Another Tesla crashes into guardrail in Montana

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Remember, with your feet controlling the gas pedal it doesn't rest naturally so that it will get tired after a while. With CC you can have your feet rest naturally at the angle/position that is most comfortable and you can change its position/side/angle ... With your feet on gas pedal it can't changed, it must be at exactly the same position/angle all the time.

Originally Posted By: supton
Bogus. Hills, change in speed zones, change in highways. Traffic that picks up and dies down. Weather conditions that change. Morons who cut you off.

Not all of America is flat, and a great deal of destinations are not in an up/down / east/west line--meaning one often changes highways.

Maybe you need a more comfortable car if you're worn out after a few hours drive?

*

Heh, I remember helping my parents move. They had a couple of Budget trucks, 24' diesel jobs. Just enough hp to get the job done, and they could smell a hill a mile away. No cruise.
frown.gif
Wound up switching feet on hills, as it bothered my right foot to drive with it planted down for the duration of the hill. Once at the top I'd switch back. Did about 12 hours of driving each day doing that. I managed.

With cruise control drivers can rest both legs and don't worry about speed, they only need to control the ca direction with steering, and they only need to take control of the speed in case of emergency at any moment.

With right foot at exact position and angle on gas pedal for hours would get any one tired. Why did you change right foot to left foot in controlling the gas pedal ? If your right foot didn't get tired why took a risk ?

I did drove from Springfield, IL to Pittsburgh, PA a distance of about 570 miles in mid 70's, the speed limit was 55 MPH. It took me a total of 13-14 hours(with 2-3 stops for gas and food) with the 1972 Mustang. I had to use left foot to control gas pedal after the first 3-4 hours, then used left foot again after several hours after right foot was the controller.

No, my personal experience and of may others, CC is a much better tool to use for long distance travel. It is almost impossible to find a newer light duty vehicle(car, SUV/CUS, minivan, PU ...) without cruise control.

If CC isn't as good as human foot in controlling speed(especially for long distance travel) for long distance driving then why all car manufactures include it as standard equipment for many years already. I am not talking about smart CC (Adaptive CC ?), I am talking about dumb CC available in most cars.

About "more comfortable car", my previous LS400 and the current E430 were as comfortable as any car at the time I bought them.

If you think you are more comfortable using your feet to control the gas pedal on long trip, keep doing it your way.
 
I thought I was clear--my foot hurt from pushing the pedal to the floor. It was fine the rest of the time. I guess the change in angle bothered me. Of course it was also not my daily driver, so it did feel much much different.

I had a similar experience driving in rush hour traffic in a rental once. It was a cheapo Kia (Accent?) with a 4AT. My right foot started hurting from pushing down on the brake as the darn thing would not remained stopped otherwise. My left is (was?) used to being on the floor and did not have that problem.

I make this particular trip about twice each year now, 780 miles one way on one weekend and 780 miles on the return a few days later. Still don't use cruise much, mostly because of moronic programming in my automatic. In boring spots it's nice, and I prefer buying vehicles with cruise "just in case". However I hate how it plays with the automatic, and I find I really don't use it.

YMMV.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Bogus. Hills, change in speed zones, change in highways. Traffic that picks up and dies down. Weather conditions that change. Morons who cut you off.

Not all of America is flat, and a great deal of destinations are not in an up/down / east/west line--meaning one often changes highways.

Maybe you need a more comfortable car if you're worn out after a few hours drive?

The very first word in your previous respond to my post was "Bogus". This confused me, I thought you mean to say my reasoning of using CC on long trips was bogus.


Originally Posted By: supton
I thought I was clear--my foot hurt from pushing the pedal to the floor. It was fine the rest of the time. I guess the change in angle bothered me. Of course it was also not my daily driver, so it did feel much much different.

I had a similar experience driving in rush hour traffic in a rental once. It was a cheapo Kia (Accent?) with a 4AT. My right foot started hurting from pushing down on the brake as the darn thing would not remained stopped otherwise. My left is (was?) used to being on the floor and did not have that problem.

I make this particular trip about twice each year now, 780 miles one way on one weekend and 780 miles on the return a few days later. Still don't use cruise much, mostly because of moronic programming in my automatic. In boring spots it's nice, and I prefer buying vehicles with cruise "just in case". However I hate how it plays with the automatic, and I find I really don't use it.

YMMV.


These opinions are from reputable entities:

Originally Posted By: Main.gov
You probably know that your vehicle's cruise control can be used to control the speed of your vehicle without keeping your foot on the gas pedal. This feature can be a help in preventing driver fatigue, speeding, and also help by improving fuel economy under certain conditions.

However, cruise control can cause accidents if you use it under hazardous road conditions such as on city streets, in heavy traffic, on hilly or twisty roads, on slippery wet, snowy, or icy roads.

Letting the cruise control manage the speed of your vehicle allows you to take your foot off the gas pedal and this can be restful, but remember, you still must control the vehicle by steering and braking. So, it is important for you to stay alert especially while using the cruise control. Don't let fatigue lead to a false sense of security because that can lead to a lack of attention and an accident. Keep your brain engaged when you are driving; constantly scan the road ahead for changes in traffic, obstacles, and road conditions.

http://www.maine.gov/bgs/riskmanage/tipofthemonth/tip46.htm


Originally Posted By: GMfleet.com
CC can help reduce driver fatigue during long trips.

www.gmfleet.com/.../PDFs/TechTip_1105_CruiseControl.pdf
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Remember, with your feet controlling the gas pedal it doesn't rest naturally so that it will get tired after a while. With CC you can have your feet rest naturally at the angle/position that is most comfortable and you can change its position/side/angle ... With your feet on gas pedal it can't changed, it must be at exactly the same position/angle all the time.

Bogus.


I stand by my statement, and bolded what I object to. My foot moves plenty while working the pedal(s).

Maybe out west this is a real issue, but I haven't had the issue out east. YMMV.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
With cruise control drivers can rest both legs and don't worry about speed, they only need to control the ca direction with steering, and they only need to take control of the speed in case of emergency at any moment.


And they are ALWAYS slower in taking that emergency control when their feet are "rested" by being away from the pedals...I've shown you two studies (at your request), which you've dismissed.

In plant control rooms, the problem is clearly evident, and subject to a huge amount of actual research, and there are specialists in space design who try to keep operating staff alert enough to manage a crisis, without peaking all the time.

What's so hard about this well know concept applying to operators of motor vehicles ?

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
With right foot at exact position and angle on gas pedal for hours would get any one tired. Why did you change right foot to left foot in controlling the gas pedal ? If your right foot didn't get tired why took a risk ?

I did drove from Springfield, IL to Pittsburgh, PA a distance of about 570 miles in mid 70's, the speed limit was 55 MPH. It took me a total of 13-14 hours(with 2-3 stops for gas and food) with the 1972 Mustang. I had to use left foot to control gas pedal after the first 3-4 hours, then used left foot again after several hours after right foot was the controller.


You really should see a medical practitioner about your problems

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
No, my personal experience and of may others, CC is a much better tool to use for long distance travel. It is almost impossible to find a newer light duty vehicle(car, SUV/CUS, minivan, PU ...) without cruise control.

If CC isn't as good as human foot in controlling speed(especially for long distance travel) for long distance driving then why all car manufactures include it as standard equipment for many years already. I am not talking about smart CC (Adaptive CC ?), I am talking about dumb CC available in most cars.


Because people want it...they want the Tesla technology (that Tesla should be charged with for beta testing on public roads), and they really want to be able to text and surf the internet while driving.
 
if we just look at the numbers-

Tesla claim they have accumulated 100 million miles of safe driving under autopilot.

Whats that death accident rate compare to in other forms of travel?

UD
 
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Why don't the people keep their hands on the wheel and drive the car ?


It wouldn't be a 'self driving car' then ...
laugh.gif
 
In doing a little looking - the latest data I found is

Tesla autopilot -1 death for every 130 M miles
The human driving stat I found was 1.08 Deaths for every 100M miles.

Walking and bicycling and ferries appear to be more dangerous.

If these numbers are true it does astonishingly well especially for such young technology - its 30% better than humans and the tech is in its infancy.



UD
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
In doing a little looking - the latest data I found is

Tesla autopilot -1 death for every 130 M miles
The human driving stat I found was 1.08 Deaths for every 100M miles.

Walking and bicycling and ferries appear to be more dangerous.

If these numbers are true it does astonishingly well especially for such young technology - its 30% better than humans and the tech is in its infancy.

UD


Problem with Tesla's stats is that the times that you can operate in that mode are "cherry picked" to only certain types of roads under certain types of traffic conditions...the human stats include all of the other operating places and modes that Tesla's self driving is expressly excluded from.

Would love to see the human stats for straight divided road with barriers either side...
 
Do you know this or are you surmising?

Lets say Tesla cherry picked as you suggested - 130M miles of "cherry picked" data is still 130M miles of data - suggesting that there is even more miles logged.

With every single hitch, or bug to has making the news we hear about everything that happens to a tesla auto and virtually nothing about anything else.

The human driving deaths we know are far lower than any other brand auto because its does better in crashes.

My point is that from 30K feet - it appears the numbers are on the side of Tesla.

UD
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do you know this or are you surmising?

Lets say Tesla cherry picked as you suggested - 130M miles of "cherry picked" data is still 130M miles of data - suggesting that there is even more miles logged.


NO...what I wrote was that the operating conditions that Tesla ALLOWS the autopilot to be engaged are cherry picked...according to the Oz site, it's highway only.

It's not traffic lights, snow, ice, slush, single lanes with oncoming traffic, school zones etc.

If you limited the human data to only those conditions that the Tesla autopilot us ENGAGED in, you would have a different number.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do you know this or are you surmising?

Lets say Tesla cherry picked as you suggested - 130M miles of "cherry picked" data is still 130M miles of data - suggesting that there is even more miles logged.

NO...what I wrote was that the operating conditions that Tesla ALLOWS the autopilot to be engaged are cherry picked...according to the Oz site, it's highway only.

It's not traffic lights, snow, ice, slush, single lanes with oncoming traffic, school zones etc.

If you limited the human data to only those conditions that the Tesla autopilot us ENGAGED in, you would have a different number.

Some videos on Youtube showed autopilot used on city streets. Tesla recommends autopilot for highway use, but drivers used it on city streets too. The miles accumulated by Tesla didn't distinguish highway miles or city miles.

One below at 1'20" the driver engaged autopilot on city street at 44 MPH. A minute later at the curve with recommend speed of 35 MPH autopilot slowed down to 36 MPH and auto-steered without problem.

The driver of this video was ready to take control at any moment.



The video poster wrote:

Quote:
Extensive 16 minute test drive of the new Autopilot software version 7 from Tesla. We test the car out on the city streets, open highway and bumper to bumper traffic in Miami. We even got pulled over by the FHP, Florida Highway Patrol because the autopilot was speeding, 75MPH in a 60MPH zone!


Please check whatever you claim to make sure they are valid.
Anyone can say anything on the net, the problem is most of the time they were wrong and without any data to support their claims.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
With cruise control drivers can rest both legs and don't worry about speed, they only need to control the ca direction with steering, and they only need to take control of the speed in case of emergency at any moment.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
And they are ALWAYS slower in taking that emergency control when their feet are "rested" by being away from the pedals...I've shown you two studies (at your request), which you've dismissed.

In plant control rooms, the problem is clearly evident, and subject to a huge amount of actual research, and there are specialists in space design who try to keep operating staff alert enough to manage a crisis, without peaking all the time.

What's so hard about this well know concept applying to operators of motor vehicles ?

I told you the studies you posted are junk science by idiots in France.

There are no data of any kind pointed to using cruise control resulted in more accidents.

Everybody after diving 5-10 hours was much fresher with cruise control than without.

What is wrong with you for not understand that if your feet or legs are at 1 position for hours isn't the best for your health and your reaction will be much slower.

No study is need for this simple fact.

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
With right foot at exact position and angle on gas pedal for hours would get any one tired. Why did you change right foot to left foot in controlling the gas pedal ? If your right foot didn't get tired why took a risk ?

I did drove from Springfield, IL to Pittsburgh, PA a distance of about 570 miles in mid 70's, the speed limit was 55 MPH. It took me a total of 13-14 hours(with 2-3 stops for gas and food) with the 1972 Mustang. I had to use left foot to control gas pedal after the first 3-4 hours, then used left foot again after several hours after right foot was the controller.

Originally Posted By: Shannow
You really should see a medical practitioner about your problems.

Actually, you should see a brain surgery to examine your brain, you seem to have serious deficiency in understanding simple facts.

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
No, my personal experience and of may others, CC is a much better tool to use for long distance travel. It is almost impossible to find a newer light duty vehicle(car, SUV/CUS, minivan, PU ...) without cruise control.

If CC isn't as good as human foot in controlling speed(especially for long distance travel) for long distance driving then why all car manufactures include it as standard equipment for many years already. I am not talking about smart CC (Adaptive CC ?), I am talking about dumb CC available in most cars.

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Because people want it...they want the Tesla technology (that Tesla should be charged with for beta testing on public roads), and they really want to be able to text and surf the internet while driving.


In my post I am talking about dumb cruise control, not the advance adaptive one. The dumb cruise control is helping me and most drivers on long trips tremendously. This is fact not fiction.

About Tesla autopilot, it isn't ready for Primetime yet. It still has some flaws even with current release. The main flaw is it doesn't have capability to recognize cross traffics, that why a driver got kill in Florida accident.

This is my final post about standard cruise control in respond to you: It is a wonderful equipment that help drivers tremendously on long trips. Your linked about slow reaction of users of cruise control in a study in France was junk, only you believe it but I don't.
 
Last edited:
How many miles per death is acceptable?

Where does it become good enough?

UD
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
How many miles per death is acceptable?

Where does it become good enough?

UD

My personal opinion is death per 100 million miles must be less than the lowest rate of the last 10 years.

As I posted before your post, the current state of Tesla autopilot isn't ready for actual use yet. I think NHTSA will issue its finding of autopilot soon, we will learn in details what are deficiencies of current Tesla autopilot.

I think NHTSA should demand Tesla stops the autopilot now and fixes all known bugs and verified the fixes before allow it to be used on public roads.
 
"My personal opinion is death per 100 million miles must be less than the lowest rate of the last 10 years."

What number is that? Lowest rate of what? auto travel? Or is it supposed to be airline level safe for your personal approval?

We know your opinion is to pull it but you are vague about the numbers you'd approve it at.

NHSTA has given Tesla till aug 28 to come up with the data it has requested so no shut down yet.

UD
 
The lowest death rate of the last 10 years was below 1.0 per 100 million miles of all vehicles types, IIRC it was 0.95 between these years 2008 and 2009.
 
I think it is more relevant to look at accident rate per million miles driven.

Today, self driving cars are showing higher accident rate compared to traditional cars according to University study.


http://www.livescience.com/55273-first-self-driving-car-fatality.html

Quote:
In fact, a study published in October 2015 found that self-driving cars are more likely to be in an accident. The study, conducted by the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute, found that per million miles traveled, self-driving cars had a higher crash rate than traditional cars. At the time of the study, no self-driving cars had been found at fault for the crashes they were involved in.


Another article on that study:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/10/31/study-self-driving-cars-accidents/74946614/

Quote:
Yet it notes that it is making the comparison from a tiny pool of autonomous test cars, about 50 of them in California, versus 269 million conventional cars as of 2013. The self-driving cars have logged about 1.2 million miles in total, while the conventionals cumulatively go trillions of miles a year.

As a result, the total number of self-driving car accidents being used for comparison is the study is minuscule, 11. But that's five times the rate of the accident rate in conventional cars, and there's four times the injury rate, the study finds. The injuries, however, have all been minor.


I'm not sure if the data is relevant now due to small sample size. I don't think Tesla counts as self driving car in this type of study.
 
A study done before October 2015 involved a small pool of Google self-driving vehicles. No established car company had any self-driving vehicle on the actual road for testing.

About Tesla autopilot, livescience.com stated the same Tesla statement published by every news organization:

Quote:
Tesla did not specify in their statement how engaged the driver was at the time of the crash, but did note that: "Neither autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor-trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied."

How Tesla knew this fact ? Did they have a video in this car to monitor the driver behavior/condition while he was in the car ? This is clearly a big lie from Tesla.

Another point of this statement is, Tesla confessed that their "Autopilot" doesn't have capability to detect a moving object across the street, and it was confirmed by an Israeli company that designed part of Autopilot.

Another flaw of the current Autopilot is it needs clear lane markings to keep the car within lane or to change lane.

In this accident it is possible that at the location of the accident there is no lane marking on the right side, Tesla Autopilot may not be able to know the problem to keep the SUV close to left marking.

From several accidents I think Tesla Autopilot should be recalled/disabled immediately, only adaptive cruise control is allowed for the time being.
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave

How many miles per death is acceptable?

Where does it become good enough?

UD


This ad has been introduced in one of our states...pretty effective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

dishdude
PSA: Please wear your seatbelt
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
OVERKILL
bbhero
Colonial Parkway cold case solved…
Replies
14
Views
1K
sloinker
supton
Ok, so maybe buying a shared car isn't a good idea either
Replies
8
Views
887
twouvakind
B
Salvage history, but clean title?
2
Replies
26
Views
814
atikovi
Thermo1223
Stop using GPS Truckers...
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
CanAmAndMore
Back
Top