AP2 minor accident

[stopcrazypp]

Because the final FSD code is completing final validation and will be released in December 2016. Because of the 8 cameras. Because the car apparently can already detect pedestrians, road signs, lanes, brush, and drive itself around in the parking lot and on city streets. You mean that was just a scam when the car will be oblivious to what other cars are doing and won't see a 6 ft construction cone or merging lanes?

Fault mostly Tesla's in this accident for poor programming. If lane markers were ambiguous the car should have followed the cars in front. This is ENHANCEDautoPILOT not autoSTEER. This is FULL-SELF-DRIVE with advanced NVIDIA technology that will drive completely unassisted, coast to coast, including charging stops, by the end of 2017.

If there is a positive, maybe your video data from the crash will be uploaded to the "neural net" to train all future Tesla's not to plow into construction cones. But I suspect this crash will have to be repeated a few hundred times before the magic Tesla AI picks up on this.

Who told you FSD was completing final validation in Dec 2016? You're confusing FSD with EAP.

Yeah, all I am seeing is confusing FSD with EAP. EAP software has nothing to do with FSD. EAP currently only uses 2 cameras (other than the recent update to take snapshots).

The logic between the two has to be different because EAP always assumes the driver can take over (so it errs on the side of avoiding false positives), while FSD has to assume there is no driver (so err on side of avoiding false negatives). Also EAP operates under the assumption that no unauthorized lane changes can occur (with the driver handling ambiguous lanes). FSD on the other hand will be allowed to make its own lane changes and to cross lanes as necessary.

 

[Joe F]

Actually there was no construction going on, and there was no reduced speed limit. It was probably AFTER all the work was complete on maybe laying a new road that they left the dividers on for it to dry or something like that. If it was a proper reduced speed construction zone things would have been very different.

Understood. Irresponsible that Caltrans doesn't provide advanced warning signs. These should be the last things removed after road work is complete.

Still stand by Waze though.

 

[davinci2017]

Wait.... You chugged through them? You weren't paying enough attention to the road to put your foot on the brake/jerk the wheel to avoid colliding with them? It states clearly and plainly to keep your attention on the road, your hands on the wheel, and your focus on driving. Sounds to me like another user error turned blame game.

Yeah a few of them, I had to ensure no one was to my side to disengage and pull away into the other lane. Had I blindly done so, I might have crashed into someone else. Its my word against the world here and I can see why its easy to jump on user error.

Sure there is a certain amount of user error here, but if you tell me everyone driving Tesla's with Auto-steer engaged have their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road 100% of the time (yourself included) and not once look at the screen to maybe change a station, look at the map or anything else, then you are delusional. I would love to see you drive with 100% focus on the road and hands at 10 and 2 for the entire duration of you commutes

It was a coincidence that I happened to look at the screen at the same time this happened and thats how accidents occur, the safeguards in the system are to help avoid such scenarios when possible and thats the technology they are constantly improving. I for one found it surprising that hazard warnings weren't quite high on that list.

 

[Joe F]

You forgot to mention his passive aggressive comment about putting all the "Tesla haters" on ignore.

It wasn't directed at the OP, nor you. Passive aggressive Your opinion. Life and time's too short to wade through some who post here. I simply choose to not have to deal with having to deal with their, for some at least, obvious hidden agendas.

 

[davinci2017]

Yeah a few of them, I had to ensure no one was to my side to disengage and pull away into the other lane. Had I blindly done so, I might have crashed into someone else. Its my word against the world here and I can see why its easy to jump on user error.

Sure there is a certain amount of user error here, but if you tell me everyone driving Tesla's with Auto-steer engaged have their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road 100% of the time (yourself included) and not once look at the screen to maybe change a station, look at the map or anything else, then you are delusional. I would love to see you drive with 100% focus on the road and hands at 10 and 2 for the entire duration of you commutes

It was a coincidence that I happened to look at the screen at the same time this happened and thats how accidents occur, the safeguards in the system are to help avoid such scenarios when possible and thats the technology they are constantly improving. I for one found it surprising that hazard warnings weren't quite high on that list.

Oh and also, having a screaming baby behind you demanding a specific song to be played doesn't help matters one bit

 

[GSP]

Solved problem? Level 2 requires the driver to SOLVE problems level 2 is a drivers assistant not replacement....

Level 2: In level 2, at least one driver assistance system of "both steering and acceleration/ deceleration using information about the driving environment" is automated, like cruise control and lane-centering. It means that the "driver is disengaged from physically operating the vehicle by having his or her hands off the steering wheel AND foot off pedal at the same time," according to the SAE. The driver must still always be ready to take control of the vehicle, however.

​

Quoted from Updated: Autonomous driving levels 0 to 5: Understanding the differences - TechRepublic

Thanks for posting a good explanation of the levels of autonomy.

I think it is important to point out the sentence in bold is true, but misleading. When I read it I think that the driver must be ready to take over when asked. However only level 3 systems are capable of detecting all conditions that they can't handle, in order to alert the driver to take over.

Level 2 systems, including Tesla's autopilot, require the driver to constantly monitor the driving environment so the driver can determine when he or she needs to take over. I believe that this is important enough that it should be explicitly called out in any explaination of level 2 systems.

GSP

 

[SomeJoe7777]

I agree this is a complex problem. But to me when the speed for auto-steer has been increased to 80+mph, I think Road hazard cones/poles high visbility stuff should get priority and to me I sort of expect that to work. People and cars go without saying and the system shouldn't even be enabled without those, but I think for it to be reasonably safe for broad use at high speed freeways, it should be able to see these high visibility markers especially as they are all brightly colored a certain way with reflectors. I was surprised that this was not the case.

Your issue is that your expectations for the system don't match what the system is actually capable of. Yet, you're driving it based on the former, not the latter. You need less assumptions and more owner's manual reading.

Autosteer, AEB, FCW, Side Collision Warning, Side Collision Avoidance, TACC, etc. are all tools available to the driver. As a driver, it's solely your responsibility to use those tools as appropriate. Yes, we all dream of the day when we don't have to worry about how to use these tools, when they're appropriate, how to supervise them, what they can and can't do, etc. But that day is not yet here. Right now, there's a handful of useful things the car can do and a truck-full of things that it can't. As a driver, you need to know the difference and not assume or expect.

If a company began selling a toolbox and the only two tools in it were a hammer and a flat-head screwdriver, would you attempt to saw a piece of wood in half? No, because the saw isn't included yet. Perhaps it might be an initial thought that a toolbox probably should include a saw, but the reality is that the one being sold right now doesn't. So the smart thing to do is don't attempt to saw wood yet. You will get very poor results if you attempt to do so with the hammer.

I own an AP1 car with about 47K miles on it, about 20K miles of those are autosteer experience. I am always holding the wheel (yes, always). I do not take my eyes off the road any more than I would do while steering the car manually. I use autosteer as a tool to assist me in maintaining my lane and allowing me to have a higher situational awareness. Yes, it occasionally makes mistakes, and I always have plenty of time to correct it.

I feel for you in terms of the damage. However, your insurance's collision policy should cover that minus the deductible, and in the end your car will be back just like it was.

 

[oktane]

If a company began selling a toolbox and the only two tools in it were a hammer and a flat-head screwdriver, would you attempt to saw a piece of wood in half? No, because the saw isn't included yet. Perhaps it might be an initial thought that a toolbox probably should include a saw, but the reality is that the one being sold right now doesn't. So the smart thing to do is don't attempt to saw wood yet. You will get very poor results if you attempt to do so with the hammer.

Great analogy, but we were sold a complete toolbox not just a hammer. What's the benefit of using AP1 if you're holding the wheel at all times and looking at the road 100% of the time? Wouldn't it be easier to simply manipulate the controls yourself and not worry about what the car is going to do? In my case I find it more stressful to use AP2. I use AP2 only for testing purposes.

 

[PluggedINLife]

That sucks, sorry to hear that.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Great analogy, but we were sold a complete toolbox not just a hammer. What's the benefit of using AP1 if you're holding the wheel at all times and looking at the road 100% of the time? Wouldn't it be easier to simply manipulate the controls yourself and not worry about what the car is going to do? In my case I find it more stressful to use AP2. I use AP2 only for testing purposes.

You were sold a promise of a complete toolbox, at some undefined future time, and when regulations allow it.

The benefit of using AP while holding the wheel and paying attention is where your mindset is and what your thought process is being spent on. You may not realize it, but steering to keep the vehicle in the center of the lane actually uses a large amount of your brain. It happens to be a rote task so you don't consciously concentrate on it, but the effort is there all the same. With that thought process freed up, your mind can observe and supervise the overall driving situation, anticipate what's coming, estimate other drivers' courses of action more accurately and more thoroughly. It's more relaxing and safer.

When on road trips, I consistently arrive at my destination with far less fatigue after using AP that when steering manually, even though I hold the wheel and pay attention. As a bonus, if AP does something wrong, I have plenty of time to correct it since I avoid any delays in taking control.

 

[alcibiades]

Perpetuating the lie about what the order page said before it was changed doesn't make it any more true.

AEB was PROMISED IN DECEMBER.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Perpetuating the lie about what the order page said before it was changed doesn't make it any more true.

AEB was PROMISED IN DECEMBER.

Yes, they're late. No question there. But that doesn't "perpetuate" any sort of "lie". The functionality wasn't there when it first went on sale, it was promised to be added later. You can't use it until it gets here.

AEB is now present in AP2 with the most recent firmware. It didn't activate in the OP's case at the beginning of this thread, nor was it supposed to, nor could it have been reasonably expected to be programmed to do so. AEB (in its current incarnation) relies on a combination of the radar and camera. Plastic construction cones have no radar signature, so the radar can't detect them. Camera might be able to be programmed to do so, but would need extensive testing and validation, and in any case, was never a promised or mentioned feature of AEB.

Furthermore, AEB is designed only to mitigate a collision, not avoid one. And on top of that, AP1 AEB would not have activated either. Any blame of AEB in the OP's case is purely misguided.

A year ago, the Florida accident that involved AP1 and a truck resulted in a death, and the same AEB discussion ensued there. AEB did not activate and was not supposed to activate because "lateral turn across path" detection is not currently a part of AEB. Blaming AEB was incorrect in that case and is incorrect in this one.

 

[xyeahtony]

While i sympathize with the OP, were his hands even on the wheel when this happen? my guess is no...

 

[alcibiades]

Even if we were to accept that AEB worked as designed, such an acceptance doesn't excuse AEB from being poorly designed.

(For example, Tesla realized AEB should work to help our cars prevent us get beheaded by driving under trucks -- even though AP had worked as designed when that one guy got killed.)

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Even if we were to accept that AEB worked as designed, such an acceptance doesn't excuse AEB from being poorly designed.

(For example, Tesla realized AEB should work to help our cars prevent us get beheaded by driving under trucks -- even though AP had worked as designed when that one guy got killed.)

Again, how does a feature set that we wish were available, but isn't available mean that it's a poor design? What other car on the road has AEB that can cope with lateral turn across path or plastic traffic cones? None that I know of.

I don't see how you can be disappointed with something that isn't available yet. That's like Christopher Columbus saying that the Santa Maria was poorly designed because it didn't have GPS.

 

[xyeahtony]

My Dad's 2015 lexus Es300h must be horribly designed because it doesn't even have radar cruise control lol.

 

[spiderbro]

I regularly drive through a stretch of highway with these lane delimiters on the left. They are extremely close to the left lane marker and do not register on ultrasonics. Luckily, the left lane markers are very clear as well or I would probably also be in the same boat. Usually I will avoid AP in this situation.

Let's just say there are a lot of edge cases that need to be addressed before anything resembling >L2 autonomy is achieved.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

Yes, they're late. No question there. But that doesn't "perpetuate" any sort of "lie". The functionality wasn't there when it first went on sale, it was promised to be added later. You can't use it until it gets here.

AEB is now present in AP2 with the most recent firmware. It didn't activate in the OP's case at the beginning of this thread, nor was it supposed to, nor could it have been reasonably expected to be programmed to do so. AEB (in its current incarnation) relies on a combination of the radar and camera. Plastic construction cones have no radar signature, so the radar can't detect them. Camera might be able to be programmed to do so, but would need extensive testing and validation, and in any case, was never a promised or mentioned feature of AEB.

Furthermore, AEB is designed only to mitigate a collision, not avoid one. And on top of that, AP1 AEB would not have activated either. Any blame of AEB in the OP's case is purely misguided.

A year ago, the Florida accident that involved AP1 and a truck resulted in a death, and the same AEB discussion ensued there. AEB did not activate and was not supposed to activate because "lateral turn across path" detection is not currently a part of AEB. Blaming AEB was incorrect in that case and is incorrect in this one.

I'm always curious how someone can post a "disagree" when all of your statements are verifiably correct. I guess we live in the post-fact society.

 

[alevek]

You have to realize that for a Tesla just because you paid for a feature you should not expect it to work. You're merely making a contribution for an eventual delivery of that function, if ever. For example I made a contribution to HW2 development by paying for an AP1 feature, car will self park on private property, which I'll never get.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

You have to realize that for a Tesla just because you paid for a feature you should not expect it to work. You're merely making a contribution for an eventual delivery of that function, if ever. For example I made a contribution to HW2 development by paying for an AP1 feature, car will self park on private property, which I'll never get.

I have to disagree. While in many ways AP1 has met or exceeded promises and expectations, there are still some features yet to be delivered, like the summon capability you cite. This was advertised as being available in the "upcoming months" when I bought my car in June 2015. Two years later, it has not yet been delivered. There were no qualifications in the advertisements ("we might not be able to deliver - take your chances"). It is something that is expected. Eventually, Tesla will have to deliver or agree to some sort of settlement.

Also, note my profile picture. This was "summon" as advertised on Tesla's web site in April, 2015, the month I placed my order. My car sure doesn't do that.