Featured Fall of Tesla

What the hell are you talking about?

I have one, and as I keep saying, the radar systems do continue to operate when the camera systems have failed. Eventually the radar systems fail too when snow or ice cakes up enough on them, but that's long after the camera have failed.

I'm wondering is Tesla has considered a way to mitigate this or if they just consider inclement weather as something that doesn't matter and so radar is expendable.

 

You aren't getting it.
It isn't a question of the system working in bad weather. It is that using the driver aids tied to those sensors can increase the safety risk.

 

You are talking about a system that we already know is being abused by numerous people treating it as if it were an autonomous driving system.

You are using it in conditions where your OM tells you not to use it.

I really hope you are not among the numerous people abusing the system to 'peer' beyond their own vision and drive faster than they would without it. Not just Tesla drivers, but some PriusChatters too.

I'm hoping that they are backing off to a more defensible liability position of shutting off this assist function before visibility gets bad enough for the driver to not adequately see the hazards ahead with their own eyes.

If allowing the system to peer beyond human visibility, then they are creating an attractive hazard of enticing drivers to use it in conditions where the driver inherently cannot be in proper overall control. This manner of operation would be acceptable and even desirable up at SAE Level 4 and higher, but is unacceptable down at the current Level 2, so should be disabled before it kills too many innocent third parties.

 

The ultimate goal is to move to a fully autonomous vehicle that can safely drive, even more safely hopefully, than a human, even in inclement weather.

Taking away radar/sonar is like covering our ears so we can't hear while driving. I do use other senses not just my vision. I can hear the Fire/EMS/Police sirens and pull off to the side of the road before I can usually see them.

This sure seems like a step backwards in development. On the other hand we have been waiting on:

Y RWD 7 seat long range
Cybertruck tri-motor

Since day one or two of initial deposits.

Supply and demand suggests less demand. Maybe they'll finally build ours. Which would make me happy...


moto g(7) power ?

 

That's because you don't have eyes in the back of your head, and on the sides.

Radar and sonar can see better in inclement weather than the visual spectrum, but we don't want autonomous cars moving faster in bad weather. Being able to see doesn't negate the reduced traction of the tires. Moving faster than what conditions would allow for a human driver isn't good for anybody around the car. Even at the autonomous level, these systems will not be 100% accident free.

Tesla's camera only system hasn't been tested by any third party yet. Best to wait until then to pass judgement.

 

Yes, that is the ultimate goal.

No, we are not there yet. Level 2 and 3 systems are not good enough for that. Maybe not even the Level 4 systems, but at least Level 4 will be smart enough to know its own limits and park when it reaches them.

At the current Level 2, these are supposed to be only a secondary set of ears and eyes, listening and looking over your shoulder. The ears and eyes on your head are still required to be fully engaged on the driving task.

If you are using the radar/sonar as your primary ears or eyes, then you are abusing the systems at their current level. They simply are not yet good enough for that, being good enough only as secondaries. For public safety, they ought to be restricted from functioning as primaries.

Autonomous driving appears to be on the horizon. Unfortunately, numerous people are letting their expectations get far ahead of technical and market realities, and are acting like it is either here already, or more closer than it really is.

 

Not quite. The Emergency vehicle can be out of visible range and I'd still be able to hear it a block away...

I did qualify that the "autonomous driver" "safely drives". That doesn't imply going against the laws of Physics. It does imply slowing down per road conditions.

Maybe just maybe someday each vehicle will have a transponder system that geolocates itself, broadcasts it's own position, direction, speed and acceleration, and this be used in inclement weather to go above and beyond what sensors can "see". Hmmm. Maybe, just maybe, it was just a dream. Like nano-robots...

moto g(7) power ?

 

@fuzzy1 You post a good point/question. Is it the responsibility of the manufacturer to limit what the car "tries" to do, or is it the responsibility of the human in the driver's seat to keep vigilant over the autonomous driver?

We test drove a Y I want to say back in March with the FSD Beta. This was in Old Town Pasadena/downtown Pasadena. In no way did I feel safe letting it do it's thing on it's own. It was like teaching my wife to drive, basically more stressful than driving myself.

At this I say it's the human driver's responsibility to watch over the system. People are trying to abuse/work around the safeguards and unfortunately some have found ways of succeeding. You get caught, or something happens, it's your responsibility. If Tesla wants further protection I would add it to the sales contract and have the purchaser aknowledge culpability...

moto g(7) power ?

 

OK let me spell it out. The adults here follow the forum guidelines by not needlessly attacking others and admitting when they are proven wrong. I perhaps made the false assumption you too are an adult.



Although the statement is provably true for MANY manuals, I provided proof from YOUR manual here.in this thread

Cut out the swearing and admit you were wrong like an adult or stay away from the adult conversations here.

Edit:
Looks like @Trollbait actually attracted a troll.

 

@Lee Jay may have MEANT that he disagreed with what the manual states, but that is not what he communicated with his words,

 

Tesla would agree, and states quite clearly that the driver is always responsible for driving safely.
The also remind you again when you first turn on the auto-lane-change, navigate with auto-pilot or any other aspect of the FSD.
When first turned on, drivers must acknowledge that they agree they accept said responsibility.

Regarding the question of how do Tesla vehicle cameras handle snow.
The front camera is inside the windshield, so is typically the last to be occluded.
The rear camera is typically the first to go, but doesn’t become occluded as quickly as the Prius II we owned.
I suspect this is, in both cases, a result of the way the airstream moves over the back of the car. I believe our Tesla rear cameras have also all been situated higher than our Prius rear cameras.
The side cameras are also in much better areas and tend not to get occluded in snow.

That all said, if the cameras are occluded, the car signals that autopilot/auto steer, etc are not available and will display a message that it isn’t available if you try to engage it.

 

I believe the Gen 4 warns if there is blockage also.

 

Speculation, it occurs to me that a radar and even LIDAR unit that sits on the dashboard might solve the over weighted, claims of IIHS, NHTSA, and any other advocates of those technologies. Radar would be especially easy with a display showing what the radar can detect. Facts and data are more effective than the fuzzy claims by some 'safety' advocates.

Bob Wilson

 

Are you using your sense of hearing to determine the distance to the car in front of you? Do you have a sense of radar? In these driver aid systems with cameras and radar, the radar is being used as a range finder to measure that distance. meanwhile, humans and many animals do this with just vision. tesla feels they have reached the point where they can do the same with just cameras.

I think you have the order of operation wrong.

Well, it is correct for the FSD you got to try. With the more autonomous systems, the human watches over the system, making sure it isn't making mistakes. These systems aren't available in consumer cars though.

What is available, and what we are discussing here, are advanced driver aids. With these, the system is watching over the human with the goal of catching, and even correcting, any errors the driver may make. They aren't meant to take over for the driver anymore than cruise control is.

The 6 Levels of Vehicle Autonomy Explained | Synopsys Automotive

 

@Trollbait I just checked, this is a "Tesla" thread, so how did I get off topic?

Radar is used as a range finder, distance measurement, I agree.

I am aware of Subaru EyeSight that works well based on cameras behind the windshield, so it is possible.

But as I understand Tesla's removal of the radar systems was reactionary to the recent flair ups of accidents. That is a disappointment. The systems do work, just like my ears can hear an emergency vehicle coming from a location my eyes, nor radar to be fair, would fail to notice. I can hear it getting closer as the volume increases so yes in a sense I CAN use my ears for distance. On the upcoming cross street behind buildings to the left for example. It's too bad, they worked hard to develop the system. A system that works that could be developed further. To throw it out does bring to question:

What happens when the vision system is obscured?

Which one, sight or lidar/radar, works better in inclement weather?

A lot of times I see you guys "playing around" with "the new guy". PriusChat is more a cult, kind of like BenzWorld, than a forum.

It would be nice to discuss solutions. I notice my proposal of transponders just got completely bypassed as an example of this point....



moto g(7) power ?

 

This would be an incorrect understanding. If your opinion is based on that understanding, you may want to re-examine it.

I addressed this in post #31 (Fall of Tesla | Page 2 | PriusChat) which you 'liked'.
I don't see any reason the system would work any differently with Tesla Vision (if that was specifically what you were asking about).

 

@Zythryn Thank you for correcting me. I did a search to verify I was mistaken. And yes makes perfect sense to just pull over and stop. That's what we are taught/advised to do when it's no longer safe to drive.

I guess at this point it's just greedy to want a system that drives in inclement weather. In due time. Patience is a virtue. As the saying goes. I told my wife exactly that as we checked out the Mirai deals last week or two weeks ago, when she asked if I was serious about getting one. The implication attached being we'd likely drop one of the Tesla reservations. "Patience is a virtue. I'll wait. Good things come to those who wait"....

moto g(7) power ?

 

Just to clarify, I did not say the car pulls over and stops.
The Tesla will, if autopilot can't function safely, alert the driver with both a beep and message, that it is disabling autopilot and instruct the driver to immediately take over.
To my knowledge, the car will slow down and pull over only in the event that it can't sense the driver is in control.

Today, as is, Tesla vehicles running under autopilot have fewer accidents than those driving with only the active safety features (lane-keeping, etc). And Tesla vehicles running with only the active safety features have fewer accidents than Tesla vehicles running without either autopilot of active safety features.
In addition, Tesla vehicles have fewer accidents per million miles driven than the averages NHSTA maintain.

The trend for Tesla's operating with autopilot has been fewer accidents.
For Tesla's operating with only active safety features it has been slightly fewer accidents.
For Tesla's operating without active safety features or autopilot it has trended to slightly more accidents. (still at about half of all cars)

Tesla Vehicle Safety Report | Tesla

 

That's not true, in practice. When the adaptive cruise isn't working because of weather, it tells you so and stops working. Further, as I said above:

So, add in auto-brake, blind spot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert, pedestrian detection, etc. Not just adaptive cruise.

I didn't accuse anyone of lying, and I'll challenge you to point out where I did.

I didn't attack anyone and I wasn't proven wrong. However, you have attacked me - falsely - and now have to find where I accused someone of lying, when I didn't.

 

You quoted somebody and then stated "Not true" The fact he stated was that many owners manuals advise against using driving aids in bad weather.

You did not state you disagreed with the manuals. The fact quoted was about advice given in many user manuals. Tyu then stated that fact was not true when I have demonstrated it is even in YOUR manual.

You MAY have meant to say you disagree with the manuals but you did not state that clearly.