Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Model S Plows Into a Fire Truck While Using Autopilot (cnbc.com)
On Monday, a Tesla Model S plowed into the back of a fire truck on a freeway near Culver City, California. The driver is claiming the car was on Tesla's Autopilot driver assistance system. As a result, the National Traffic Safety Board will be investigating both driver and vehicle factors. CNBC reports: The Culver City Firefighters Association Local 1927 union chapter tweeted out a picture of the crash on Monday afternoon. The firetruck was on the freeway helping after a motorcycle accident, the union said in an Instagram post. The post said there were no injuries. The outcome could have been much worse if firefighters had been standing at the back of the truck, Battalion Chief Ken Powell told the San Jose Mercury News. "Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver," Tesla said in a statement sent to CNBC.
Hey Tesla, how about you STOP calling it autopilot. It's NOT autopilot. You don't get into the car and say "Ok Tesla, let's go to the pharmacy" and then sit back and enjoy the ride while the car drives you there.
Call it "Driver Assist" as in the driver is watching what's going on around them like they should and let the car keep itself within the lane and not bump into other cars while driving.
You set a high expectation with drivers when you keep calling it "Autopilot". Stop it.
It's the difference between constant, can't-miss-a-second attention vs check-it-once-a-minute attention.
"Fully attentive" means can't-miss-a-second, not check-it-once-a-minute.
My brain wanders more, I'm able to glance to the side for a few seconds to look at something interesting on the road and I'm not constantly adjusting speed/steering.
In other words, you are part of the dangerous problem: people who don't understand that you need to pay full attention to driving when on autopilot. You should not be on the road, because your disregard of Tesla's instructions means you're not just a danger to yourself, but to everybody else too.
His defense didn't work because: "Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver"! Same thing is said in TFS of this article with the fire truck story.
If you think about it, a "fully attentive driver" ready to take control at any time seems to me like the driver needs driving school instructor skills where the instructor can take control of the car if the student screws up. Driving school instructors need more skills than a casual driver. It seems to me like being able to take over on the fly at any time might be harder than when you already have control in the first place.
Does driving a Tesla require a driving school instructor license? Maybe it should if it doesn't...
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
It's the difference between constant, can't-miss-a-second attention vs check-it-once-a-minute attention.
It you have not looked where you are going for a minute then, at 60 MPH, you will have travelled one mile -- you would not have seen that fire truck even if you had tried! Driving like that is what causes accidents like this.
A paradox of safety features like this is that gives the drivers more confidence to push the car to its limits; before anti skid brakes people were much more cautious on wet surfaces than they are today. I remember this being discussed on Radio 4 (England) some 20 years ago; the tongue in cheek comment was that the best way of reducing accidents would be to put a large, sharp spike above the dashboard pointing at the driver's head; the driver would then be careful enough to avoid any accident.
While using Tesla Autopilot the driver is to be ready with hands over the wheel and ready and aware of the complete environment around them.
;) Heck if that is the case you may as well be driving yourself ;)
;)
In order to take instantaneous control if needed
Just my 2 cents
That is a strikingly severe limitation... one that I had not heard about this previously. is this actually deliberate, because I cannot fathom how it would only be the best we can do technologically.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
what the hell is the point of having an automatic driving system if you have to sit there waiting for that split second between when you realize the autopilot isn't working and when the accident occurs?
It's not an automatic driving system. It's just Tesla marketing that implies it is. Their disclaimer says it's not.
What benefit does it add?
Its benefit is if the driver's treats it like an extra set of eyes, and is able to take corrective action when the driver fraks up. If the driver thinks it'll drive for him, you're right, it's a bad idea. (If you know anything about an aircraft's autopilot, you know it does not mean the flight crew is playing "I spy" while the plane does all the work).
* Blind Spots. You wanna change lanes or merge into traffic. So you check your blind spot, and glance away from the road in front for a fraction of a second. Problem is, somebody else just cut you off and stomped on the brakes. (Or somebody cut off the guy in front of you, and he stomped on the brakes.) In either case, the car starts braking before you know there's a problem.
* Blind Spots part II: We aren't paying as much attention as we think we are. The reality is humans suck at paying attention, we have mountains of data to prove it, and that's why we pay big bucks to watch "Magicians" and "Illusionists" perform.
* Blind Spots, part III: We're effectively blind for the fraction of a second while our eyes move from one focus point to another. That matters more than you'd think. The "I didn't see it coming" excuse doesn't even require a distraction... just glance at the road sign for a second.
* Distractions: A Pennsylvania insurance company found that 62% of accidents were caused by somebody being "lost in thought". Humans suck at paying attention.
* Another one I didn't appreciate until I got a car with a similar system: The car handles the gas pedal, and I cover the brake pedal with my foot. Wild animals (deer, moose), pets, children, and even adults jump in front of cars all the time. My car (not a Tesla) won't react until something is in my lane, so there's a chance I'll react first.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Approaching a fire truck parked on the highway gives you a LOT more than a split second to apply the brakes.
I think the Auto Emerg Braking may have kicked in. It doesn't look like the airbags were triggered and I would have expected a LOT more damage for at collision at 65 mph.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
So this excuses it from being safe?
It isn't clear if it is safe or not. This guy claimed Autopilot was engaged, but I am skeptical. In other Autopilot failures there were explanations, like projections above the cameras' field of view, or a lorry exactly the color of the sky. But in this case it just plowed into a firetruck for no apparent reason. That is a pretty big bug to have gone unnoticed until now.
Seems to be the fundamental issue that everyone is missing. There is no way that the Tesla was going 65 at impact. The crush zone is barely impacted, the fire truck looks barely dented. At most that looks like a 7-10 MPH hit. Which means if the Autopilot was engaged, it was doing it's best to stop.
At 65 MPH, that Tesla would of be buried under that red truck up to it's A pillar's at a minimum, if not the B pillar.