Automotive

Tesla driver killed in crash with autopilot active

  • Last Updated:
  • Jun 20th, 2017 12:22 am
Deal Addict
Jan 27, 2011
3741 posts
3965 upvotes
Toronto
payam1981 wrote: Sigh...

So we're discussing cyclists, pedestrians, animals or a left turn at an intersection because which of these applied to this accident?

Point me to where I said the Volvo system would have detected the pole? What I said was the LIDAR sensor would have 'seen' the tractor trailer and triggered the brakes thus preventing the secondary impact. It's really a stroke of luck that this accident didn't have any secondary casualties due to the rural setting.

It's like going in circles with you. You keep posting irrelevant data to make your argument look legitimate or academic instead of actually taking the time to read and comprehend what I posted.

The only reason I mentioned Volvo was because you initially falsely claimed there was no mass produced LIDAR unit available when Tesla was developing and equipping Model S with Autopilot hardware.
Dude you're wasting your time with these Tesla fanboys. You will never get through their think heads. They will only see data that will favor their God the car! Move on.

Did you see the other thread about the Model X rollover while on autopilot which Elon claimed it would never happen? And now Tesla is claiming it wasn't on autopilot. Like they would admit that it was if it was! That would be like the gun industry admitting that gun kill people! Oh wait they don't do they.

Tesla future slogan will be "Our autopilot don't kill people..."
Deal Addict
Aug 1, 2006
1510 posts
759 upvotes
Toronto
payam1981 wrote: Sigh...

So we're discussing cyclists, pedestrians, animals or a left turn at an intersection because which of these applied to this accident?

Point me to where I said the Volvo system would have detected the pole? What I said was the LIDAR sensor would have 'seen' the tractor trailer and triggered the brakes thus preventing the secondary impact. It's really a stroke of luck that this accident didn't have any secondary casualties due to the rural setting.
This is your claim:
payam1981 wrote: But in the case of this crash you can be 100% certain had the Tesla car been equipped with LIDAR in addition to Radar and Camera, the crash would have either been prevented or at a minimum the severity reduced as LIDAR sees perfectly bright or direct sunlight conditions and is immune to 'noise' that Radar units suffer from.
The LiDAR would only have reacted 6 or 12 meters (depending on version) from the tractor trailer. Then, applying the brakes, a Model S requires 170+ feet to stop from 70 mph (the reports say it was likely going 80+). The impact with the pole wasn't even severe enough to deploy the airbags so your fixation on preventing a secondary collision is has little consequence and thus your claims that LiDAR would have reduced the severity don't hold up. (Your claim it would have have prevented the crash is utter nonsense.)
payam1981 wrote: It's like going in circles with you. You keep posting irrelevant data to make your argument look legitimate or academic instead of actually taking the time to read and comprehend what I posted.

The only reason I mentioned Volvo was because you initially falsely claimed there was no mass produced LIDAR unit available when Tesla was developing and equipping Model S with Autopilot hardware.
Oops. An inexact omission on my part: no highway-capable LiDAR available. (Tesla's Autopilot is aimed at highway travel only due to the numerous requirements such as clear, constant lane markers and thus -- it's still only recommended for highway use.)
some1not wrote: Dude you're wasting your time with these Tesla fanboys. You will never get through their think heads. They will only see data that will favor their God the car! Move on.

Did you see the other thread about the Model X rollover while on autopilot which Elon claimed it would never happen? And now Tesla is claiming it wasn't on autopilot. Like they would admit that it was if it was! That would be like the gun industry admitting that gun kill people! Oh wait they don't do they.

Tesla future slogan will be "Our autopilot don't kill people..."
Hardly a fanboi. Don't own one and don't a Model 3 reservation.

Simply trying to address the ignorance and armchair quarterbacking.
payam1981 wrote: But in the case of this crash you can be 100% certain...
When it comes to leading-edge technology, people either massively underestimate it or have delusions of grandeur into what it's capable of. People also don't understand it takes years to finalize consumer-ready hardware. Tesla's Autopilot hardware came out in Q4 2014. It's not something that can be changed on a whim so the shortcomings of 2014 carry through to present day in 2016 until the next version comes out (~2018). It's also easy to want to throw everything under the sun at it without considering the economics and physical constraints (power, weight, etc.).
Home automation, NOVO (HiFi) Magazine, Google Trusted Photographer, electric vehicles.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
32228 posts
8694 upvotes
GTHA
Tesla Model S In Fatal Autpilot Crash Was Going 74 MPH In A 65 Zone: Feds
The report reads:

Tesla system performance data downloaded from the car indicated that vehicle speed just prior to impact was 74 mph. System performance data also revealed that the driver was operating the car using the advanced driver assistance features Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer lane keeping assistance. The car was also equipped with automatic emergency braking that is designed to automatically apply the brakes to reduce the severity of or assist in avoiding frontal collisions.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 13, 2012
8501 posts
1053 upvotes
Occupied Ottawa
It's been said before and I'll say it again: computer-driven cars don't have to be perfect. They just have to be better than people. The computers will make mistakes. So will people.

The technology is still developing, so while it's not perfectly suitable for everyday use, it will be relatively soon.

You and I may be good drivers, but think about all the really bad drivers out there that are licensed. In their cases, the computer is likely a far better driver than they are.
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
2363 posts
175 upvotes
ConsoleWatcher wrote: It's been said before and I'll say it again: computer-driven cars don't have to be perfect.
So, who's going to be held responsible when my computer-driven car runs through a crowd of nuns leading disabled kids over a pedestrian crossing?

Because if it's me... your computer better be perfect, so that can't ever happen. If it's the manufacturer, and the computer isn't perfect, they better have big pockets for the lawsuits.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 13, 2012
8501 posts
1053 upvotes
Occupied Ottawa
movieman wrote: So, who's going to be held responsible when my computer-driven car runs through a crowd of nuns leading disabled kids over a pedestrian crossing?

Because if it's me... your computer better be perfect, so that can't ever happen. If it's the manufacturer, and the computer isn't perfect, they better have big pockets for the lawsuits.
Well, it'll be me and my insurance company that'll be civilly liable, just like as if I accidentally ran through the crowd without the computer.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 23, 2002
6065 posts
2507 upvotes
ConsoleWatcher wrote: You and I may be good drivers, but think about all the really bad drivers out there that are licensed. In their cases, the computer is likely a far better driver than they are.
No, because computerized systems available for purchase today can't drive; they can keep lanes, follow another car and stop for many, but not all obstacles.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 18, 2005
23686 posts
5125 upvotes
Niagara Falls
SLee wrote: No, because computerized systems available for purchase today can't drive; they can keep lanes, follow another car and stop for many, but not all obstacles.
That seems like a pretty silly argument. Lets say for argument sake, the Google car program is 15 000% safer on average than a human, you'd rather us not have that technology because it couldn't figure out how to stop for a magical flying hippo?

Not only that, but you can be damn sure any law that allows self driving cars will still require the drive to be alert and paying attention. They will still have the ability to stop the vehicle manually if required.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 23, 2002
6065 posts
2507 upvotes
Evil Baby wrote: That seems like a pretty silly argument. Lets say for argument sake, the Google car program is 15 000% safer on average than a human, you'd rather us not have that technology because it couldn't figure out how to stop for a magical flying hippo?
What's the argument? None of the computerized systems are as safe as the worst driver because they can't drive; they don't understand the concept of traffic signals, lights, turns, merging etc.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 18, 2005
23686 posts
5125 upvotes
Niagara Falls
SLee wrote: What's the argument? None of the computerized systems are as safe as the worst driver because they can't drive; they don't understand the concept of traffic signals, lights, turns, merging etc.
Sure they do. Link
Deal Fanatic
Jul 23, 2002
6065 posts
2507 upvotes
Evil Baby wrote: Sure they do. Link
My comments are for systems that can be found in cars on the market.

As for the Google Car, it's barely been tested outside of Mountain View or in bad conditions. Plus it has drivers who take over, as sort of a "HumanPilot" system for it. Without drivers, they would have been in a number of accidents.

http://static.googleusercontent.com/med ... ual-15.pdf
Deal Fanatic
Jul 13, 2012
8501 posts
1053 upvotes
Occupied Ottawa
SLee wrote: My comments are for systems that can be found in cars on the market.

As for the Google Car, it's barely been tested outside of Mountain View or in bad conditions. Plus it has drivers who take over, as sort of a "HumanPilot" system for it. Without drivers, they would have been in a number of accidents.

http://static.googleusercontent.com/med ... ual-15.pdf
I agree the computerized cars we have not have trouble with certain scenarios and that they are not ready for actual real-world use. However, the success we've seen so far means that in the relatively near future they will be ready for real-world use. Of course, other technologied will help to (better sensors for cars, cars' computers communicating with each other, traffic signals sending out wireless signals, etc..).

I think that even when it does come, there will be certain restrictions. For example, being restricted to certain areas, certain times of day, not during bad weather, etc.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
32228 posts
8694 upvotes
GTHA
Tesla Faults Brakes, but Not Autopilot, in Fatal Crash
Tesla Motors has told Senate investigators that its crash-prevention system failed to work properly in a fatal crash, but said its Autopilot technology was not at fault, according to a Senate staff member.

Instead, Tesla told members of the Senate Commerce Committee staff on Thursday that the problem involved the car’s automatic braking system, said the staff member, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

It was not clear how or why Tesla considers the automatic braking system to be separate from Autopilot, which combines automated steering, adaptive cruise control and other features meant to avoid accidents. Tesla declined to comment on Friday.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
32228 posts
8694 upvotes
GTHA
Tesla Believes Autopilot Update Would Have Saved Driver's Life In Fatal Crash
A Tesla Model S driver became the first human to die in a vehicle driving semi-autonomously this past May when it struck an 18-wheeler with its Autopilot system enabled. In a press conference on Sunday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company believes its new Autopilot update would have saved the driver’s life.

Tesla blamed auto-braking system for the crash in late July, saying the it was not a failure of Autopilot. But the bottom line is that, in Tesla’s own words, “neither the driver nor the car’s sensors could see a tractor trailer pulling across the highway.” But had the car been equipped with the update to the Autopilot system, which primarily depends on radar instead of camera detection, Musk said it probably would have saved Brown’s life.

“We can’t say it with absolute certainty, but we believe that yes it would have [saved Brown’s life],” Musk said. “It would see a large metal object across the road, and there’s no road sign there. This would not be a whitelisted situation, so it would brake.”
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
32228 posts
8694 upvotes
GTHA
mofesto wrote: This will be a brutal lawsuit... a rich person died! Tesla autopilot couldn't see it was driving under a tractor-trailer that was stretched across the highway, because it was too high for the autopilot to see. It tried to drive through the opening under the trailer.


http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/30/12072 ... us-model-s
NHTSA Investigation Finds No Tesla Autopilot Defect In Fatal Crash
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/01/20/nh ... tal-crash/

Last May, former Navy SEAL Joshua Brown was killed when his Model S slammed broadside into a tractor trailer while operating in Tesla Autopilot mode. The fatality sent shockwaves throughout the automotive world. Since it was the first known fatality involving self driving technology, it called into question whether such systems were safe.

This week, NHTSA closed its investigation into the crash that killed Joshua Brown, saying its staff “did not identify any defects.” In response, the company issued a brief statement. “At Tesla, the safety of our customers comes first, and we appreciate the thoroughness of NHTSA’s report and its conclusion.”

Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
32228 posts
8694 upvotes
GTHA
Any read Florida Highway Patrol's full investigation report?

The report concluded that the Tesla driver was “not attentive” and “failed to take any evasive action.” However, the truck driver was still considered at fault, and the driver was cited for failing to give right of way during a left turn.

Read the Florida Highway Patrol's full investigation into the fatal Tesla crash
A meticulous dissection of last summer’s Autopilot fatality
http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/1/144586 ... rol-report

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)