Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tesla Model S Plows Into a Fire Truck While Using Autopilot (cnbc.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the man-vs-machine dept.

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.

8 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. STOP calling it Autopilot!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:STOP calling it Autopilot!!!!!! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's an autopilot like in an aircraft, that still requires a human pilot(s) to be a systems manager.

    2. Re:STOP calling it Autopilot!!!!!! by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the common man on the street doesn't know that's what autopilot means and is likely to think it means the plane flying itself because they've never been in a cockpit or have any real idea what pilots do beyond vague notions of flying the plane.

  2. Re:Intended use by arth1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. All ways thought it was werid that by oldgraybeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    In order to take instantaneous control if needed ;) Heck if that is the case you may as well be driving yourself ;)

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  4. Re:Defense: it was drunk by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Defense: it was drunk by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  6. Re:Defense: it was drunk by Keick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.