Man Blames Tesla Autopilot System For Rollover Crash, Then Recants (autoguide.com)

According to AutoGuide, the driver of a Tesla is blaming the Autopilot system for a recent crash in Minnesota. "58-year old David Clark was approaching an intersection when he turned the Autopilot system on, causing the car to accelerate suddenly and veer off the road," reports AutoGuide. "The vehicle ended up on its roof in a marsh with all five occupants sustaining minor injuries." From the report: Tesla's Autopilot function is considered an SAE Level 2 autonomous system, meaning the car will accelerate and steer on its own, but the driver is expected to remain alert and intervene if necessary. In an emailed statement to Electrek, Tesla said it has yet to establish whether or not the Autopilot function was actually turned on at the time of the accident. The company also noted it is still the driver's responsibility to ensure the safe operation of the vehicle when Autopilot is engaged. AutoGuide's report was based off the information Kandiyohi County Sheriff's Office received and reported. Now, it appears the Tesla driver is claiming the self-driving Autopilot system wasn't responsible for the crash, despite what he initially told investigators. According to ABC News, Clark said he was confused in the moments after the crash. After discussing the crash with his fellow passengers, he now believes that he disengaged Autopilot by stepping on the accelerator before the crash. "I then remember looking up and seeing the sharp left turn which I was accelerating into. I believe we started to make the turn but then felt the car give way and lose its footing like we hit loose gravel," Clark wrote in the email.

Comments

When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[mykepredko]

I would think their lawyers (and hopefully marketers) cringe every time they see a story like this. The name "Autopilot" (while great) implies that nothing needs to be done by the driver so any accidents will be the car's fault, basically by definition.

Keep the "Autopilot" registered mark when they have something that works at Level 4 or 5 but for now, call it something like "Lane Keeping Assist" and eliminate the headlines "Driver killed while Tesla Autopilot Active".

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[vought]

People using this feature freak me out when I'm riding my motorcycle into San Francisco. The normal behavior of phone-users is to brake, speed up, slow down, bounce off of the lane markers (Driving by Braille) and generally endanger those of us on two wheels.

Tesla drivers? There they are, tapping away on the fucking phone with their eyes down and the car is gliding along, centered in the lane and steady, station-keeping a safe distance form the car in front of it.

Please, more like this.

As far as people blaming cars for their own stupidity, I'll trust the engineers at Tesla, thanks. Our Audi 5000 didn't take off by itself and neither do Teslas.

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[ShanghaiBill]

The name "Autopilot" (while great) implies that nothing needs to be done by the driver

I have heard this said many many times by people that all have one thing in common: They don't own a Tesla, and have never driven one. So it doesn't matter if it is misleading to them, since they aren't actually using it. Likewise, it doesn't really matter if you misunderstand what a aircraft autopilot does if you aren't a pilot.

Meanwhile, for those of us that actually drive Teslas, there is no way that we are stupid enough to believe that it is "hands-off" just because of the name. Anyone that uses the system can see that it requires human interaction.

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[Ogive17]

And in the moment where something happens and "Autopilot" notifies the driver it needs to take over and they swerve into your lane because they had no situational awareness... no, we don't need more of that.

I have driven level 2 cars before, they are great.. but I never let it drive me. In my opinion, they greatly reduce driving fatigue. However until every car on the road is at least level 3 or above, I will keep my hands on the wheel and my eyes on the road... just hope others do the same.

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's annoying because I believe it really is as good as an airplane autopilot (flight director) system of today.

It's just that airplane autopilots have vastly easier tasks -- 80% is simply 'head directly to this waypoint at these coordinates and altitude", and another 10-15% is simply follow this heading given by ATC. (There's a bit more to it around rates of turn and rates of altitude change for the more advanced routes, but the point is it's all hard coded ahead of time and almost trivial algorithm wise.)

There's no 'follow the road' - it's merely head directly to a waypoint.
There's no 'keep track of other cars' - in the rare case of another plane in the way, TCAS systems provide the very straightforward "CLIMB" or "DESCEND" instruction. Most of the time, it's still, "head to waypoint" because ATC has avoided the other planes.
There's no avoid pedestrians.
There's no weather implications. Human pilots program the route in around that..
There are no intersections - the closest is "once you hit waypoint x on the route, proceed to waypoint y".
There are no lanes.

The list goes on.

TLDR: Airplanes head directly to point 'x'. if *that* was all a car autopilot had to do, it's borderline trivial (the hardest point is taking account turning radius!).

Re: When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[michelcolman]

So what happens if you're nearing a curve, autopilot wants to slow down, but you stomp on the gas? Won't that give a pretty similar result to what happened in this case? Do you think the autopilot will "just go faster" and make the turn regardless of the laws of physics?

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[michelcolman]

Most autoland systems do idle the engines and apply the brakes. They don't deploy reverse thrust, though. Also, they don't select flaps and put the gear down. All of the setup is still for the pilots to do, the plane is just really good at keeping the localizer and glide slope perfectly centered, maintaining the set speed, pulling the nose up at the right time and bringing the plane to a stop. That's all the autoland system does, really. And it requires a fair bit of training to handle all the possible malfunctions, because the reaction of the system is usually just a "hey, you need to take over" or even worse, no reaction at all. And malfunctions do occur frequently, these systems are nowhere nearly ready to work without human supervision. Autolands are more stressful than manual landings, we only do them when visibility is really, really low.

No current autopilot system on commercial planes can take off autonomously. That's a deliberate decision because airplane manufacturers have decided that the decision to abort or continue a take-off is too critical to be left to automation. The margin for error is so small that they want the pilot to have his/her hands on the controls and actively controlling the airplane rather than waste seconds having to transition from "all is going well automatically, no need for me to do anything" to "WTF we need to do something!".

Taxiing is a different matter altogether. It would need extra sensors to avoid hitting things with the wings, and the added value is probably not considered to be worth the development cost. If a pilot gets lost on the taxiways, that's just an inconvenience with no lives depending on it.

Re:When will Tesla lose the name "Autopilot"?

[Ol Olsoc]

but for now, call it something like "Lane Keeping Assist" and eliminate the headlines "Driver killed while Tesla Autopilot Active".

We are talking about Tesla. Detractors will seize on whatever they can seize on, so the headlines won't go away. Remember the hue and cry when one Tesla caught fire? You would have thought that Musk was hiding a body in the trunk of every Tesla.

Meanwhile Legacy vehicles catch fire every day.

So these stories will not stop, and even a fake positive like this one is seized upon.

"The car will tattle on the driver."

[SensitiveMale]

I said it before here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10765687&cid=54657685 and I'll say it again.

There is no more "he said/she said" with a Tesla. That car will tell investigators everything.

If you get into an accident driving one, everything you did is logged and will be submitted into court if it goes that far.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[Rei]

Which, IMHO, is a good thing.

If I did nothing wrong, I want my car to exonerate me.
If it was my fault, then I deserve what I have coming.

He said / she said is a terrible system.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[redcliffe]

I agree. A lot of anti-surveillance and anti-logging arguments are basically "I want to do the wrong thing and get away with it".

The actual argument we should be having is about what is right or wrong, not whether you should be caught if you do the wrong thing.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[Herkum01]

Obviously you are not a lawyer, because "he said / she said" is numerous billing hours and courts and works out great for them and the justice system.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[PolygamousRanchKid]

If you get into an accident driving one, everything you did is logged and will be submitted into court if it goes that far.

The helpful engineers at VW have logged all the emissions data from my car, and the data proves that my Triple-Diesel-Turbo-Afterburner-Stinker is actually Carbon Negative! This means that the more I drive and the more diesel I burn is actually better for the environment!

I have this faint, fleeting notion that Tesla software is never going to log a problem that implicates itself.

"Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error."

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[Pascoea]

You've been driving this road for decades, so you know it's a long yellow light.

So you're saying, "I could have safely stopped for the yellow light, but since I know it's a long yellow I decided I could beat it." Along with all of the other "bad stuff" you mention, not driving defensively, poor hand placement, loud music, distracted driving, are all choices you make.

You may have done nothing wrong and couldn't have prevented the accident

Not doing any one of the 5 things you mentioned in your comment may or may not prevent the accident, but which one is going to look better on paper in front of a judge? Your argument is basically, if I get in an accident I don't want my car to tell the judge if I fucked up.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[SensitiveMale]

So you're saying, "I could have safely stopped for the yellow light, but since I know it's a long yellow I decided I could beat it." Along with all of the other "bad stuff" you mention, not driving defensively, poor hand placement, loud music, distracted driving, are all choices you make.

Nope. There is no "beating" the yellow light. I was clear in my example. The light was green when you started in the intersection. Are you telling me that you're one of those people that will slam on the brakes at the first sign of a yellow light? Yes, I'm sure you will reply to some different scenario that the one I'm suggesting.

I'm sure that you always have both hands at 10 & 2 (even during turns so kudos on that by the way), never coast through an intersection, immediately slam on the brakes when the light turns yellow no matter how close you are to the light, never have the radio on, never talk on the phone, never eat or drink in the car, never have a pet in the car, never bring your kids along, or do anything else while driving. I'm sure you never speed (not even 1 mile over or coast while going downhill), never turn the radio on above a whisper, never carry on a conversation in person or on the phone, always stay in the right lane, and so on. Well, congratulations because you're the only one.

Before you think I'm going overboard, reread your reply and you put yourself on that pedestal.

Your argument is basically, if I get in an accident I don't want my car to tell the judge if I fucked up.

Nope. My argument is that the driver didn't do anything wrong, but a lawyer can and will argue that he did. If you would get off that delusional and self righteous horse, you could see that.

You are driving into the intersection and the light changes yellow. Got that? You're IN the intersection. The safe course of action is to keep going because the light just turned yellow, you KNOW it's a long yellow, the guy behind you is going as well, so it would be stupid to slam on the brakes & hope to stop near the brake line.

But a lawyer will argue the opposite because it's their job to do so.

The point is you didn't fuck up but a lawyer can pour over the logs and make it look like you did.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[Pascoea]

No righteous high horse, no pedestal. I'm just as guilty as you are of everything you mentioned. Merely looking it it from the other point of view.

I've been on both sides of shitty situations. I busted up the back of another car because it was wet and I was following too close, and I've totaled a car because a guy completely disregarded a traffic signal. My point is that in both instances, data logging likely would have changed the outcome. The guy I rear ended unreasonably dynamited the brakes because the left turn light turned yellow, dude was literally stopped in the middle of the intersection when I hit him. When I t-boned the guy I was exceeding the speed limit, not by a lot but enough that 5-10 MPH would have made a huge difference. The first instance I was 100% at fault, when in reality he should have shared some of the blame. In the second, he was found 100% at fault where I should have shared in it.

And the argumentative side of me want's to say no, you weren't clear at all in your example. All you said was you were driving on a green and it turned yellow, no mention of how far away from the intersection you were or if you could safely stop. The only detail you provided was you that know the light stays yellow for a long time

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[jezwel]

Nope. There is no "beating" the yellow light. I was clear in my example.

You are driving into the intersection and the light changes yellow. Got that? You're IN the intersection.

Yup got it.

The safe course of action is to keep going because the light just turned yellow, you KNOW it's a long yellow, the guy behind you is going as well, so it would be stupid to slam on the brakes & hope to stop near the brake line.

You are legally obliged to 1) not enter an intersection where you cannot clear the intersection - regardless of the color of the light, and 2) clear the intersection after entering it. The length of the yellow time is irrelevant - if it turns red while you are still clearing the intersection you are still in the clear.

The point is you didn't fuck up but a lawyer can pour over the logs and make it look like you did.

You were following the law by clearing an intersection where the light turned yellow. As long as the Tesla can report that it could not safely stop prior to the start of the intersection when the light turned yellow, you are in the clear in regards to whether you should be in the intersection. As to hitting another car, well that's where the argument starts as to who had right of way.

Re:"The car will tattle on the driver."

[angel'o'sphere]

I'm sure that you always have both hands at 10 & 2 (even during turns so kudos on that by the way),
No I prefer half past 9 and 2:30.

never coast through an intersection,
True.

immediately slam on the brakes when the light turns yellow no matter how close you are to the light,
Nope, the yellow is an indicator. Red is the stop sign, not yellow.

never have the radio on,
True, I listen to CDs :D with "normal loudness"

never talk on the phone,
True.

never eat or drink in the car, never have a pet in the car, never bring your kids along,
All three true.

or do anything else while driving.
Exactly. I don't do anything else while driving.

I'm sure you never speed (not even 1 mile over or coast while going downhill),
That happens sometimes.

never turn the radio on above a whisper, never carry on a conversation in person
That is bollocks, why do you ask this?

or on the phone,
Exactly, I don't phone when driving, chances are my phone is in flight mode.

always stay in the right lane, and so on.
Of course. Other people driving on the wrong lande drive me nuts. Why would I join their behaviour?

Well, congratulations because you're the only one
No, I'm not. I'm simply german. And regarding a few things I have some personal rules, e.g. my phone in night mode till 11:00 in the morning, with very few exceptions, in flight mode when I drive, and no drink or food in the car. As I have no kids or pets, that part was easy :D

So the only thing distracting me while driving are sexy ladies on the side walks or bicycles, or in cars (less often as you only see the faces)

And driving defensively helps to have more time to watch those sexy ladies ...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

[Rei]

Autopilot is the best excuse for a driver getting into an accident that ever was invented. "No officer, it wasn't me! My car did it on its own!"

Thankfully, it's easy for Tesla to avoid legal liability for things like this because the car logs when autopilot is actually in use and what it's doing. Unfortunately, it doesn't help with the PR aspect, as the media just blindly reports that it was Autopilot before taking the time to find out if it actually was.

Re:I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

[Balthisar]

Autopilot is the best excuse for a driver getting into an accident that ever was invented. "No officer, it wasn't me! My car did it on its own!"

Any time I'm in my beater Expedition (it's only 2004), I have to remind myself that the cruise control is not adaptive. After being trained by Ford's stop-and-go ACC, it's really easy to be lulled into thinking that the truck will stop instead of rear-ending the car in front of me at a red light.

I'm an attentive driver under most circumstances. Seriously attentive, as in exclude the rest of the world attentive. Except when my car trains me not to be. If I can nearly fall into the spell, I wonder how dangerous the migration is going to be for other people who drive multiple cars, some of which without autonomous features?

Why did he have to "look up"?

[jimtheowl]

"I then remember looking up and seeing the sharp left turn which I was accelerating into."

Look up from where?

At his foot to reassure himself that he was pressing the accelerator, or at at text on his phone?

Re:Why did he have to "look up"?

[jimtheowl]

I have never operated a Tesla but I'm not quite sure why you were modded down.

Every primary input should be usable without looking at it, especially if one is trying to do something as simple as change the audio volume.

This shouldn't be news

[FeelGood314]

What anyone says in the hours after an accident should never be considered accurate or even news. (It shouldn't be allowed in a court of law without a warning either). People are stressed, they are frightened, they might even be defensive. Someone who wouldn't normally lie might tell something that is blatantly false. I'm not going think less of this person but I will definitely lose respect for any paper that prints it or a website that links to it on their front page. I feel almost dirty clicking on a link from BeauHD - click bate shit.

Re:This shouldn't be news

[PIBM]

I once was t-boned in an intersection, during a snowstorm, while the other driver of that white car had shut off his lights to better see through the snow. He never saw the stop sign since his lights were off, and I had no way to see that someone was incoming. My car was totalled and thrown off the road.

I hit my head pretty hard on the window. Allegedly, I kind of removed the door to get out after the accident. While I do remember some things, not much, it appear that the cop asked me what I would do once he would let go of me. I replied that I would take my car and drive to meet my girlfriend. That's when he called an ambulance :)

Stepping on the gas seems logical

[houghi]

I said logical, not good.

When you see people driving into stores, they are almost always automatic cars. I believe the reason behind this is human behavior. We know that we need to press down the pedal if we want to stop, In a panic situation what I think is happening is that people have this instinct that they need to push down the pedal. They notice that they go faster, so they press down harder.
Then before people realize they are pushing down the wrong pedal, they hit something all the wile thinking they are doing the right thing. And as they go faster, they won't be calming down to realize the errors of their ways.

With a shift, the way to break is to first lift up your foot from the gas. That would already mean you will go slower. Next you need to press down the break. So going slower is a two-step process where the first is to move up your foot. And as taking your foot of the gas also means you will go slower, you will have a bit more time to correct your foot and press down the right pedal. And if you go faster (because you press down the wrong pedal) you will take off your foot and have time to get it right this time.

I can easily imagine that people press down the gas instead of the break. However the two step process would be safer compared to the one-step process. Just human nature. That does not mean automatic cars are less safe. They are just in these specific situation.