand line of the diverging lane. The car followed that line right into the barrier. Perhaps if the lane lines had actually existed, the Tesla could have followed them.
If you freeze it at :29 you can pretty clearly see the car locked onto the left hand line, which is diverging from the highway, and will hit the barrier. You can also see that the left hand line of the lane that he was trying to be in doesn't exist. You can't track something that doesn't exist.
Nor can you blame the car when the damned thing is giving you all this information and you should be paying attention.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
Nor can you blame the car when the damned thing is giving you all this information and you should be paying attention.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
The car and programming are perfect. All autonomous cars of the future should use that exact program for control. No improvement will ever be needed. All issues are the fault of the driver.
Once you are assimilated, you will agree.
=D
I wasn't doing a second by second analysis of the video. I already said it looked like the car was doing what it was set up to do. However, there are always things that can be done better (that includes the car, the driver, and other) even if I don't know what they are. Tesla probably already has improvements planned based on this and other stuff, but I wouldn't expect them to talk about it.
-
There are a number of different types of impact attenuators. We don't know which type this was. In my corner of my state, they seem to have switched from wedges of sand-filled plastic barrels to some sort of telescoping contraption. Neither one leaves much after being hit at any significant speed.
The crap view of the one in the video looks to me like a water-filled one. Then again, I'm basing that on Texas experience, and we tend to use water for the obvious advantages in places where it won't freeze. (Easily transported and pumped into the containers, simply flows away after one is hit, etc.) The chunks of plastic laying around in one of the wreck aftermath photos look like the same type I've seen used in those around here, too.
However, the post or Jersey barrier or whatever that the attenuator was supposed to protect people from is still there and a functioning collision-avoidance system should still, like, avoid the collision.
Yeah, that's pretty much the entire relevant part.
-
And that is the improvement part. There apparently wasn't much "collision avoidance" built into the system. That is fine as they don't promise that and seem to make it clear it doesn't do that. However, it does include safety and alarm features short of that. That is still on the driver.
-
So a system designed to keep you in your lane at highway speeds on a limited access highway is now a malfunctioning "collision avoidance system?
Two separate systems. Whether it's true autopilot or just semi-assisted driving, I'm sure a Tesla has some doohicky that's supposed to stop the vehicle before it wraps itself around a solid object that's basically dead ahead.
Tesla Model X's do have Automatic Emergency Braking system. However, one of the things that disables that system is sharp steering input so not sure how that would impact avoiding a traffic barrier.
That might be part of the issue.
-
https://kprcradio.iheart.com/featured/the-pursuit-of-happiness/content/2018-05-30-tesla-car-in-autopilot-mode-crashes-into-parked-police-car-in-california/
This is a video, but another case of a Tesla with its autopilot feature in use that crashed. This time into a parked (unoccupied) police SUV.
-
Once you are assimilated, you will agree.
To quote Barbie of Borg, "I will not comply".
I've been some thought to getting another classic VW Type 1 just to get AWAY from all the gimmicky gadgets in modern automobiles. :old: Sure, they suck most heinously in an accident, but I was willing to accept that risk on a motorcycle. I'd love to get a Schwimmwagen, even a Kübelwagen would be fantastic. But both are few, far between and unGodsly expensive.
-
Plus you may get stuck with a lemon from a company that is out of business. Tesla is burning through cash, it doesn't look like they can raise any more from either bonds or stock issues due to downgrades from Moody's and the stock price tanking. They only have enough cash on hand for a few more months and they are no where near the 5,000 Model 3's per week production number.
If you have Tesla stock or bonds; run, do not walk, to the exits...
They might be one of the most overvalued corporations I've seen in recent times. Their market capitalization is higher than Ford or GM, which makes no sense at all.