Tesla Autopilot One Again Proves Crumple Zones Work

[FrgMstr]

Tesla owners are out once again to prove that the Tesla Model S surely deserves its overall "Good" crash rating. However, this does make me question that "Superior" rating when it comes to "Crash Avoidance and Mitigation." This time is again a Tesla Model S owner actually believing that "Autopilot" feature actually means what is says. Rest assured, you need to be paying attention while driving down the road. Especially if your autopilotted car will run into the back of a stationary firetruck with its emergency lights on. Maybe Tesla is dead last in the driverless vehicle race? Fortunately no first responders were standing at the rear of the firetruck and the driver walked away from the crash. Crumple zones be crumplin'.



“It was a pretty big hit,” Powell said. The firefighters union tweet indicated that the Tesla had been traveling at 65 miles per hour before the crash, but it was unclear to what extent the car may have slowed before striking the fire truck.

 

[Jim Kim]

Auto-Pilot, can't believe they still call it that. Must be waiting on more deaths or lawsuits before they rename it.

 

[RPKYGK]

Had two Model S's in at Enterprise Rent A Car today. Apparently the temps along with the freezing rain did not agree with the battery packs. One fried something in the packs and was towed, the other refused to charge and made it stone dead to the parking lot. The people at Enterprise were pissed because the guy parked it right in front of their main door and its stone dead so they had to wait for a tow truck to come, and with the ice storm they may be waiting a while.

 

[NeoNemesis]

They need to do fully autonomous or not at all. It's pretty clear at this point hat humans are simply too stupid and lazy for anything in the middle.

 

[FearTheCow]

They need to do fully autonomous or not at all. It's pretty clear at this point hat humans are simply too stupid and lazy for anything in the middle.

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

sure they are because it'll finally end the argument of whether or not it was the cars fault or the drivers fault..

although i really think they need to work on regulation standards for semi/fully autonomous vehicles.. e.g. put a pinger or something on safety vehicles so that it pings any semi/fully autonomous vehicles to automatically slow down or notify the driver if they get within a certain range of them. although i think this should be in all new cars, not just autonomous cars since automakers keep trying to soundproof car cabins more and more with every new model that it's almost impossible to hear police/fire/ambulances until they're right next to you.

 

[Danny Dawg]

Screw the auto pilot and just hire yourself a driver.

 

[NeoNemesis]

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

No, it absolutely isn’t that at all. Autopilot is just an advanced driver assist system. It was NEVER billed as autonomous, it was alway just a stepping stone tech until they could actually do full autonomy. The name ‘autopilot’ unfortunately leads people to believe that the cars are autonomous.

 

[Gottfried Leibnizzle]

I've been saying it from day one - the bodies will pile up in the streets until the idiots pushing for autonomous vehicles stop trying to mix it up with human drivers on the same roads (or in the same car, as in this case).

Self-driving cars - bring them. It can't happen soon enough, but only on dedicated road circuits please.

 

[refraxion]

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

Thing is. Tesla right now is Level 2 Autonomy. They are technically waiting for the tech as well as government regulations to allow for Level 5 Autonomy. Which will then be true autopilot.

 

[nutzo]

No, it absolutely isn’t that at all. Autopilot is just an advanced driver assist system. It was NEVER billed as autonomous, it was alway just a stepping stone tech until they could actually do full autonomy. The name ‘autopilot’ unfortunately leads people to believe that the cars are autonomous.

Should have called it advanced cruise control, or something similar.

The problem is that if they change the name now, they will be sued by current owners for downgrading their cars, even if it all works the same.

 

[John1701]

I think/hope this automated car craze we are in will collapse. The only way it will be successful is if the government rides the "gimme my robot car" popularity wave, ignoring the shortcomings because they are smart/evil enough to realize that 30 years from now the idea of restricting where people are allowed to drive will be entering into public discussion.

 

[chaos4u]

this push for autonomous vehicles is going to end badly. we are either going to loose our privilege to drive our cars and be baby sat by some overly safe and annoying A.I.

or its going to end up being rushed and stationary vehicles animals or obstructions and other unknown or uncalculated obstacles will end up causing enough loss of life and property to the extent that its scrapped.

either way autonomous vehicles is a bad idea always has been always will be . i dont care how 'smart' the algorithm is its nothing more than the typical database driven precalculated response to obstacles . and every time it meets an exception it fails spectacularly .

those that believe in this technology are either wishful for a reprieve from traffic or are just blissfully unaware of what a mad house it really is out there on the open roads.

the only way it will ever be marginally successful is if they equalize all the variables by forcing all vehicles to be autonomous and under the control of the ai at all times.
but when that either fails or is exploited it will be a big ol mess possibly even surpassing the worst of Chinese traffic jams.

 

[Johan Steyn]

I just think Tesla is getting so much hate. Give them credit for the pioneering work they have done. It just seems as if everybody is trying to screw Elon Musk as much as they can. Before Tesla, we basically zero electric cars and the same goes for "autopilot." The fact that people are stupid will remain. Even Top Gear sold a bag of lies when they tested Tesla.

I do not own one or stock, but seriously? I can believe that all this attack on Tesla is driven by other conventional car makers as well as oil companies. It is sick. Sad to see HOCP is now also part of this hate party. On the stock market the hate is worse than ever.

 

[krotch]

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

If the driver has to pay attention, it's not fully autonomous. It's also not "supposed" to be fully autonomous either. Tesla states such and states what conditions you can use Autopilot. There is currently zero fully autonomous cars on the market for purchase.

Should have called it advanced cruise control, or something similar.

The problem is that if they change the name now, they will be sued by current owners for downgrading their cars, even if it all works the same.

No they won't. Customers are sucking on the Tesla teat and will probably praise Tesla for changing the name.

 

[Tsumi]

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

Which is exactly that middle ground we should be avoiding. Tesla Autopilot isn't completely ready and wasn't marketed as completely ready.

 

[gamerk2]

I'm going to speak as a Software Engineer: We're never going to have perfectly reliable autonomous cars on existing roadways. There's simply too many variables to cover every possible situation.

Case in point: A major highway near me is undergoing roadwork. The existing lane markers are still visible, but in the interim new solid lane markers have been put down to show where the lanes are during the maintenance period. How do you think autonomous cars will handle two different sets of lane markers?

If you want autonomous vehicles, you're almost better off replacing our entire roadway system with a rail network; otherwise you'll never get the public to trust in it as the accident rate will simply be too high (granted, lower then it is now, but perception matters more then reality).

 

[Drakeniir]

On the bright side, if the car's battery pack had a thermal runaway event, the fire truck was right there!

 

[NeoNemesis]

Should have called it advanced cruise control, or something similar.

The problem is that if they change the name now, they will be sued by current owners for downgrading their cars, even if it all works the same.

The thing is, 'autopilot' has never meant autonomous. Even on aircraft it's always just been a form of 'driver assistance'. People just assumed it meant that the planes could fly themselves. You are correct though, the name was dumb.

 

[bobzdar]

There's no way it was doing 65mph when it hit - the car would have been way more deformed. Looks like it hit the brakes but not in time. Could be this was a case of the vehicle in front moving lanes at the last second and the Tesla not having time to react. I've seen this happen in real life with a human driver and the result was much the same, following car hits whatever the lead car avoided. However, a human probably would have seen the flashing lights ahead unless it was a large truck in front of them.

 

[RogueTadhg]

"Advanced Assistance" is better than "Autopilot". Saying "Autopilot" for many people, even myself is akin to "Autonomous" where I can take a nap and wake up at the destination. Imagine the drive to work, being trapped in long traffic - but you're still sound asleep. I bet there would be a lot less honking going on. Many Americans are going without sleep so this is a very real benefit which we aren't there yet.

 

[Azphira]

Autoplow

 

[Verge]

I'm going to speak as a Software Engineer: We're never going to have perfectly reliable autonomous cars on existing roadways. There's simply too many variables to cover every possible situation.

Case in point: A major highway near me is undergoing roadwork. The existing lane markers are still visible, but in the interim new solid lane markers have been put down to show where the lanes are during the maintenance period. How do you think autonomous cars will handle two different sets of lane markers?

If you want autonomous vehicles, you're almost better off replacing our entire roadway system with a rail network; otherwise you'll never get the public to trust in it as the accident rate will simply be too high (granted, lower then it is now, but perception matters more then reality).

It won't, but morons overlook this stuff. They will have to phone home and take different routes once a section of road like this is identified. It's the only way.

Unfortunately for the shrubs driving it the first time, their car will probably stop in the middle of the road and wait, hope it has a steering wheel.

 

[SomeoneElse]

The thing is, 'autopilot' has never meant autonomous. Even on aircraft it's always just been a form of 'driver assistance'. People just assumed it meant that the planes could fly themselves. You are correct though, the name was dumb.

I was just about to say this same thing.

People have to realize, even then they fly aircraft, you still have a pilot and co-pilot sitting at the controls of the aircraft. The plane never has and done everything without human overseeing. Its guided by GPS and other navigation systems while in flight but the pilot is always checking systems(or should be).

AutoPilot is not autonomous.....never was.

 

[heatlesssun]

Auto-Pilot, can't believe they still call it that. Must be waiting on more deaths or lawsuits before they rename it.

Indeed, in this case it sounds more like Warp Drive.

 

[Rahh]

Auto-Pilot, can't believe they still call it that. Must be waiting on more deaths or lawsuits before they rename it.

Why rename it when it means exactly what it means? It's more baffling to me that you and other rich owners of Tesla's don't understand what this means even though the owners themselves are told repeatedly how it works. If simply renaming it stops these idiots from doing this then I'm all for it. They'll just find another way to mess it up because of their stupidity. Must be nice to be so rich and yet oblivious at the same time.

 

[Rahh]

"Advanced Assistance" is better than "Autopilot". Saying "Autopilot" for many people, even myself is akin to "Autonomous" where I can take a nap and wake up at the destination. Imagine the drive to work, being trapped in long traffic - but you're still sound asleep. I bet there would be a lot less honking going on. Many Americans are going without sleep so this is a very real benefit which we aren't there yet.

Except that's not how autopilot ever worked or meant.

 

[0neTwo]

search the surrounding area for an orange

 

[TwiceOver]

Until all of the vehicles can talk to each other, this is still a pipe dream.

 

[Jim Kim]

Why rename it when it means exactly what it means? It's more baffling to me that you and other rich owners of Tesla's don't understand what this means even though the owners themselves are told repeatedly how it works. If simply renaming it stops these idiots from doing this then I'm all for it. They'll just find another way to mess it up because of their stupidity. Must be nice to be so rich and yet oblivious at the same time.

You know what's baffling, How you can assume I'm rich or that I own a tesla all from one simple statement that most people agree with, now that's baffling. But do carry on making wild ass assumptions, they are fun to read.

 

[sfsuphysics]

They need to do fully autonomous or not at all. It's pretty clear at this point hat humans are simply too stupid and lazy for anything in the middle.

While I do agree with this statement, the fact that this "autonomous" car hit a stationary object kind of shows we're not ready yet. This time it was a fire truck, next time it could be some road crew fixing the road or something.

 

[0neTwo]

Until all of the vehicles can talk to each other, this is still a pipe dream.

Truth. It will take ~25 years before actual self driving is a thing. Need time to get the old cars off the street. That way they dont have to rely on reacting to what the other 99.9% of non-driverless cars are doing.

 

[kju1]

Truth. It will take ~25 years before actual self driving is a thing. Need time to get the old cars off the street. That way they dont have to rely on reacting to what the other 99.9% of non-driverless cars are doing.

Longer than that. We need the following for self driving cars:

1) Congress to do something (dont hold your breath...)
2) Cars to be difficult to hack (see above)
3) Networked cars
4) Possible infrastructure upgrades . i.e. some areas with confusing intersections would likely need to be redesigned. Better cell infrastructure maybe?
5) Education of drivers to help them program the vehicle to get where they are going AND to be able to tell when its "gone off the rails" or when they need to stop the vehicle. I.e. to not hit a fire truck

 

[0neTwo]

Firetruck will need to have a reverse light replaced.

 

[Gweenz]

Firetruck will need to have a reverse light replaced.

You joke, but that's probably $25k in damages right there, easy. You can't just take it over to Earl Scheib and get it painted for $20.

Any insurance people here? Will he be covered, or can they deny him based on the fact that he wasn't using the vehicle as intended?

 

[ZacharyS]

Auto-Pilot, can't believe they still call it that. Must be waiting on more deaths or lawsuits before they rename it.

An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required. Autopilots do not replace human operators but assist them in controlling aircraft, allowing them to focus on broader aspects of operations such as monitoring the trajectory, weather and systems.

How is this not exactly what exists in Tesla cars? Its purpose is to keep you on the road moving forward. That is it. The problem is not the name, the problem is somehow people are still stupid enough to think that autopilot means you literally don't need a pilot. Did you not see that episode of Archer where he knocks out the pilot of the plane and they end up hours off course because all auto pilot does is keep you flying in a direction.

What the hell else should it be called if not the exact term that fits what it does?

Autopilot is supposed to be fully autonomous with the driver paying attention just in case, so no, fully autonomous vehicles are still not a good idea.

No, it isn't. Its only "fully autonomous" in the sense that it will keep you on the road. Its just a more advanced cruise control that keeps you between the lines and tries to maintain a safe distance from the vehicles in front of you. It won't take an exit. It won't pass a car. It won't make complex decisions.

I'm going to speak as a Software Engineer: We're never going to have perfectly reliable autonomous cars on existing roadways. There's simply too many variables to cover every possible situation.

Case in point: A major highway near me is undergoing roadwork. The existing lane markers are still visible, but in the interim new solid lane markers have been put down to show where the lanes are during the maintenance period. How do you think autonomous cars will handle two different sets of lane markers?

If you want autonomous vehicles, you're almost better off replacing our entire roadway system with a rail network; otherwise you'll never get the public to trust in it as the accident rate will simply be too high (granted, lower then it is now, but perception matters more then reality).

I'm also going to speak as a software engineer, and I want to be very clear:

You are **clearly** not involved in any of the technology surrounding autonomous driving. How do you handle multiple sets of lane markers? You use your surroundings. Where are the other cars? Are they one the road? Yes? Try to file in behind them. Are there no other cars? Who gives a shit, stay on the road and you're gucci. Obviously this is simplified, but the general idea is exactly how this type of situation will be handled. Will it cause slowdowns? Absolutely. But... have you driven through a wreck area or construction? Its slow anyway because just like cars, people need to look around at their surroundings as well.

Obviously this takes time to perfect, but the scenario you are presenting is actually one of the easier ones to solve. If you want to present a real problem then lets talk about snow/water covered roads. But frankly, I think its perfectly acceptable to just say "fuck that" for now until we can actually get sensors in all the reflectors on roads in those climates. We don't need this tech to literally work everywhere right off the bat with zero issues ever. There is no reason we couldn't have driverless cars in many states in the US or many parts of the world 24/7. Many places in the south might see snow once every few years, and even then its barely enough to effect anything. And really thats the only "unsolvable" issue with just camera tech and such.

Frankly I'm just sad by the comments here. This is supposed to be a place where we celebrate technology and you are all just shitting on something you literally don't understand and are making statements that I would expect from someone uninformed like my parents. The fact that so many of you are arguing completely and 100% factually incorrectly about what autopilot actually means shows you are all talking out your ass and are just as dumb as the people who assume their car is fully 100% autonomous...

 

[Blakestr]

Frankly I'm just sad by the comments here. This is supposed to be a place where we celebrate technology and you are all just shitting on something you literally don't understand and are making statements that I would expect from someone uninformed like my parents. The fact that so many of you are arguing completely and 100% factually incorrectly about what autopilot actually means shows you are all talking out your ass and are just as dumb as the people who assume their car is fully 100% autonomous...

You aren't the only one. Honestly, yeah these near-misses are scary but I don't understand why people are extrapolating so much, as though there will be a magic switch and every car on the road will have this system. And honestly, with humanity's driving record, these cars are going to have to kill A LOT of people to even come close to being AS BAD as the average American driver.

 

[kju1]

You joke, but that's probably $25k in damages right there, easy. You can't just take it over to Earl Scheib and get it painted for $20.

Any insurance people here? Will he be covered, or can they deny him based on the fact that he wasn't using the vehicle as intended?

Plus that back step/fender thing looks fubared up.

I would say he wouldnt be covered due to negligence.

You aren't the only one. Honestly, yeah these near-misses are scary but I don't understand why people are extrapolating so much, as though there will be a magic switch and every car on the road will have this system. And honestly, with humanity's driving record, these cars are going to have to kill A LOT of people to even come close to being AS BAD as the average American driver.

I believe in tech, I also have a realistic view of the world. Remember it only takes one death to stir up the social justice warriors and if it happens to be the wrong person (i.e. some senators daughter) then laws will get made...until then they could give fuck all what happens.

 

[James21]

While some are busy trying to blame the driver, in any case this is a huge failure for the Tesla software.

If you have "autopilot" "Advanced assistance" "insert any new cool name you want here" engaged on your car.
Slamming into a stationary object is a gigantic failure!
I'm about to crash into this big stationary thing, apply braking force now, is one of the most basic advanced crash avoidance options that many other cars in the mainstream market have.

A car that sometimes drives itself but requires you to always be ready to take control if it messes up, is going to be less safe than one manually driven with advanced safety aids (Such as Lane departure warning, blind spot warning, rear cross traffic warning, adaptive cruise control and active front impact mitigation braking).

Blaming the drivers is kind of stupid, yes they may not have been properly paying attention. But for the $$$$$ upgrade to "autopilot" it should at least be able to put on the brakes for large stationary objects or objects that suddenly swerve into it's path.
That should be a primary important function above all else.

Even my non high tech car is pretty aggressive about braking if it thinks there might be a crash.

 

[travisty]

Frankly I'm just sad by the comments here. This is supposed to be a place where we celebrate technology and you are all just shitting on something you literally don't understand and are making statements that I would expect from someone uninformed like my parents. The fact that so many of you are arguing completely and 100% factually incorrectly about what autopilot actually means shows you are all talking out your ass and are just as dumb as the people who assume their car is fully 100% autonomous...

I think it's coming down to a fear of the unknown.

AI as intelligent as humans and moreso will happen. We, humans, will be replaced in the workforce by robots; that's the future.

Do we have to make sure robots are safe? Of course. We already have data that self driving cars are safer. If just 5% that's a good start but it's not 5%, it's much closer to 90-95% safer. The pandemic of human-driving (1.2 million deaths per year from accidents worldwide) must come to an end because we humans are not meant to and should not be driving. It really is that simple.