[news] Investigation into self-driving car after fatal crash

[elsiegee40]

US authorities are investigating the first death potentially caused by self-driving technology.

 

The driver of a Tesla car died in Florida in May after colliding with a lorry.

 

Under scrutiny is Tesla's Autopilot feature, which automatically changes lanes and reacts to traffic.

 

In a statement, Tesla said it appeared the Model S car was unable to recognise "the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky" that had driven across the car's path.

 

US opens investigation into Tesla after fatal crash | BBC

[Arthur]

https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/tragic-loss

[Arthur]

Driver killed in Tesla Autopilot crash filmed a close call earlier this year

 

The driver killed in the first known fatal crash of a Tesla vehicle in the semi-autonomous Autopilot mode had previously posted a viral video of his Model S avoiding an accident with Autopilot engaged. Joshua Brown, a 40-year-old Ohio man who regularly posted Tesla videos to his YouTube account, received more than 1.7 million views to a dash cam video of his Model S avoiding a collision on a highway.

 

[Arthur]

Police confirm DVD player found in Tesla Autopilot wreck

 

A day after we learned that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating a fatal crash involving Tesla's Autopilot feature, more details have emerged. The Florida Highway Patrol confirmed to Reuters that a portable DVD player was found in the wreckage. The driver of the truck that was crossing the highway when it was struck by the Model S told the Associated Press that the driver was playing a Harry Potter movie at the time. He said he could he could hear it playing after the car hit a telephone pole further down the road.

[elsiegee40]

Police confirm DVD player found in Tesla Autopilot wreck

 

So the driver was possibly over-trusting the self driving system.

 

The system may have been faulty, but still if you're working with beta (?alpha) testing software the last thing you do is trust it 100% with your life!

[Duranis]

You could say that if it was road legal it should be safe and you should be able to trust it with your life. If you have to pay as much attention as when you are driving normally then what is the point in the first place?

 

If a car is self driving then it should be able to 100% deal with any situation by itself. IMO is not possible to do this when you are basically using cameras as a guidance system on roads were people are still driving manually and acting unpredictably.

 

Even with someone "paying attention" things happen so fast that I doubt the reaction time of most people would be quick enough. Especially when they are trusting the car to know what its doing "I don't need to break the car will stop in time...". The driver might have no indication that the car doesn't in fact see the big lorry stopped in front of it and that extra moment of hesitation when the driver is thinking the car will still do what is is supposed to is a massive problem.

 

No system is 100% fool proof and I'm sure self driving cars are still a lot safer than a lot of drivers out there but until everyone is using them and there is a lot more technological infrastructure to support them (road embed sensors, "hive" comm's between cars, etc) it just seems like a terrible idea and this kind of thing will happen more often.

[localzuk]

Even with this death, auto-pilot is still statistically more safe than a manual driver. And this issue can be worked out - make the system aware of oddly shaped vehicles such as a semi crossing a road with a huge gap under it (better vertical scanning of the road ahead).

 

Also, this system is meant as a driver's aid at the moment. Much like cruise control. You still need to pay attention, its just that you're not having to put as much attention into it as before - potentially reducing driving fatigue a bit.

Edited July 4, 2016 by localzuk

[Arthur]

If a car is self driving then it should be able to 100% deal with any situation by itself.

Tesla's "AutoPilot" feature is just automatic lane keeping, changing and cruise control. It's nowhere near as advanced as Google's autonomous driving system and isn't meant to replace a human operator.

 

I wouldn't expect it to be able to deal with any situation itself because it's not designed to do that.

[mavhc]

This is why google's not releasing anything less than full autonomy, their tests years ago showed that people just started to ignore the road with partial assistance.

 

Also semi trailers should have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-trailer_truck#Underride_guard to avoid head level collisions.

[pcstru]

The system may have been faulty, but still if you're working with beta (?alpha) testing software the last thing you do is trust it 100% with your life!

Since they are on the public roads, surely *everyone* has to trust it with their lives? Sad to think then that even software development for safety critical missions where cost is not really an issue, fails to produce defect free systems. What will happen when small car manufacturers have to produce such systems to a low price or be unable to compete. Whatever happens then I hope we have better legislation that sets high quality standards for such systems before they are allowed anywhere near a public road.

[dry]

Also semi trailers should have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-trailer_truck#Underride_guard to avoid head level collisions.

My understanding is that the truck was crossing the road perpendicularly infront of the Tesla, and the Tesla proceeded through the gap between the end of the tractor unit and the trailer's wheels.

 

All trucks driving in Central London must have a guard there to prevent cyclists getting crushed at junctions, but the accident happened in the US where a similar regulation is likely to not exist.

 

Even if a guard was fitted to the trailer, it would be unlikely to stop a car travelling at 60mph towards it- but it may well have been picked up by Tesla's lasers/radar system and would have slowed the car.

 

Sad loss but hopefully not a significant setback in the world of driving automation.

[Duranis]

Also, this system is meant as a driver's aid at the moment. Much like cruise control. You still need to pay attention, its just that you're not having to put as much attention into it as before - potentially reducing driving fatigue a bit.

 

That is where I have a problem with it though. You either give driving your full attention or you might as well not bother. If it takes you a second or 2 to notice there is an issue then another second or 2 to debate with yourself if the car is going to deal with it or not then it is probably already too late to do something about it.

 

I'm 100% behind useful driving aids, for example a system that will brake for you if it detects you are about to drive into the back of something or warns you if you are starting to lane drift but anything that is labeled as "autonomous" or "self driving" just gives people an excuse to not pay enough attention and gets in the way when things go wrong and people have to take over.

 

As mentioned what happens when cheap competing systems come in or what happens when the cars get to 10-15 years old and the sensors start failing (or sooner if they are not maintained properly).

 

It either needs to be able to do the job 100%* or it needs to in no way be labeled as "self driving" or "autonomous". I don't see how that will ever be possible while manufacturers are trying to do it using only car mounted (relatively cheap) sensors.

 

*While there are humans involved nothing will be 100% perfect but it needs to not get confused between a truck and the sky....

[Davit2005]

My Skoda has Lane Assist, but it does not work if you let your steering go for 10 seconds according to the Manual, this with Adaptive cruise control you could probably take you hands and concentration off the road ahead. But is that what the system is designed for IMO NO!!!!, It is a driver aid and nothing more.

[jmak]

My Skoda has Lane Assist, but it does not work if you let your steering go for 10 seconds according to the Manual, this with Adaptive cruise control you could probably take you hands and concentration off the road ahead. But is that what the system is designed for IMO NO!!!!, It is a driver aid and nothing more.

I have the same system and one of the key points in the instructions is that the radar ignores stationary objects - makes sense as otherwise it would be forever stopping, given the range of detection. I've seen comments that the radar in this accident should have picked up the truck whereas Tesla say that the cameras didn't identify the white truck against a similar coloured sky.

 

Not saying it's not a flaw in the system, just makes a bit more sense of Tesla's explanation.

 

I find the system I have excellent - it works best in busy dual carriageway traffic - I regularly drive a 70mph section where the speed varies constantly between 50 and 70 and then suddenly stops. The car maintains the gap perfectly and gives me more time to look around for idiots swapping lanes and motorcycles filtering with less attention required on matching my speed to the vehicle I'm following. It also makes sitting in 5 miles of crawling traffic approaching the Dartford crossing much less of a chore. Mine's not called autopilot though and I know I'm still in charge and responsible for controlling the car.

[mavhc]

https://www.google.com/patents/US20070233353 suggests systems don't necessarily avoid stationary/objects heading towards you, but assess whether they're on your side of the road