Model X mule(s) show signs of nVidia Tegra X1 Drive PX platform - no rear mirror!

[Nubo]

What about keeping the "rear view mirror" as an option in it's current location in the center of the windshield. Except the "rear view mirror" is actually a nice LCD display that provides an even better view of the rear than any mirror ever could. Best of both worlds. You get a better view from the cameras, you don't need a clean line of sight from the "mirror" out the back end, and people who absolutely "won't buy a car without a rear view mirror" get a rear view mirror :wink:

RT

The one drawback I expect is eye adaptation. The rearview mirror is typically close to the driver, but the viewing distance is pretty much at infinity as the eye is concerned. If replacing with a video screen, the eye would have to be able to focus at short-distance. For someone with hyperopia or presbyopia, this could result in an uncomfortable frequency of switching between far (down-road) and near (display) vision and some folks might have trouble adapting at all. As people get older, the speed of focal change adaptation gets slower. With side-view displays the problem would probably be lessened because of increased focal distance to the screens. But, I guess there's nothing forcing them to put the display where the rearview mirror would normally be, so maybe the rearview display would be further away too.

Ah, well I'm already expecting to have to get bifocals for the car anyway because of the primacy of the touch-screen in controlling the car. With our present vehicles I can get by with touch.

 

[vandacca]

The one drawback I expect is eye adaptation. The rearview mirror is typically close to the driver, but the viewing distance is pretty much at infinity as the eye is concerned. If replacing with a video screen, the eye would have to be able to focus at short-distance. For someone with hyperopia or presbyopia, this could result in an uncomfortable frequency of switching between far (down-road) and near (display) vision and some folks might have trouble adapting at all. As people get older, the speed of focal change adaptation gets slower. With side-view displays the problem would probably be lessened because of increased focal distance to the screens. But, I guess there's nothing forcing them to put the display where the rearview mirror would normally be, so maybe the rearview display would be further away too.

This is why we need 2 rear-cameras in the back and a lenticular 3D monitor in the cockpit! A lenticular 3D monitor can be configured to provide a 3D image at the driver's position without the need for any type of 3D glasses.

 

[Jack_L]

Or perhaps one of Elon's surprises in the X will be "corrective screens" that automatically adapt and change their prescription strength based on the selected driver profile. No need for glasses anymore while driving. Windshield, mirrors (if any) and camera screens will all provide us with perfectly corrected views (prescription updates automatically updated via over the air updates at might). Now that's a smart vehicle of the future!

 

[AnxietyRanger]

While adaptive windshields and 3D cameras are interesting thoughts and maybe some such will manifest themselves in a more distant future (a night-vision windshield concept was demoed some time ago by someone that was basically a screen when showing an image), I don't see them happening yet, nor do I see the Drive PX specifications supporting it. Also, 3D as a concept has some inherent flaws that might preclude from someone trying it outside of entertainment and specific scientific applications.

But a new generation of all-around camera features and traffic recognition features with DRIVE PX, sure, that seems plausible for Model X.

As for the rest, I quote another post of mine to avoid repeating it.

While I don't think this is the root cause of the delay (the falcon wings and the second row seem plausible reasons to me), I do believe it likely that what Tesla released in the P85D and Auto-pilot is what the first generation of Model X was supposed to have drivetrain and assistant-systems-wise (at least ever since Model X got delayed beyond 2013). But since it didn't launch yet, I have speculated Tesla decided to wait for the second-generation of Auto-pilot for Model X, hence waiting for the mass availability of nVidia's Drive PX with its numerous all-around cameras. This speculation is based on seeing what looks like Drive PX camera locations/lack of mirror on Model X mules, Drive PX release info and timing from nVidia and Elon Musk saying at Drive PX launch something along the lines of I'm excited to show what we've been working on together work the X.

This would allow them to launch the Model X with something Model S doesn't yet have and wow a little. Yet this also makes me a believer that if Model X launches with nVidia Drive PX, Model S will receive this update near the same time. I have also speculated that if Model X launches with a redesigned nose, it is possible a Model S facelift with a new nose would be included as well, based on the September 2014 "leakster" whose CAD drawing fot pulled by Tesla claiming Model X nose cone is gone, and on the head designer of Model S reportedly saying in an interview the one thing he'd change on the Model S being nose cone and the timing mentioned in Tesla's shareholder letter of November 2014, saying "Our focus will be on scaling up Model S production over the coming year, so no major platform changes to the hardware are planned in the near term" which alludes to a year of no major changes, ending around autumn 2015. It seems plausible.

Of course, if this is what happens, judging by the latest 70D change, it is also possible Tesla is waiting for Model X launch to launch the 70D's sister battery of higher capacity with Model X, which would also trickle down to Model S, perhaps autumn 2015.

I am also in the camp that believes Model X reveal will happen as near actual sales as possible, to minimize its effect on Model S sales, assuming it will come with new features that might make Model S buyers think twice about the current Model S. Yet I don't think Tesla will want to reveal all the bits and bobs on Model S before Model X (and rely on second-row and Falcons to wow solely), so they are juggling these concerns at the moment I'm sure and being extra secretive. Hence, that's why we need to i-spy and speculate even harder, to fill that gap for the prospective buyer.

- - - Updated - - -

To add to above: Some sort of HUD on the Model X is of course possible even if I don't see a revolutionary windshield screen yet... although I don't think we have seen any evidence of a HUD yet. But it is possible considering the competition.

 

[vandacca]

While adaptive windshields and 3D cameras are interesting thoughts and maybe some such will manifest themselves in a more distant future (a night-vision windshield concept was demoed some time ago by someone that was basically a screen when showing an image), I don't see them happening yet, nor do I see the Drive PX specifications supporting it. Also, 3D as a concept has some inherent flaws that might preclude from someone trying it outside of entertainment and specific scientific applications.

Let me make this perfectly clear: The odds of a 3D lenticular rear view image is close to zero (if not zero). It was just a cool idea (IMHO) I thought up while reading this forum.

With regards to the Inherit Flaws, they don't apply to this application for the following reasons:
- the convergence & focus points are within a few feet of each other, so there is no great difficulty switching between the two
- lenticular 3D does not require glasses, eliminating the scope issue and having a dark image
- I'm not sure about the strobing effect of the edges, but that may be resolved by simply going to a 60Hz or 120Hz refresh rate

The rest of the article applies to film-making, so its not relevant here. But I did want to note that the movie, "Hugo" addressed the remaining issues. Its one of the best 3D films of all time, one where the 3D enhances the film and doesn't distract you from the film in a gimmicky way like most other 3D films.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Let me make this perfectly clear: The odds of a 3D lenticular rear view image is close to zero (if not zero). It was just a cool idea (IMHO) I thought up while reading this forum.

With regards to the Inherit Flaws, they don't apply to this application for the following reasons:
- the convergence & focus points are within a few feet of each other, so there is no great difficulty switching between the two
- lenticular 3D does not require glasses, eliminating the scope issue and having a dark image
- I'm not sure about the strobing effect of the edges, but that may be resolved by simply going to a 60Hz or 120Hz refresh rate

The rest of the article applies to film-making, so its not relevant here. But I did want to note that the movie, "Hugo" addressed the remaining issues. Its one of the best 3D films of all time, one where the 3D enhances the film and doesn't distract you from the film in a gimmicky way like most other 3D films.

I'm no expert on 3D and certainly don't want to sound argumentative on the issue, but just to be clear my takeaway from the article in question was a little different than yours:

I got from the article (which I already read years ago so maybe my memory deceives me) that the biggest issue was not particularly related to filmmaking needs, but to any representation of 3D on a 2D plane where eyes are tricked into seeing separate images on said 2D plane - as opposed to really seeing a real 3D view. Basically my takeaway was, no artificial 3D will work well, unless it is generating real holograms with real depth. For example, while I'm far from overly 3D sensitive, I feel similar eye fatigue issues exist on glasses free Nintendo 3DS as on the average glass using movie or video game application because both are still on a 2D plane (with the added difficulty of taking an extra moment to focus on the 3D image without glasses).

Perhaps some new techniques could alleviate or entirely remove these issues, again I'm no expert, or it might be that despite the issues the automotive world might still embrace them in some use. Current 3D certainly is used effectively in some entertainment and certain specific scientific applications, so I'm not trying to belittle it.

As for the rest of vandacca's post, interesting observations and I appreciate adding them.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Interesting observation from Matias:

Drive PX costs 10 000$, so it can't be default component.

I haven't researched the price myself.

Still, I'm not quite convinced it couldn't be at least a Tech Package or even default component. Whatever is there currently is also a cost-item. Some or all of the cost difference could also be offset by a Tech Package or higher vehicle cost.

 

[vandacca]

I got from the article (which I already read years ago so maybe my memory deceives me) that the biggest issue was not particularly related to filmmaking needs, but to any representation of 3D on a 2D plane where eyes are tricked into seeing separate images on said 2D plane - as opposed to really seeing a real 3D view. Basically my takeaway was, no artificial 3D will work well, unless it is generating real holograms with real depth. For example, while I'm far from overly 3D sensitive, I feel similar eye fatigue issues exist on glasses free Nintendo 3DS as on the average glass using movie or video game application because both are still on a 2D plane (with the added difficulty of taking an extra moment to focus on the 3D image without glasses).

Perhaps some new techniques could alleviate or entirely remove these issues, again I'm no expert, or it might be that despite the issues the automotive world might still embrace them in some use. Current 3D certainly is used effectively in some entertainment and certain specific scientific applications, so I'm not trying to belittle it.

Walter Murch wrote that, "The biggest problem with 3D, though, is the "convergence/focus" issue." He basically said that the human eye wasn't used to making huge changes in focus (e.g. from 10' to 80') and that it could become very tiresome and generate headaches in many people.

The point I was trying to make that with a rear-view image, you could greatly simplify 3D (e.g. have only 1 viewer; short period of viewing time: seconds; very small changes of focus required: inches) and eliminate most issues. I agree that 3D is mostly a gimmick in theatres, but in a very simple and narrowly defined context, it should work fine. You're not going to get a headache looking at the rear-view image for 5-10 seconds at a time, especially if the range of focus is only a few feet.

I just don't want Elon to further delay the Model-X in order to implement this new idea. :wink:

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Plenty of talk of the latest sighting in the other thread. Picking up my relevant notes here...

Tesla X on the freeway. Crash avoidance enabled? - YouTube

Well the rear-view mirror is definitely missing on the mule (e.g. see 0:07). The video also shows nicely how far up the front window goes on the mule before a mid-car cross-beam (e.g. see 0:09).

Of interest, of course, is the apparent automatic driving/assistance feature keeping the car away from the side of the road (could be DRIVE PX, could be just current auto-pilot improved). Other than that, not much I can see new from the video, it obviously is the same mule as in most (all?) sightings.

Now that we look at it, the March Palo Alto video shows the same bordering the right edge of the lane behavior:

tesla model x in palo alto - YouTube

Edit: For some reason this frame doesn't show on YouTube for me, or maybe it goes away so fast, but this is a rather unique perspective to the roof given past sightings...

 

[NigelM]

Well the rear-view mirror is definitely missing on the mule (e.g. see 0:07).

That doesn't mean it isn't going to be there at all. In fact the video clearly shows there is something there, we just don't know if it's the mirror stem or something else or why the mirror isn't obviously visible...

 

[AnxietyRanger]

That doesn't mean it isn't going to be there at all. In fact the video clearly shows there is something there, we just don't know if it's the mirror stem or something else or why the mirror isn't obviously visible...

True, it could be a mirror stem. Also, most importantly, testing a mule without a rear view mirror doesn't mean a production vehicle would ship without. Nor is it proof of DRIVE PX. It is just one interesting thing that could mean something.

On the other hand, it could just be a sensor and that's all there could be there - as traditionally in cars this area has housed the rain sensor, later the forward-looking camera of adaptive cruise systems... Even without a mirror, those are probably still needed.

 

[crmatson]

Interesting observation from Matias:
I haven't researched the price myself.

Still, I'm not quite convinced it couldn't be at least a Tech Package or even default component. Whatever is there currently is also a cost-item. Some or all of the cost difference could also be offset by a Tech Package or higher vehicle cost.

Previously replied on Model X Mule Spottings thread:
Should be much more affordable:
For those excited about the idea of their own self-driving car, don’t worry about that $10,000 price tag. If any automaker decides to Drive PX, or a derivative of its technology, in vehicles made for consumers, Shapiro says, “the per car amount will be very affordable.”
http://www.wired.com/2015/03/nvidias-powerful-new-computer-helps-teach-cars-drive/

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Good additional points on the pricing, guys, thank you.

This recent quote from Elon Musk came up - are they hinting at this stuff... or something else?

“The X will have a step beyond what we’re currently shipping on the autonomous front,” Musk said. “There are a whole bunch of things about the X that have not been revealed.”

The X will have a step beyond what we’re currently shipping on the autonomous front

Also, I'm wondering if the recent spyshots of Model X mule flirting with the side of the road are a new level of lane assistance at work. Using just regular top camera or front bumper cameras?

Model X Mule Spottings - Page 22

Already the tesla model x in palo alto - YouTube video has Model X suspiciously close to the side of the road...

 

[NigelM]

This recent quote from Elon Musk came up - are they hinting at this stuff... or something else?

“The X will have a step beyond what we’re currently shipping on the autonomous front,” Musk said. “There are a whole bunch of things about the X that have not been revealed.”

That wasn't a "recent" quote, it was from Detroit on Jan 13th. You seem to be in a time warp today AnxietyR. ;-)

 

[AnxietyRanger]

That wasn't a "recent" quote, it was from Detroit on Jan 13th. You seem to be in a time warp today AnxietyR. ;-)

This one was wholly intentional. No attempt to mislead, though.

I linked to a thread I found while browsing older threads on this forum (four, five pages back) to gather relevant-seeming points together and link data points to contribute to our understanding of the Model X. I wasn't trying to portray recent as "yesterday". The link is there for all to click. Recent is relative. Early 2015 seems recent to me in Model X time. Still does. Maybe you attributed something to my post that wasn't there.

As recent is something "belonging to a past period comparatively close to the present" or "a time, culturally and situationally defined, within the span ranging from yesterday to a week or a few months previous", to quote some definitions, the thing to consider really is what is contextually recent - basically whether or not Elon Musk's comment remains timely and relevant in the Model X situation.

As the quote happened well after the auto-pilot launch and at a time when the mule(s) discussed in this thread started appearing, and nothing to the contrary has been heard since and the mules seem pretty much the same, I would say it remains relevant - and, as in the Model X development time-frame four months is not that long a time, recent seemed like a fitting word.

Most importantly: Why on Earth are we nit-picking singular words? Is this thread any better for these kinds of comments? Is it making this a more hospitable place to hold a conversation in?

 

[NigelM]

As recent is something "belonging to a past period comparatively close to the present" or "a time, culturally and situationally defined, within the span ranging from yesterday to a week or a few months previous", to quote some definitions.....
...
Most importantly: Why on Earth are we nit-picking singular words? Is this thread any better for these kinds of comments? Is it making this a more hospitable place to hold a conversation in?

Probably not. But (Ahem) who's quoting dictionary definitions here?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Probably not. But (Ahem) who's quoting dictionary definitions here?

It hasn't bothered you when others do. Why now?

 

[NigelM]

It hasn't bothered you when others do. Why now?

Doesnt bother me at all my friend. I was just noting that you were quoting dictionary definitions while simultaneously suggesting that doing so wasn't making the thread hospitable. Anyway, pointless discussion in my opinion so you're welcome to have the last word.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Doesnt bother me at all my friend. I was just noting that you were quoting dictionary definitions while simultaneously suggesting that doing so wasn't making the thread hospitable. Anyway, pointless discussion in my opinion so you're welcome to have the last word.

Fair enough, I too contributed to the clutter in this thread when I could have chosen to let it be. I do think we could do without all that and the same standard applies to myself.

Mostly I wish we could stop reading each other like the devil reads the bible, though. A lot of stuff gets new meaning when one reads them assuming the best, not the worst - and I think too often the opposite happens.

 

[dirkhh]

Doesnt bother me at all my friend. I was just noting that you were quoting dictionary definitions while simultaneously suggesting that doing so wasn't making the thread hospitable. Anyway, pointless discussion in my opinion so you're welcome to have the last word.

Dang I've given you to much reputation lately... but hats off for a classy move!