No Tesla in the dropdown... keep up :-)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36680043
Interesting reading. Was it the car or driver to blame? Car couldn't react to the environment it seems on auto pilot.
|
|
I wonder if it uses a camera only and ultrasound or LIDAR would have spotted the truck?
|
Good question. A lot of the Tesla options are future upgrade options. Even the current Model S 60 can be upgraded to the 75 model.
So you're thinking why would that be possible - Extra battery capacity already there...
1. Road tax is based on initial purchase price.... buy an S60 today and then upgrade but the future road tax is based on purchase price in the USA. Other options make sense when the upgrade's possible later - but they all should be included.
2. Trying to upsell people in a long wait for a Series 3 for ¢15k more.
|
|
Looks like the classic system failure where it encounters a scenario it hasn't been coded for (white truck against a bright sky) and fails.
|
>>it encounters a scenario it hasn't been coded for<<
'BSOD' Blue screen of death, takes on a new, too real, meaning.
|
>> No Tesla in the dropdown...
There is now. Unable to add any of the models though.
|
>> >> No Tesla in the dropdown...
>>
>> There is now. Unable to add any of the models though.
>>
Do people still use this? I've been picking them at random for years now...
|
>> Do people still use this?
Unless you're specifically talking about a particular car, or have a question about it, then there is no need to use it. Just chose something from the category drop down instead.
The make/model is more helpful over in Technical Matters as people were forever forgetting to include those details, either in the subject header or main body of their post. That's why the make/model selection is compulsory in that part of the forum.
|
|
Thanks. Not that we'll have many on here with the cash to buy one. Well apart from Dulwich Estate II.
|
|
Headline figure on the Tesla UK site is £302 a month, which would be within reach for many here. Not sure how it's derived but seems surprisingly affordable to me.
|
Anyone notice that they have the country as Great Britain and not UK. Although in fairness there isn't a dealer or charging station in Northern Ireland.
The £302 figure includes the savings compared to a petrol car. So also includes savings from the London Congestion Charge.
So for a PCP with 10,000 miles limit a year that's a deposit of £13,445 and £410 a month over 36 months. Total paid £28k. And then you give it back.
Change the deposit to £500 and the monthly charge is £666. So around £29k over 36 months.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 1 Jul 16 at 16:08
|
My experience is that no car with a forward looking radar is able to pick out a static object from its surroundings at high speed.
It could be that the Tesla uses its forward camera to identify objects over the radar returns, but it's no means infallible. I suspect this was known limitations in the autopilot system coupled with driver complacency - see the video where he almost gets taken out by a truck.
On the bright side, while humans don't generally learn from other people's mistakes if this turns out to be a bug in the system, every other Tesla will not make the same mistake.
|
>> My experience is that no car with a forward looking radar is able to pick
>> out a static object from its surroundings at high speed.
>>
>
So to make autonomous cars really work and be acceptable there has to be some technological breakthrough that would remedy this?
Or perhaps they merely need the same kind of programing that humans receive - do not drive faster than at a speed at which you can stop within the road actually visible?
So if you cannot see the road because of glaring sun, stop.
|
|
In this instance the car thought the road was clear. Which suggests it uses cameras only and not radar or lasers to detect distance to objects.
|
>> In this instance the car thought the road was clear. Which suggests it uses cameras
>> only and not radar or lasers to detect distance to objects.
>>
As I said above, radar sensors stuggle to pick static objects out of the environment. Because the lorry was turning right, it wasn't moving relative to the car's direction of travel.
An alternative theory is that the radar didn't pick it up because the beam travelled under the trailer between the wheels.
The ultimate reason for the crash is that the prat of a driver wasn't paying attention to the road.
|
>>
>> The ultimate reason for the crash is that the prat of a driver wasn't paying
>> attention to the road.
>>
No point in having an 'auto-pilot' if I have to babysit it; may as well just drive the car myself, as I'll never know when that 'computer says no' moment will happen, and I'll have a split second to take control and appropriate action.
|
|
Wasn't there a plan for automated lorry convoys a while back? Sounds like a good plan. :-)
|
SQ
>> No point in having an 'auto-pilot' if I have to babysit it; may as well
>> just drive the car myself, as I'll never know when that 'computer says no' moment
>> will happen, and I'll have a split second to take control and appropriate action.
Eventually, sure, but the design of this system was to increase mental capacity and reduce tedium. Just because the Airbus has an autopilot doesn't mean I trust it any further than I can throw it.
Worth jumping in one to test drive (a Tesla, not an Airbus...) and you'll quickly form the opinion that it's a useful tool to help you increase your situational awareness on the road but you'd never leave it to do it's own thing, except perhaps in a traffic jam.
Going from the Volvo with a very capable adaptive cruise system to the BMW was a bit of an eye-opener. Driving on the motorway in busy traffic is HARD. When driving the Volvo I'm looking half a mile or more down the road and just keeping a casual eye on the car in front / lane markings.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 4 Jul 16 at 10:12
|
>> When driving the Volvo I'm looking half a mile or more down the road and just keeping a
>> casual eye on the car in front / lane markings.
When driving I'm looking at the car in front, the situation down the road and just as importantly the situation behind and alongside. Too many idiots racing up to the bumper of cars behind and then deciding to dart into the middle lane to undertake despite the traffic ahead maintaining a steady speed.
|
>> When driving I'm looking at the car in front, the situation down the road and
>> just as importantly the situation behind and alongside. Too many idiots racing up to the
>> bumper of cars behind and then deciding to dart into the middle lane to undertake
>> despite the traffic ahead maintaining a steady speed.
Exactly. If an element of the driving is taken over by the computer, then you have more mental capacity to watch other drivers and anticipate their actions. This capacity is necessarily reduced if you're having to do some of the driving yourself.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 4 Jul 16 at 12:50
|
|
I'm still surprised the Tesla didn't detect the lorry in this accident. So it's not using radar or similar and only using cameras. That is worrying. Then again looking at the front of a Model S I can't see where there could be a radar unit so maybe not a surprise.
|
Actually I'm thinking of the current/revised model S look:
buyersguide.caranddriver.com/media/assets/submodel/7651.jpg
But it originally looked like this:
blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Tesla-Model-S1.jpg
qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-533653a3c9942ab9f38d9109a0f206fc
Which does look like it has a radar at the front. Maybe they switched to cameras only? They should have kept the radar.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 4 Jul 16 at 11:05
|
>> Just because the Airbus has an autopilot doesn't mean I trust it any further than I can throw it.
>>
That is reassuring.
From what I read and recent "aviation events" I hope more pilots would be the same.
|
>>
>> So to make autonomous cars really work and be acceptable there has to be some
>> technological breakthrough that would remedy this?
>>
Yes.
>>
>> So if you cannot see the road because of glaring sun, stop.
>>
..and hope there's isn't 40 ton of Scania 20 feet behind you at the time.....
|
>> ..and hope there's isn't 40 ton of Scania 20 feet behind you at the time.....
I can recommend avoiding the HGV or tanker behind ramming into the rear of your car. It certainly isn't fun I can tell you.
|
>> >>
>> ..and hope there's isn't 40 ton of Scania 20 feet behind you at the time.....
>>
But it will have an autonomous auto pilot too, and will be following the same rules.
In the perfect world of autonomous vehicles, removing the fallible element of humans, pile ups will be impossible. Just as they would be now, if everyone followed the 2-second rule of clear road visibility.
|
>>
>> In the perfect world of autonomous vehicles, removing the fallible element of humans, pile ups
>> will be impossible. Just as they would be now, if everyone followed the 2-second rule
>> of clear road visibility.
>>
Well there's still the non autonomous road users; pedestrians, daisy the cow, cyclists, debris (fallen trees etc.) plus sensor failures, mechanical failures (e.g. wheel falls off) and SW coding errors.
|
|
Yes, quite so. Even accepting that perhaps cows are not an everyday problem for most road users, being cut up on a motorway and having to brake sharply is absolutely basic everyday driving. If they can't handle that then the idea risks quickly meeting its Hindenburg moment.
|
Official inquiry says autopilot and other gizmos not to blame. It's quite an interesting read.
static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2016/INCLA-PE16007-7876.PDF
|
Not read that yet but had previously read the cars relied on cameras more than radar and lidar. I can see how they missed a big metal trailer.
A dumb auto-brake using radar/lidar would have stopped. But such a system isn't then use to work with an AI system to drive you all the way autonomously from A to B. (A to Z for Amazon customers).
|
|
The point of the report is that the cars are not intended to be driven without driver input but that's what was happening.
|
|
Anyone seen the videos of the latest cars (which have more sensors than the one that crashed I think) actually driving to the Tesla offices? Very interesting and very clever.
|
youtu.be/tq_OTcncPH0
This is quite an interesting video - it's Autopilot being used on a rural road but by a driver who is very aware of the limitations of the system.
|
|
Some cameras have difficulty auto focusing in low contrast situations, decent cameras have a manual focus function. Could this have been part of the problem with the Tesla?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 4 Jul 16 at 11:17
|
If it had radar it would have spotted the HGV. Images of the front of the revised Model S (matches the Model X) looks like there's no radar unit. Surely that's a wrong decision if that is indeed what they have done.
But the driver should have seen it too! There are rumours he was watching Harry Potter on a DVD system. If he wasn't watching the road then this is up for a Darwin award.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 4 Jul 16 at 11:24
|
>> There are rumours he was watching Harry
>> Potter on a DVD system.
Stupid muggle.
I bet he was actually watching some XXX, but in respect for his family, etc etc etc
|
>>Just because the Airbus has an autopilot doesn't mean I trust it any further than I can throw it.
And fursty doesn' have pedestrians, daisy the cow, etc. to dodge, and has ATC to point him in the right direction and fend off big lumps of flying metal. (In theory).
|
|
I saw a Tesla t'other day, in Worksop. Nice looking car,
|
>> I saw a Tesla t'other day, in Worksop. Nice looking car,
Must have been the Model S. The Model X is a bit strange looking IMO.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 20 Feb 17 at 09:33
|
A friend has bought a Model X, but I've not seen it yet.
Those rear doors do seem completely pointless though, on what is a family car. Family cars often have roof bars/boxes (or at least all the big SUVs that I saw coming back from the Alps at the weekend did - maybe this is because SUVs may be big but the 4x4 drive train means that the boots are not actually that big...?)
Any way, try fixing a roof box or roof bars to a car with gull-wing doors!
|
Huge boot, small front boot and it can take a towbar.
I doubt inability to fit a roofrack is the dealbreaker for most.
|
>> Huge boot,
or seats?
>> small front boot
called a frunk
Seat config seems to be the usual two front and three rear or two front ,two middle and walk through to two in the third row.
A few for sale on Autotrader at £77K up to £170K
|
They keep getting quicker too.
www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla/model-s/2017/2017-tesla-model-s-p100d-fi
rst-test-review/
0-60 2.28 seconds.
Edit. Sorry, posting from phone and link won't link.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Mon 20 Feb 17 at 19:55
|
|
Thanks. Dunno why that wouldn't play.
|
Because your phone merely cut and pastes the plain text in the URL field. That doesn't include the "http://" bit.
Whereas on a PC it knows that you're tying to paste a link so it automatically adds it. All you need do in future in the same circumstances is add it manually.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 20 Feb 17 at 20:22
|
But I'd rather this if allowed:
www.topgear.com/car-news/geneva-motor-show/meet-789bhp-ferrari-812-superfast
Not as fast and more expensive. But a proper car.
|
Saw that earlier - the driver was ignoring the car warning him he was being unsafe. Probably kept putting his hand on the wheel every few minutes and then did something else until it warned again.
The driver assumed the car was smarter than it was. He paid the price.
I was surprised how good adaptive cruise control was last weekend in the Passat demo car. I'll end up with it anyway and will use it. I might go for lane assist if I get the Skoda... again it will check you are holding the wheel but ways to fool it... e.g. bottle of water stuck through the wheel with the water movement fooling the sensors.
|
Got Adaptive Cruise Control on my new Golf. Certainly better than the traditional type but still don't really see the point of it. Prefer driving without it.
|
>> Got Adaptive Cruise Control on my new Golf. Certainly better than the traditional type but
>> still don't really see the point of it. Prefer driving without it.
>>
Whatever floats your boat, I use mine most journeys, in town or out. I have always found cruise control useful and the ACC makes it better.
|
|
Yes, it's a purely personal thing. ACC is certainly clever. Have given it a good work out in many different scenarios and it does work. For me however it doesn't really make the driving experience easier or better so don't think I'll use it much.
|
The Tesla incident illustrates the potential problem with automation in cars, which is the potential for the driver's attention to be reduced or taken away.
In the best case scenario, support for the driver in lane guidance, ACC etc. will reduce driver workload and enable more attention to be given to other tasks. In the worst case, those other tasks will not be driving related and risk is increased if the automatics are less effective than a competent, attentive driver.
No doubt these driver aids will become much more common and it would be interesting to understand the effect on RTC rates, if any.
The problem of over-reliance on automatics is well rehearsed in aviation and has been implicated in some serious accidents. Despite this, air passenger transport safety has increased dramatically, but that is in a more more regulated, monitored environment with very high levels of training.
|
>>The problem of over-reliance on automatics is well rehearsed in aviation
>> and has been implicated in some serious accidents.
>>
Indeed and has has been well chewed over. From what i read , " the computer is is showing rubbish, things were fine a few seconds ago, things feel fine now , leave things alone,. sit on your hands and think!"
Similarity with some car situations?ions? Take your feet off things rather than panic-)
|
Tesla Car Crash and Autopilot - zippy
