5 ms·

Isn't the autopilot in a tesla pretty similar to what is called autopilot in an airplane?

by s_m_t 8y ago

nikofeyn 8y ago
that is a possibility, but there are key differences that come to mind. one is the different environments. two, the commercial airline pilots are working when using auto-pilot. they are flying the airplane via automation and are still very active in working with the plane and computer systems. they are still performing their jobs. of course, there are still issues, for example the recent boeing plane crash. but to me, it isn't comparable to the tesla situation, especially given the apparent idiocy of tesla owners who have completely bought into the hype compared to professional pilots who actually remain active in flying the plane.
- tc313 8y ago
  But in terms of the appropriateness of calling the feature “autopilot,” it seems that Tesla’s feature is as deserving of the name as an airplane’s autopilot (the driver/pilot still has to remain alert and focused on what’s happening).
  - Xylakant 8y ago
    So what you’re implying is that Tesla uses the misguided notion that many people have about the capabilities of an airplane autopilot to promote a feature that doesn’t behave as people expect?
    - diydsp 8y ago
      after experiencing this line of inquiry on many forums, yes, that is consensus. autopilot is the lane guidance of the skies that maintains basic stability not a level 5 system. people hear autopilot and think it means it does "everything." further muddying the waters, tesla maintains their car has all the hardware, sensors and computation to support fully autonomous driving. it's just that pesky software missing.
      - masklinn 8y ago
        > autopilot is the lane guidance of the skies that maintains basic stability not a level 5 system. FWIW that's not necessarily true either, autopilots run the entire gamut from "maintains trajectory and altitude" to "automated flight from takeoff to landing" (only the taxiing is left to the pilot).
    - usrusr 8y ago
      A switch for maintaining bearing and altitude would be pretty useless in a car, but it would definitely cause fewer misunderstandings than the current illusion of autonomy. Supervised autonomy is dangerous no matter how it is labeled, but some labels are worse than others.
  - nikofeyn 8y ago
    that's all well and good, but i am not talking about airplanes' auto-pilot. there are also still differences in terms of everyday joes buying teslas using its auto-pilot versus trained pilots using auto-pilot. there are differences in availability so the airplane situation is not as suscpetible or vulnerable to a poorly named feature and marketing hype. maybe it is, but i wager the tesla situation is worse.
- dotancohen 8y ago
  What recent Boeing crash? I cannot think of anything recent involving the autopilot.
  - Leherenn 8y ago
    Lion Air flight on the new 737 Max I presume. It isn't exactly the autopilot at cause though according to initial reports, it's the anti-stall system pitching down due to a broken stall sensor, and the pilots not knowing how to disengage it.
- bdavis__ 8y ago
  Autopilot is the system that moves the flight surfaces to maintain altitude (or a climb/dive rate), and heading. There is an FMS (Flight Management System) that can give commands to the autopilot. The FMS knows the X,Y,Z of every waypoint and every runway touchdown point, and has in it encoded the 'highway rules' of aviation. When the FMS flies the plane, it is going on a pre-planned route. It does not adapt to anything. Imminent collision with another aircraft (TCAS advisories) alert the pilot to do something, not the FMS/Autopilot. It is a long way from self driving a car. The specifics make it a good analogy, but how much of the public understands it to this depth.
fromthestart 8y ago
Plane autopilot doesn't have to deal with obsticles. It has to fly in a straight line with very gradual adjustments. Driving is magnitudes more complex, contextual data, inconsistent behaviors of other drivers, etc.
- Udik 8y ago
  On the other hand, if you set an airplane autopilot against a mountain, it will happily go there and crash. And try to make an airplane in autopilot land safely in the same way they did with this car.
- Retric 8y ago
  Airborne collision avoidance system are part of both civil and military aviation. If nothing else Aircraft do need to deal with mountains. Military aircraft go a step further and avoid hills. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrain-following_radar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrain-following_radar
  - kpil 8y ago
    This is even less complicated than an adaptive cruise control system. If you point it to in the general direction of a mountain, it very much depends on luck if the descent is possible or not.
    - Retric 8y ago
      Terrain-following is significantly more complex than the most basic forms of adaptive cruse control. Radar works much better for tracking discrete objects moving at different speeds than mapping 3d terrain. This is why adaptive cruse control will often hit stationary objects and generally disengage at low speeds. Remember, the aircraft needs to avoid everything in a line in front of it. But, they also want to stay as low as possible to avoid enemy radar, so it also wants steer steer around hills and even trees vs simply going up.
leeoniya 8y ago
pretty sure autopilot in airplanes just monitors rudimentary sensors and follows a gps course. i dont think most airplanes even have active radar, let alone cameras/lidar and randomly moving obstacle avoidance at milisecond latency, road sign recognition, etc. comparatively boring at 35k ft. many orders of magnitude complexity difference.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
Aeroplanes have ATC keeping multiple miles of separation, and thousands of feet of height between vehicles, and regulations requiring a pair of awake, sober and aware humans on board. An aircraft autopilot can be quite dumb and remain safe.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mattmanser 8y ago
  The grandparent comment is still correct though.
  - masklinn 8y ago
    1. it's not practically correct, the experience of using a plane autopilot and tesla's driving assistance is completely different, a plane autopilot will not smash you into a parked truck or a road divider — because they don't exist in the sky, sure, but at the end of the day the important bit is a plane's autopilot is almost certainly going to warn and disengage long before it kills you 2. it's not communicationally correct, most drivers are not pilot, and when you talk about "autopilot" to a layperson they expect an automated driving system (SAE3 or more), and this false impression is exactly why Tesla's marketing named their driving assistance the way they did 3. and it's not really technically correct either, there are autopilots which can do everything between takeoff and taxiing (including landing), tesla's driving assistance can do no such thing
- bayesian_horse 8y ago
  An aircraft's autopilot does not absolve the pilot of keeping an eye on the instruments, the flight situation, the windows (if applicable). He has to be ready at any moment to disengage the autopilot or take the controls when the autopilot self-disengages. The only thing an autopilot, both the tesla's and the airplane's, is good for is reducing the cognitive load of the operator.
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
bamboozled 8y ago
Doesn’t a pilot receive thousands of hours of training to correctly operate and monitor the auto-pilot though ?
- baddox 8y ago
  Isn’t that because planes are a lot harder to operate than automobiles (or at least our tolerance for accidents is much lower with planes)? The required training to operate Tesla’s autopilot is nothing more than a normal car driver plus following the very simple and constant instructions the car gives (basically just to keep your hands on the wheel, which the car supposedly enforces).

Isn't the autopilot in a tesla pretty similar to what is called autopilot in an airplane?

by s_m_t 8y ago

Isn't the autopilot in a tesla pretty similar to what is called autopilot in an airplane?

that is a possibility, but there are key differences that come to mind. one is the different environments. two, the commercial airline pilots are working when using auto-pilot. they are flying the airplane via automation and are still very active in working with the plane and computer systems. they are still performing their jobs. of course, there are still issues, for example the recent boeing plane crash. but to me, it isn't comparable to the tesla situation, especially given the apparent idiocy of tesla owners who have completely bought into the hype compared to professional pilots who actually remain active in flying the plane.

tc313 8y ago
But in terms of the appropriateness of calling the feature “autopilot,” it seems that Tesla’s feature is as deserving of the name as an airplane’s autopilot (the driver/pilot still has to remain alert and focused on what’s happening).
- Xylakant 8y ago
  So what you’re implying is that Tesla uses the misguided notion that many people have about the capabilities of an airplane autopilot to promote a feature that doesn’t behave as people expect?
  - diydsp 8y ago
    after experiencing this line of inquiry on many forums, yes, that is consensus. autopilot is the lane guidance of the skies that maintains basic stability not a level 5 system. people hear autopilot and think it means it does "everything." further muddying the waters, tesla maintains their car has all the hardware, sensors and computation to support fully autonomous driving. it's just that pesky software missing.
    - masklinn 8y ago
      > autopilot is the lane guidance of the skies that maintains basic stability not a level 5 system. FWIW that's not necessarily true either, autopilots run the entire gamut from "maintains trajectory and altitude" to "automated flight from takeoff to landing" (only the taxiing is left to the pilot).
  - usrusr 8y ago
    A switch for maintaining bearing and altitude would be pretty useless in a car, but it would definitely cause fewer misunderstandings than the current illusion of autonomy. Supervised autonomy is dangerous no matter how it is labeled, but some labels are worse than others.
- nikofeyn 8y ago
  that's all well and good, but i am not talking about airplanes' auto-pilot. there are also still differences in terms of everyday joes buying teslas using its auto-pilot versus trained pilots using auto-pilot. there are differences in availability so the airplane situation is not as suscpetible or vulnerable to a poorly named feature and marketing hype. maybe it is, but i wager the tesla situation is worse.
dotancohen 8y ago
What recent Boeing crash? I cannot think of anything recent involving the autopilot.
- Leherenn 8y ago
  Lion Air flight on the new 737 Max I presume. It isn't exactly the autopilot at cause though according to initial reports, it's the anti-stall system pitching down due to a broken stall sensor, and the pilots not knowing how to disengage it.
bdavis__ 8y ago
Autopilot is the system that moves the flight surfaces to maintain altitude (or a climb/dive rate), and heading. There is an FMS (Flight Management System) that can give commands to the autopilot. The FMS knows the X,Y,Z of every waypoint and every runway touchdown point, and has in it encoded the 'highway rules' of aviation. When the FMS flies the plane, it is going on a pre-planned route. It does not adapt to anything. Imminent collision with another aircraft (TCAS advisories) alert the pilot to do something, not the FMS/Autopilot. It is a long way from self driving a car. The specifics make it a good analogy, but how much of the public understands it to this depth.

fromthestart 8y ago

Plane autopilot doesn't have to deal with obsticles. It has to fly in a straight line with very gradual adjustments. Driving is magnitudes more complex, contextual data, inconsistent behaviors of other drivers, etc.

Udik 8y ago
On the other hand, if you set an airplane autopilot against a mountain, it will happily go there and crash. And try to make an airplane in autopilot land safely in the same way they did with this car.
Retric 8y ago
Airborne collision avoidance system are part of both civil and military aviation. If nothing else Aircraft do need to deal with mountains. Military aircraft go a step further and avoid hills. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrain-following_radar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrain-following_radar
- kpil 8y ago
  This is even less complicated than an adaptive cruise control system. If you point it to in the general direction of a mountain, it very much depends on luck if the descent is possible or not.
  - Retric 8y ago
    Terrain-following is significantly more complex than the most basic forms of adaptive cruse control. Radar works much better for tracking discrete objects moving at different speeds than mapping 3d terrain. This is why adaptive cruse control will often hit stationary objects and generally disengage at low speeds. Remember, the aircraft needs to avoid everything in a line in front of it. But, they also want to stay as low as possible to avoid enemy radar, so it also wants steer steer around hills and even trees vs simply going up.

leeoniya 8y ago

pretty sure autopilot in airplanes just monitors rudimentary sensors and follows a gps course. i dont think most airplanes even have active radar, let alone cameras/lidar and randomly moving obstacle avoidance at milisecond latency, road sign recognition, etc. comparatively boring at 35k ft. many orders of magnitude complexity difference.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

Aeroplanes have ATC keeping multiple miles of separation, and thousands of feet of height between vehicles, and regulations requiring a pair of awake, sober and aware humans on board. An aircraft autopilot can be quite dumb and remain safe.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mattmanser 8y ago
The grandparent comment is still correct though.
- masklinn 8y ago
  1. it's not practically correct, the experience of using a plane autopilot and tesla's driving assistance is completely different, a plane autopilot will not smash you into a parked truck or a road divider — because they don't exist in the sky, sure, but at the end of the day the important bit is a plane's autopilot is almost certainly going to warn and disengage long before it kills you 2. it's not communicationally correct, most drivers are not pilot, and when you talk about "autopilot" to a layperson they expect an automated driving system (SAE3 or more), and this false impression is exactly why Tesla's marketing named their driving assistance the way they did 3. and it's not really technically correct either, there are autopilots which can do everything between takeoff and taxiing (including landing), tesla's driving assistance can do no such thing
bayesian_horse 8y ago
An aircraft's autopilot does not absolve the pilot of keeping an eye on the instruments, the flight situation, the windows (if applicable). He has to be ready at any moment to disengage the autopilot or take the controls when the autopilot self-disengages. The only thing an autopilot, both the tesla's and the airplane's, is good for is reducing the cognitive load of the operator.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago

bamboozled 8y ago

Doesn’t a pilot receive thousands of hours of training to correctly operate and monitor the auto-pilot though ?

baddox 8y ago
Isn’t that because planes are a lot harder to operate than automobiles (or at least our tolerance for accidents is much lower with planes)? The required training to operate Tesla’s autopilot is nothing more than a normal car driver plus following the very simple and constant instructions the car gives (basically just to keep your hands on the wheel, which the car supposedly enforces).