Tesla Autopilot failed to notice a tractor trailer

[JD001]

Originally Posted by Toyarzee

Autopilot or not, you shouldn't be sleeping or watching Netflix while in the pilot seat. Period.

I do hope this push for automation doesn't further invoke careless behaviour...

Ejector seat function if a dumb ass is detected in the drivers seat.

[JD001]

No matter how good a system you will never overcome the human interface issue. As you will get dumb drivers taking things literally, much like drivers taking satnav instructions to end up in a river or driving off a cliff!!

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by NemesisPrime909

i never trust driver-less cars,

I am suggesting that cars with drivers aren't to be trusted either.

[joe strummer]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

I am suggesting that cars with drivers aren't to be trusted either.

Hahaha, now that's witty.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I can't come up with an analogy that accurately describes how astronomically implausible that scenario is.

And I can't come up with another scenario that explains how the system failed so miserably that the car was carrying enough speed to not only go under the trailer, which would have sheered off the roof, yet still be carrying enough momentum to go through two fences, and hit a pole.

I'm not saying the programmers specifically did not foresee a tractor/trailer crossing in front of the car, but the bottom line here is that software, in general, does not "learn" it can only handle scenarios it has been programmed to do.

For example, we don't know if the system is programmed to judge clearance. The example earlier in this thread where a different Tesla rolled itself under a truck with a overhanging load suggests that may be an issue. That could be contributing factor (just a theory with no basis in fact except the one photo).

A human who had learned to drive a car only on a desert road with no concerns of clearance would know from other experiences he/she could not drive underneath a tractor/trailer parked across the road just because there is a gap below it. A computer that was never taught to look 'up' above the top of the hood, would not know that and would think all was well.

I am not underestimating Musk, but then he didn't personally write the software in the Tesla. He may be the brains behind it, and is certainly the money behind it, but he did not personally verify every system. There is pretty much no system in the world that doesn't have some level of bugs and what seems like an obvious miss in hindsight.

Admittedly, I'm just guessing, as we all are. We will know one day what happened here, and let's face it, it will happen again either in this, or in another way.

Heck, a person willing to put in the time could take an Autopilot car and turn it into a suicide drone. That is what scares me about it the most.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Sonic Motor

With how the US is, I have a feeling this is the ONLY way it will go. Making things "easier" always makes people lazier, especially with how many people actually let themselves rely on technology.

This has nothing to do with the US. This is human nature. We all do it every day since the beginning of time. We trust the things we invent to work and eventually don't question it.

This is true from everything from gas stoves (open flames in our house we never think about twice) to roller coasters to the packaged food we eat.

[JD001]

Maybe the Tesla system is designed to leave the scene of an accident promptly. As this may explain why the car ended up in the field looking for the exit...

[MuseChaser]

I am COMPLETELY conflicted in my thoughts about autopiloted cars in general and the Tesla specifically. The Tesla is really the first electric car that's of any practical use, i.e., big enough to carry passengers and cargo while having a range large enough to go places other than the end of your driveway and back. On top of that, although I've never driven one, it sure seems as if its performance and handling would keep most drivers enthused about the experience. The price puts it way above my pay grade, but if I could afford one I'd probaby go check one out. I did the math and a full charge would cost me about $7.50 where I live, compared to the $28-$32 it costs me to fill up the FR-S. The FR-S will go maybe 50-100 miles further per fillup (figuring 260 for the Telsa and 360 for the FR-S), but that still makes the Tesla, at least in terms of fuel, much cheaper to drive. I'd miss the third pedal very much, though. Haven't owned an automatic car yet other than the large family trucksters my wife has driven over the years and the 560SL summer toy. Anyway, it's nice to see a manufacturer truly invested in making a useful, high-performance electric car. The other electric car options' (Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf) sole purpose seems to be to give the owner the ability to smugly brag that they've bought an expensive electric car that does almost nothing so they can show how sensitive they are to the environment, conveniently forgetting that the electricity has to be generated SOMEWHERE and that batteries are made from some pretty amazingly hazardous materials. The best car for the environment is the one you already own, kept in good condition. It's not in a landfill, and manufacturing a new car is, out of necessity, a polluting process to some degree. Buying a new car every year is one of the worst things you can do for the environment, electric or not, although it's great for the economy. I digress...

Car autopilots - another toughie. Personally, I'll always trust myself more than a computer, especially with my family onboard. However, I'd trust autopilots in OTHER cars way more than most other human drivers on the road. That's not ego, it's just the way we're ALL wired; we value our own safety more than other people's safety. Read enough posts on this forum, and you'll see that there's no arguing that point. The folks that would be most interested in autopilots are probably the folks that are already pretty passive drivers (in other words, safe predictable drivers in the first place), or folks that, for health or age reasons, don't feel safe driving any more on their own due to decaying reaction times, inability to judge distances, or whatever. Autopilots would keep those people mobile longer and more safely, so that'd be a good thing. Sadly, the folks that would have the least amount of interest in autopilots are probably the folks who should use them the most; those who drive like idiots, endangering all of our lives so they can have fun weaving in and out of traffic at ridiculous speeds, tailgating, road-raging, racing on highways, etc. Those folks won't ever use autopilots anyway, so any safety gain from autopilots would be negligeable unless they were made mandatory and human driving made illegal. I have NO interest in that scenario.

Like I said... I'm completely conflicted. Hope that helps muddy the issue.

My work here is done.

Barry

[NemesisPrime909]

Originally Posted by Stang70Fastback

Ha! HA! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Do you even drive on public roads? 90% of people are looking 10 feet in front of them, and have no clue what is going on beyond that distance, or around/behind them, and practically NOBODY pulls over when they are tired. Defensive driving is a lost art practiced only by a select few, and the situational awareness of the average driver is about on par with that of a blind, dead dog with a paper bag over its head.

Hate on Autopilot all you want (I'm not being a fanboy here) but quite frankly I would feel more comfortable driving alongside a car on Autopilot than a car driven by some clueless moron (which is most people, seemingly, these days.) At least I can be pretty sure that the car on Autopilot knows I'm next to it.

EDIT: And to add, I work in transit. You would be amazed and how cars will slam into our buses at speed. A giant bus. When asked what happened, it's not uncommon for them to say, "I just didn't see it." You just didn't see a 60-foot bus in front of you?! And yet people discussing this accident will inevitably take the position of, "A human-driven car would definitely have seen the truck."

As I've said before, I'm not necessarily saying Autopilot is ready for use by the general public. I'm just saying that self-driving cars don't need to be perfect. They just need to be less likely to crash than a human-driven car to be a net benefit for everyone on the road. We shouldn't expect perfection.

I'm 26 and have been driving ever since I was 15. I sometimes feel like i was the only one who read the book and actually still follows most if not all the rules. I have had enough experience to know you can't account for stupidity. For that same reason, I can't fully trust autopilot. I know that even if i follow all the rules I can still get into an accident. But that's why I stay alert and watch the road. Telsa has put it into their driver's heads (not directly) that they can do other things while driving and this is a huge mistake.

What I'm trying to say is, in an a car with autopilot, the driver is the failsafe. The driver can see things the auto pilot can't and has to be able to react.

As some one said, the autopilot must have seen the road underneath the trailer and detected the road was clear.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Heck, a person willing to put in the time could take an Autopilot car and turn it into a suicide drone. That is what scares me about it the most.

That's been possible for over a decade since electronic power steering and throttle by wire came out, there was a video of a guy who wired up his s2000 to steer via remote control that I can't find at the moment.

As for the autopilot programming, I can't think of a reason why it would 'see' the truck and keep going no possible logical explanation, the simple answer, already posited in Tesla's press release is that it didn't 'see' the truck. It's a known limitation in the hardware that comprises the system of sensors installed.

There's very little complex coding involved, the first autopilot feature was implemented on steam engines as a cruise control to manage the uneven power delivery created by steam engines of the time, autopilot on an airplane was created before ww2, you could probably rig up the smart cruise control that would have at least slammed on the brakes in the scenario which were talking about with entirely analog hardware if you can find the space to house it without a single line of code

[daiheadjai]

Originally Posted by Toyarzee

I do hope this push for automation doesn't further invoke careless behaviour...

I thought that was the point.
We need autonomous cars so that I can check Facebook and watch reality TV shows while hurtling towards my destination in a metal and glass cage.

[Dadhawk]

@MuseChaser, I agree with most of what you said but a couple of comments.

I've said before on here I don't care what my car uses for fuel, what I care about is being able to get in it in Georgia, enter any waypoint in the continental US and having a fairly high level of confidence I can get there without worrying about the location of fuel stops, and that a fuel stop will take less than 15 minutes. Can't do that with electric.

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

I.... The FR-S will go maybe 50-100 miles further per fillup (figuring 260 for the Telsa and 360 for the FR-S), but that still makes the Tesla, at least in terms of fuel, much cheaper to drive.

I do think this is misleading, even though you do clarify with "at least in terms of fuel". There is not a point within the normal life span of either car where the Tesla is cheaper than an FR-S to operate per mile. You are dismissing the cost of acquisition, insurance, etc all must be taken into consideration.

This is the same argument I give folks that, during high fuel prices, want to trade in their "gas guzzler" that gets 20MPH for a Prius. If what you care about is gas mileage, that's fine, but if what you care about is the cost of driving, your ROI is years.

[MuseChaser]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

@MuseChaser, I agree with most of what you said but a couple of comments.

I've said before on here I don't care what my car uses for fuel, what I care about is being able to get in it in Georgia, enter any waypoint in the continental US and having a fairly high level of confidence I can get there without worrying about the location of fuel stops, and that a fuel stop will take less than 15 minutes. Can't do that with electric.

Absolutely, although Tesla is starting to close that gap; they've built "supercharging" stations along a major route from the east coast to the west coast (or vice versa depending upon your point of view.. ) and up and down the majority of both of those coasts, and you can get a full charge in an hour. Still not near as easy as getting gas, but it's a start. Admittedly, they have a VERY long way to go.

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I do think this is misleading, even though you do clarify with "at least in terms of fuel". There is not a point within the normal life span of either car where the Tesla is cheaper than an FR-S to operate per mile. You are dismissing the cost of acquisition, insurance, etc all must be taken into consideration.

This is the same argument I give folks that, during high fuel prices, want to trade in their "gas guzzler" that gets 20MPH for a Prius. If what you care about is gas mileage, that's fine, but if what you care about is the cost of driving, your ROI is years.

I'm in 100% agreement with you, which is why I specifically wrote "at least in terms of fuel." I was pleasantly surprised at just how little you'd have to spend in electricity on a Tesla once I crunched the numbers, but as you (and I, many times in many other posts ) have said, fuel is just one part of the total cost of owning a car. I've said and written it a million times.. the cheapest car to drive is the one you've already paid for and own.

No arguments from me at all on any points... thanks for the reply.

Barry

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

I'm in 100% agreement with you, which is why I specifically wrote "at least in terms of fuel." I was pleasantly surprised at just how little you'd have to spend in electricity on a Tesla once I crunched the numbers, but as you (and I, many times in many other posts ) have said, fuel is just one part of the total cost of owning a car. I've said and written it a million times.. the cheapest car to drive is the one you've already paid for and own.

No arguments from me at all on any points... thanks for the reply.

Sounds like we are on the same page, thanks.

The electricity "cheapness" won't last long. Roads are paid for in large part by fuel taxes. Electric cars (and other alternate fuel vehicles) are sliding under the radar on that right now but eventually fees will have to catch up if the numbers become significant. It will either be a charge directly on the fuel, or everyone will get converted to a "mileage per year" tax of some sort/flavor.