5 ms·

> Until fairly recently, I believe that the RADAR, which used to be in all their cars, would have detected the stationary object (me) and applied braking force

> Until fairly recently, I believe that the RADAR, which used to be in all their cars, would have detected the stationary object (me) and applied braking force to at least reduce the impact. It is the other way around. They've stopped using RADAR because RADAR has too many false reflections at speed and it was causing learning issues in the ML dataset. The vision based position detection is better (could argue about weather and visibility here, but it is irrelevant to this convo). Reliance on RADAR was causing it to hit stopped objects, because it was relying on radar data that was already too jittery and had to be ignored. Regardless of the RADAR issue, the driver is responsible for the vehicle at all times. If someone hits you using cruise control they remain at fault.

yupper32 5y ago
> If someone hits you using cruise control they remain at fault. That'd be relevant if they didn't call it autopilot. If they called it lane assist or cruise control plus or something then I'd agree. Tesla is at major fault for implying that the Teslas can drive themselves, even if the driver is also at fault.
- mwint 5y ago
  Tesla could call it Egre-MuzzFlorp and it wouldn’t matter. The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners.
  - yupper32 5y ago
    And yet, people drive their Teslas as if it means "can drive itself". Words matter. You'd need real evidence to convince me that Tesla calling the system "Autopilot" hasn't significantly contributed to crashes.
    - mwint 5y ago
      On the contrary, we need real evidence suggesting it does. Certainly the population level crash data doesn’t support it.
  - simion314 5y ago
    >The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners. Reality check: There are videos shown Tesla drivers sleeping in the car, or using the car from the back sit, so we have proof that a subset of Tesla users are using autopilot as "it drives itself and only laws forced Tesla to add those warnings". This videos are reality, no conspiracy, no subjectivity, no fake stats... some idiots are believing the marketing and some other idiots are still defending that marketing.
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      > some idiots are believing the marketing That doesn't follow. Some people are definitely being idiots, but the marketing doesn't say that it's okay to do those things, so they're not "believing the marketing" by doing so.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If an at-fault Tesla hits me, my legal beef is with the driver of that Tesla. They may in turn rely on insurance or on suing Tesla to recover damages from their own misunderstanding of the car’s abilities or improper marketing, but my beef remains with the driver of the at-fault vehicle.
raylad 5y ago
Nearly every major manufacturer has a separate emergency stop system that continually looks for an obstacle in the vehicle's path and applies braking force, overriding the driver and any cruise control or self-driving that is in use. These often use RADAR, have worked for years, and are routinely tested by international agencies such as the IIHS. See, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgUiZgX5rE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgUiZgX5rE Teslas at least used to do this too: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/performance-of-pedestrian-crash-prevention-varies-among-midsize-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/performance-of-pedestrian-c... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJJfn2tO5fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJJfn2tO5fo If Teslas no longer have this functionality, is a serious problem that needs to be corrected. That could mean reprogramming existing cameras or adding a sensor if the system really did rely on the now-removed RADAR.
- eightysixfour 5y ago
  That's not true and you are confusing different features. AEB and Autopilot/Assisted Cruise Control do not behave the same. Here's some articles I found with a google of "radar cruise control stationary object." https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-systems-sometimes-hit-parked-cars-and-lane-dividers/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-s... > But while there's obviously room for improvement, the reality is that the behavior of Tesla's driver assistance technology here isn't that different from that of competing systems from other carmakers. As surprising as it might seem, most of the driver-assistance systems on the roads today are simply not designed to prevent a crash in this kind of situation. > Sam Abuelsamid, an industry analyst at Navigant and former automotive engineer, tells Ars that it's "pretty much universal" that "vehicles are programmed to ignore stationary objects at higher speeds." Here's one with BMW owners asking about it: https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1738458 https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1738458 Here's a review of Cadillac's SuperCruise: https://www.thedrive.com/tech/14830/i-wrote-this-in-a-supercruise-equipped-cadillac-ct6-that-is-driving-itself https://www.thedrive.com/tech/14830/i-wrote-this-in-a-superc... > Related: All these types of semi-autonomous systems have a hard time identifying stationary cars—vehicles in stopped traffic on the highway, for example—as "targets" to avoid. Coming over a crest at 70 mph, I pick up the stopped traffic ahead of me far before the system does. I even give the system an extra second or two to identify that we're hurtling towards stopped traffic, but have to initiate braking. However, it's very likely that even at that speed, the car could have made the stop before an impact. And the feature you're thinking of, AEB and its limitations are here: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-features-automatic-braking-system-tested-explained/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu... > If traveling above 20 mph, the Volvo will not decelerate, according to its maker. > No car in our test could avoid a collision beyond 30 mph, and as we neared that upper limit, the Tesla and the Subaru provided no warning or braking.

yupper32 5y ago

> If someone hits you using cruise control they remain at fault. That'd be relevant if they didn't call it autopilot. If they called it lane assist or cruise control plus or something then I'd agree. Tesla is at major fault for implying that the Teslas can drive themselves, even if the driver is also at fault.

mwint 5y ago
Tesla could call it Egre-MuzzFlorp and it wouldn’t matter. The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners.
- yupper32 5y ago
  And yet, people drive their Teslas as if it means "can drive itself". Words matter. You'd need real evidence to convince me that Tesla calling the system "Autopilot" hasn't significantly contributed to crashes.
  - mwint 5y ago
    On the contrary, we need real evidence suggesting it does. Certainly the population level crash data doesn’t support it.
- simion314 5y ago
  >The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners. Reality check: There are videos shown Tesla drivers sleeping in the car, or using the car from the back sit, so we have proof that a subset of Tesla users are using autopilot as "it drives itself and only laws forced Tesla to add those warnings". This videos are reality, no conspiracy, no subjectivity, no fake stats... some idiots are believing the marketing and some other idiots are still defending that marketing.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    > some idiots are believing the marketing That doesn't follow. Some people are definitely being idiots, but the marketing doesn't say that it's okay to do those things, so they're not "believing the marketing" by doing so.
sokoloff 5y ago
If an at-fault Tesla hits me, my legal beef is with the driver of that Tesla. They may in turn rely on insurance or on suing Tesla to recover damages from their own misunderstanding of the car’s abilities or improper marketing, but my beef remains with the driver of the at-fault vehicle.

raylad 5y ago

Nearly every major manufacturer has a separate emergency stop system that continually looks for an obstacle in the vehicle's path and applies braking force, overriding the driver and any cruise control or self-driving that is in use. These often use RADAR, have worked for years, and are routinely tested by international agencies such as the IIHS. See, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgUiZgX5rE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgUiZgX5rE Teslas at least used to do this too: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/performance-of-pedestrian-crash-prevention-varies-among-midsize-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/performance-of-pedestrian-c... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJJfn2tO5fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJJfn2tO5fo If Teslas no longer have this functionality, is a serious problem that needs to be corrected. That could mean reprogramming existing cameras or adding a sensor if the system really did rely on the now-removed RADAR.

eightysixfour 5y ago
That's not true and you are confusing different features. AEB and Autopilot/Assisted Cruise Control do not behave the same. Here's some articles I found with a google of "radar cruise control stationary object." https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-systems-sometimes-hit-parked-cars-and-lane-dividers/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-s... > But while there's obviously room for improvement, the reality is that the behavior of Tesla's driver assistance technology here isn't that different from that of competing systems from other carmakers. As surprising as it might seem, most of the driver-assistance systems on the roads today are simply not designed to prevent a crash in this kind of situation. > Sam Abuelsamid, an industry analyst at Navigant and former automotive engineer, tells Ars that it's "pretty much universal" that "vehicles are programmed to ignore stationary objects at higher speeds." Here's one with BMW owners asking about it: https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1738458 https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1738458 Here's a review of Cadillac's SuperCruise: https://www.thedrive.com/tech/14830/i-wrote-this-in-a-supercruise-equipped-cadillac-ct6-that-is-driving-itself https://www.thedrive.com/tech/14830/i-wrote-this-in-a-superc... > Related: All these types of semi-autonomous systems have a hard time identifying stationary cars—vehicles in stopped traffic on the highway, for example—as "targets" to avoid. Coming over a crest at 70 mph, I pick up the stopped traffic ahead of me far before the system does. I even give the system an extra second or two to identify that we're hurtling towards stopped traffic, but have to initiate braking. However, it's very likely that even at that speed, the car could have made the stop before an impact. And the feature you're thinking of, AEB and its limitations are here: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-features-automatic-braking-system-tested-explained/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu... > If traveling above 20 mph, the Volvo will not decelerate, according to its maker. > No car in our test could avoid a collision beyond 30 mph, and as we neared that upper limit, the Tesla and the Subaru provided no warning or braking.