Tesla Model X Driver Blames Autopilot for Insane Collision with Semi-Truck

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Is Tesla’s safety rating as good as advertised? Probably, since this guy’s Model X looks like it was driven into a grinder, but he still managed to walk away from the incident without serious injuries. It’s not all rainbows, though, as the driver also claims that Autopilot was what almost got him killed, having driven him “full speed” into a truck. Of course, AP is not meant to be an avoidance system…

…you would think that it’s the aftermath of a fatal accident, but the Tesla Model X driver actually walked out of it with “no injuries aside from a stiff neck”. He credited the vehicle’s safety for saving his life, but he also blamed the Autopilot for what he claims was “driving full speed into the back of a semi.” It’s actually a little more complicated than that. “There was a pickup truck that was out of gas in the right lane (lights were either dim or off, and give the night, was hard to see). A semi was pulling up onto it, saw it, braked and swerved into my middle lane. Autopilot did not disengage, but did the emergency beep about 1 second before impact. I was looking off to the side, and impacted the truck immediately after I heard the beep and looked forward.”
 
so

Semi truck break and swerve into lane maybe not checkings for other cars in the lane.
drive is looking off to the side not paying attention to the road as supposed to
cars give warning beep.
drive to slow to react because he haven't been paying attention to the road ahead
crash

Must be the autopilot....
 
SvenBent said:
so

Semi truck break and swerve into lane maybe not checkings for other cars in the lane.
drive is looking off to the side not paying attention to the road as supposed to
cars give warning beep.
drive to slow to react because he haven't been paying attention to the road ahead
crash

Must be the autopilot....
Click to expand...

Right. Because magically if he were driving everything would have gone differently. Sometimes shit happens that nothing could avoid.
 
How many times does Telsa have to post warnings and or respond to claims that AP does not mean a self driving car? Owners have been repeatedly told this. Sometimes in an instant change situations even auto controls can't act fast enough. I'm glad the driver is OK and if anything this is some great info to further improve their driving software.
 
Driver blames Tesla Autopilot for not avoiding a crash. Not the truck's fault for veering in to his lane, and not the driver's fault who wasn't watching the road at all, but Tesla's.

This is why we can't have nice things.
 
Interested to see the report of why/if the automatic collision braking/emergency braking feature did not engage. Especially since if the semi was slowing down and then swerved into the TM-X's lane, the lidar and front sensors "should" of seen it. Though without the rest of the information, it may HAVE but the mechanical limits of braking could of been reached and didnt slow the vehicle enough to avoid the impact (which is probably what I would assume occured)

SKynet or not, I cant wait for lvl 4 to be federally required to enter an interstate. It cant come soon enough.
 
I dont see how this is Tesla's fault. Tesla is pretty clear that the autopilot is NOT a substitute for being fully aware and having your hands on the wheels. When I test drove on they repeatedly emphasized this during the test drive and kept saying "it does not drive for you" over and over.
 
kju1 said:
I dont see how this is Tesla's fault. Tesla is pretty clear that the autopilot is NOT a substitute for being fully aware and having your hands on the wheels. When I test drove on they repeatedly emphasized this during the test drive and kept saying "it does not drive for you" over and over.
Click to expand...
Maybe they should not call it Auto Pilot.
 
macksomerville said:
Interested to see the report of why/if the automatic collision braking/emergency braking feature did not engage. Especially since if the semi was slowing down and then swerved into the TM-X's lane, the lidar and front sensors "should" of seen it. Though without the rest of the information, it may HAVE but the mechanical limits of braking could of been reached and didnt slow the vehicle enough to avoid the impact (which is probably what I would assume occured)

SKynet or not, I cant wait for lvl 4 to be federally required to enter an interstate. It cant come soon enough.
Click to expand...
I'd like to know this too. Even in my wife's Honda Pilot, the collision mitigation system works well at night (we found out the hard way after some yahoo pulled out right in front of us on a rural highway).
 
socK said:
Looking at the road tends to help a bit
Click to expand...

I'm of the camp, then what the fuck is the point of having an AP system? If it can't handle basic accident avoidance better than a human, it shouldn't be a "feature" at all..
 
SvenBent said:
so

Semi truck break and swerve into lane maybe not checkings for other cars in the lane.
drive is looking off to the side not paying attention to the road as supposed to
cars give warning beep.
drive to slow to react because he haven't been paying attention to the road ahead
crash

Must be the autopilot....
Click to expand...


Yes actually, if it's not an "autopilot" then don't effin call it "autopilot." Musk can blame his own arrogance at marketing for all the problems. Of course he won't rename it though, as then the idiot public won't preorder his cars.
 
How many AP accidents has there been so far? Each month it seems like i'm reading about one from here.
 
Verge said:
It's not an autopilot system. They just call it one.

Germany has already said no: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/17/germany_outlaws_tesla_autopilot_name/
Click to expand...

Precisely my point.. But I say get rid of it entirely until it's actually a true Autopilot system. Seriously, who wants a car that can supposedly drive itself, but you have to keep your eyes on the road and hands on the wheel just in case the car fucks up and you have to immediately take over. I think it was Wired that had a great write up about it awhile back, where premise of the article was, expecting humans to be only half alert then be able to instantly take over is incredibly stupid..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
upload_2017-3-28_11-51-34.png


Right into a truck you dumb shit, watch the fucking road...

Also on this note, comparing aircraft autopilot to land based autopilot is apples and oranges...
 
percydaman said:
Right. Because magically if he were driving everything would have gone differently. Sometimes shit happens that nothing could avoid.
Click to expand...

Disregarding nitpicking over who would do what better, the thing that bothers me in the two articles I ahve read on this is that

1) autopilot is an extended use of the tesla collision avoidance system.
2) Everyone is saying it slammed into the semi at full speed.
3) Any decent collision avoidance system should have been braking.

This could entirely be shitty article writing, but it sounds to me like the active collision avoidance system failed to slow.
 
It's almost like driver inattentiveness is the whole problem to begin with. :eek:

I'm not sure how naming it something different is going to help avoid accidents. A humans response time (go figure, another "problem" when traveling near 100ft/sec) just isn't suited to taking over at a moments notice, especially when you otherwise haven't been doing anything but watching - both other traffic and your own car. Every single video I've seen of this, your hands aren't actually on the wheel so you've added to your response time even more.

Verge said:
You don't really know how flightplans work.

It's the equivalent of navigating a roadway.
Click to expand...
Gotta watch out for those Cessna's broke down on the side of the flight path, and those damn cargo plans blocking it.
 
It's natural people will always try to blame something or someone else. Autopilot is a good scapegoat. I'd like to see one tesla crash where the driver didn't try to blame the autopilot for the crash. That should be news.
 
Verge said:
Yes actually, if it's not an "autopilot" then don't effin call it "autopilot." Musk can blame his own arrogance at marketing for all the problems. Of course he won't rename it though, as then the idiot public won't preorder his cars.
Click to expand...
The word autopilot has never meant. hey do all the stuff for me.

using a word correctly but then it get a new meaning dictated by the dumb grey masses it hardly Musk's fault.
Otherwise please enlighten me where the term autopilot comes from and how it means total automatic control that takes care of everything. I would surely like to know.
 
they didn't mention the body of the hooker that burned alive in the accident that was the cause for the 'distraction'
 
Jim Kim said:
Maybe they should not call it Auto Pilot.
Click to expand...

Worked on aircraft - autopilot is a function pilots turn on from the seat, and they stay in the seat (at least one at all times). Autopilot on aircraft also kicks off in certain conditions, so remaining alert is crucial. So it was never meant to mean "fully autonomous" as people think.
 
IcePickFreak said:
Gotta watch out for those Cessna's broke down on the side of the flight path, and those damn cargo plans blocking it.
Click to expand...
I remember this one time some jerk flying an a320 cut off the 747 I was in leaving maybe a plane-length and a half between us once on the flight path.

Oh wait, that's not a thing either, heh.
 
SvenBent said:
The word autopilot has never meant. hey do all the stuff for me.

using a word correctly but then it get a new meaning dictated by the dumb grey masses it hardly Musk's fault.
Otherwise please enlighten me where the term autopilot comes from and how it means total automatic control that takes care of everything. I would surely like to know.
Click to expand...

So I guess if they called it "driver assist" this guy wouldn't have plowed into the semi amiright? It's not like several Telsa employees didn't warn him at all what "autopilot" actually meant amirght? The guy probably never read or watched the news either.
 
sboucher said:
I'm of the camp, then what the fuck is the point of having an AP system? If it can't handle basic accident avoidance better than a human, it shouldn't be a "feature" at all..
Click to expand...

Aircraft autopilot systems don't really avoid collisions - more like cruise control + navigation. They have the means to detect (TA/TCAS/doppler/transponders/etc.) and that does get fed to AP, but really it's meant to cruise and the pilot should be observing at all times to quickly take control.
 
I think even honda's crash avoidance has a limit, it could be that the computer didn't brake because there is no avoidance possible braking, it disengaged because the only avoidance possible might have been turning hard to somewhere, a decision that an alert human might (a big might there) have been able to do. If the computer locked the brakes, even with anti-lock, I think that would not make turning as possible as without, I think.. so all this could just be a properly functioning system. No it doesn't mean tesla's system created the issue, and it could very well be this situation was unavoidable by anyone or anything.
 
So, let me see if I have this straight...

1) Truck swerves in front of Tesla driver
2) The difference in their relative speeds gives the car autopilot literally 1 second (or less) to respond, which it attempts to do.
3) No mitigation could have stopped the Tesla from hitting the truck in front of it, since autopilot doesn't yet scan for stupid, and couldn't anticipate or respond in time.
4) Tesla's autopilot is junk.
 
Astral Abyss said:
So, let me see if I have this straight...

1) Truck swerves in front of Tesla driver
2) The difference in their relative speeds gives the car autopilot literally 1 second (or less) to respond, which it attempts to do.
3) No mitigation could have stopped the Tesla from hitting the truck in front of it, since autopilot doesn't yet scan for stupid, and couldn't anticipate or respond in time.
4) Tesla's autopilot is junk.
Click to expand...
Or: Its named Autopilot, but didn't walk on water, then go to 4.
 
ClariorHincHonos said:
Worked on aircraft - autopilot is a function pilots turn on from the seat, and they stay in the seat (at least one at all times). Autopilot on aircraft also kicks off in certain conditions, so remaining alert is crucial. So it was never meant to mean "fully autonomous" as people think.
Click to expand...

How is this lost on so many people? It reminds me of that scene in Archer where he leaves the plane on autopilot and gets hammered, only to find out auto pilot just keeps your speed and altitude for the most part. You can't just punch in an address and take a nap...
 
Verge said:
You don't really know how flightplans work.

It's the equivalent of navigating a roadway.
Click to expand...

Except that pesky third dimension and a completely different environment of obstacles, also not to mention billions in existing infrastructure that assists in said automation...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top