“I was just shaking”—new documents reveal details of fatal Tesla crash
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Apparently under typical as distinct from ideal conditions, it would take over 5 seconds to stop from 70mph. BMW claim 2.7 seconds + thinking time, i.e. about 3.5 seconds, but "they would, wouldn't they?" - Autobahn surface and US pavement tend in my experience to be a bit different.
The result is that the driver could still have been killed in the worst case if he applied the brakes as soon as the truck had pulled out, whereas in Europe he would not have been killed under those conditions due to truck side impact protection. (Unless he had the knowledge and speed of reaction to aim for the truck wheels rather than under the middle of the trailer.)
(Edit - I apologise for a poorly worded post. I went from "over 5 seconds" to "in the worst case" without clarifying that meant something different from "as soon as the truck started to pull into the intersection." I had been thinking about how much of a truck the sensors would need to see to decide it was a hazard. A human driver should, of course, be able to start braking the moment the truck lights appeared, because we "know" what that means. The person who pointed out I was suggesting 500ft braking distance wasn't enough was absolutely right to correct me. Yes, a human driver should have been fine.
Moral: think more carefully and fill in the details next time.
Between first post and correction I have just been out in Storm Dennis (why not Donald?) and have had a pedestrian decide, under those conditions, to wander out into the road in front of me. Lights on, white car. I was looking, but the collision avoidance system had started to apply the brakes before my foot reached the pedal. It seems that in the incident in TFA, nobody comes out well.)
The result is that the driver could still have been killed in the worst case if he applied the brakes as soon as the truck had pulled out, whereas in Europe he would not have been killed under those conditions due to truck side impact protection. (Unless he had the knowledge and speed of reaction to aim for the truck wheels rather than under the middle of the trailer.)
(Edit - I apologise for a poorly worded post. I went from "over 5 seconds" to "in the worst case" without clarifying that meant something different from "as soon as the truck started to pull into the intersection." I had been thinking about how much of a truck the sensors would need to see to decide it was a hazard. A human driver should, of course, be able to start braking the moment the truck lights appeared, because we "know" what that means. The person who pointed out I was suggesting 500ft braking distance wasn't enough was absolutely right to correct me. Yes, a human driver should have been fine.
Moral: think more carefully and fill in the details next time.
Between first post and correction I have just been out in Storm Dennis (why not Donald?) and have had a pedestrian decide, under those conditions, to wander out into the road in front of me. Lights on, white car. I was looking, but the collision avoidance system had started to apply the brakes before my foot reached the pedal. It seems that in the incident in TFA, nobody comes out well.)
Upvote
36
(85
/
-49)
Upvote
-56
(156
/
-212)
Can we please stop pretending that staring forward actually means that driver is processing what is going on? Most of use can day dream while looking forward and miss the most obvious things.
Even professional safety drivers from google couldn't keep concentration. Now guess how likely it is for some random person tired from work or distracted by god knows what.
The idea that driver can take over in a second is absurd and Ars should really stop pushing it as there is tons of research showing just how bad humans are at it.
Even professional safety drivers from google couldn't keep concentration. Now guess how likely it is for some random person tired from work or distracted by god knows what.
The idea that driver can take over in a second is absurd and Ars should really stop pushing it as there is tons of research showing just how bad humans are at it.
Upvote
243
(294
/
-51)
Upvote
25
(54
/
-29)
Speculation of course. But he would have been going a small fraction of the speed by then, possibly with not enough force to shear off the A-pillars.
Upvote
148
(149
/
-1)
"Cadillac's Super Cruise technology does just that, using a driver-facing camera to observe where a driver is looking."
Why was this even mentioned? It also totally allows you to look away from the road. Not to mention the incompatibility with many types of glasses/sunglasses makes it a non-starter safety option anyway.
Why was this even mentioned? It also totally allows you to look away from the road. Not to mention the incompatibility with many types of glasses/sunglasses makes it a non-starter safety option anyway.
Upvote
121
(161
/
-40)
Upvote
-92
(101
/
-193)
He, or the computer, could also have changed lanes. The ideal response would've been to decelerate and move over. There's a reason driver safety courses emphasize steering out of a bad situation rather than just braking.
Upvote
188
(203
/
-15)
Big difference between collision at 70mph and say 20mph even if he didn't come to a complete stop. Don't forget by slowing down that would have given the truck more time to pull ahead a bit more as well.
Upvote
225
(226
/
-1)
What is ars 'pushing' in this article? What are you pushing by implying they pushed something in this article.
Upvote
-17
(62
/
-79)
Why people put their lives in the hands of beta technology is just beyond me...
Upvote
207
(230
/
-23)
Underride side protection will not do much at 70mph, that’s not what it’s designed for. We are back to the old issue with these half way autodrive systems. People are very bad at monitoring, much better, though not perfect, at doing. To keep awareness you need as much concentration as actually doing the driving so best to do the driving. If he was too close to brake he needs to aim at the trailer wheels and hope he’s lost enough speed.
Upvote
104
(115
/
-11)
As Director of Safety for the 3rd largest irregular route trucking company in the U.S., chaired Safety Review hearings on fatals and read the DOT studies on accident fatalities this accident would be charged against the truck driver. Four reasons.
1) He saw the car
2) He was operating during twilight and sunrise
3) He admitted the intersection congested, un-controlled and " busy"
4) Categorically, this accident falls into DOT fatals statistically occurring during the Deadly hour-30 mins. before and after sunrise/sunset where 70% of DOT fatal accidents happen.
It is safety protocol taught in driver training to avoid operating during the Deadly Hour, pull over, stop to eat, fuel and shower if possible.
1) He saw the car
2) He was operating during twilight and sunrise
3) He admitted the intersection congested, un-controlled and " busy"
4) Categorically, this accident falls into DOT fatals statistically occurring during the Deadly hour-30 mins. before and after sunrise/sunset where 70% of DOT fatal accidents happen.
It is safety protocol taught in driver training to avoid operating during the Deadly Hour, pull over, stop to eat, fuel and shower if possible.
Upvote
363
(403
/
-40)
Probably mostly not this audience, but having been a former EMT/firefighter, this comment would have been met with a few laughs. Sometimes it's the only way to stay sane.
On topic, I'm amazed that there were only a few seconds between activation of 'autopilot' and the crash.
Upvote
213
(215
/
-2)
Indeed. So the smart thing as a driver is NOT to engage these kinds of features, but use as little as possible to stay engaged in the driving. If you think that driving is too boring, get on a train, bike, or bus instead. But do not pretend that it is safe to drive lazily, because it is not.
Upvote
129
(147
/
-18)
The driver was traveling 70 MPH (over the speed limit on such a Florida road), took his eyes off the road and his hands off the wheel. Not a good series of actions even with 'self driving' or 'autopilot' or whatever he engaged. I feel bad for the truck driver who has to live with this.
Upvote
232
(245
/
-13)
Per the NTSB report the posted speed limit was 55. The driver was going 70. Had he been going the speed limit and driving himself he would have had time to avoid the accident.
It surprises me that there aren’t laws requiring such autopilot systems to respect speed limits.
It surprises me that there aren’t laws requiring such autopilot systems to respect speed limits.
Upvote
253
(276
/
-23)
As another commenter mentioned, SuperCruise allows you to look away from the road for a period of time as well. It would not have prevented this accident.
For some reason people act like Autopilot causes these accidents. But driver inattention causes thousands of accidents every year. The media just doesn't make a fuss about it because there isn't the sexy hook of blaming Autopilot.
Personally, I have seen Autopilot attempt to stop when a car or truck turn in front of me every single time. But that doesn't mean I can ignore the road. More importantly, the most common inattention accidents are rear ending the vehicle in front when it stops suddenly, and Autopilot certainly can save your life if you make that mistake.
This guy, like many other drivers, made a terrible mistake with an even higher cost. It should remind all drivers to pay better attention to the road, because even though I do pay very careful attention, I can always focus on doing better.
For some reason people act like Autopilot causes these accidents. But driver inattention causes thousands of accidents every year. The media just doesn't make a fuss about it because there isn't the sexy hook of blaming Autopilot.
Personally, I have seen Autopilot attempt to stop when a car or truck turn in front of me every single time. But that doesn't mean I can ignore the road. More importantly, the most common inattention accidents are rear ending the vehicle in front when it stops suddenly, and Autopilot certainly can save your life if you make that mistake.
This guy, like many other drivers, made a terrible mistake with an even higher cost. It should remind all drivers to pay better attention to the road, because even though I do pay very careful attention, I can always focus on doing better.
Upvote
73
(122
/
-49)
Other than not touching the wheel for the last 7.7 seconds, or reacting in any way whatsoever to the truck obstructing his path for 4.5 seconds prior to impact?
That's a rather odd conclusion.
Unless he picked a very poor time for a nap, he must have been paying attention to something, but it clearly wasn't the road.
Upvote
236
(242
/
-6)
Sending you a virtual shoulder squeeze. As I was reading this, I blanched at the thought of what that EMT must have seen. Jesus Christ. At least it was quick for the driver, but what first responders have to go through... damn.
Upvote
148
(152
/
-4)
true. When I was in University years ago, with tons of repetition between university and home, my brain sometime goes "autopilot" when riding a motorcycle or driving a car.
"huh? I've arrived? did i even properly stop at red light?"
Upvote
194
(196
/
-2)
Isn't Supercruise geofenced and also programmed to obey speed limits?
Upvote
50
(53
/
-3)
Exactly. While I don’t blame anyone for thinking interior camera tracking can be helpful, the people who think Super Cruise would never make these mistakes just don’t know what they’re talking about. First off, You can look away for 4-5 seconds with no issues. If you glance back at the road, even without processing what’s in front of you, it resets the clock. The first time this happened to a Tesla the report came back saying the guy had been warned SIX times to put his hands back on the wheel. The issue is people overly relying on the driver assist tech. I can set my plain-Jane cruise control and slam right into the side of a building. No one had to tell me I needed to pay attention when I had it on.
Upvote
64
(79
/
-15)
a bit out of topic, in Indonesia the deadly hours in the evening right before the sun sets is "praying time" and instead of people resting or drive safer... people drive faster and more reckless to get home faster.
Upvote
60
(61
/
-1)
Yes, Super Cruise wouldn't have helped. There's a reason that safety experts tell you to keep a 3 second following distance, and that's for an attentive driver. If you look away for two seconds in a Cadillac or in a Tesla or any car, you no longer have those three seconds. And the three seconds assumes that the vehicle in front of you is coming to a stop and still moving forward. This was coming from the side, and slamming on the brakes full force wouldn't have stopped many cars in such a short distance.
Upvote
32
(39
/
-7)
You're using the wrong metric. ~70mph and ~4.5s corresponds to ~500ft. Stopping might have required some hard braking but would have been trivial if he was paying attention.
Upvote
103
(108
/
-5)
Nobody is expecting side protection to work at 70mph, but it can be expected to help after someone has been braking hard for the last few seconds.
I am not about to do the test, but I do wonder if an A pillar would actually save anyone even at 20mph. The kinetic energy of a Tesla at that speed is approx. 80kJ, which is rather respectable.
Upvote
36
(44
/
-8)
I think some of you are not doing the math right. He had 4.5 sec till impact at 70mph. If he started applying his brakes he would have reduced his average speed, so he would have had more time till impact. An easier way to think about it is 70mph is about 100feet/sec, so at 4.5sec away he was 450feet away from impact. Most passenger vehicles can stop from 70mph in under 200feet. So one scenario is the truck pulled out when the Tesla was 450 feet out, it took 1.5sec to perceive and react, at which point he was 300feet out, then he applies moderate braking and stops in 300 feet
Upvote
176
(176
/
0)
Expecting the driver to maintain focus while not in control is oblivious to human nature. And having to pay attention pretty much defeats the purpose of relinquishing control. Wait for mature fully autonomous systems and drive like a normal person in the meantime.
Upvote
61
(78
/
-17)
Depending on where on SR7, it may well have been a 65mph speedlimit. Autopilot limits how far above speed limit it can be set when not on the highway.
I feel bad for both parties, but you seem to ignore that the truck driver pulled out in front of an oncoming car in violation of right-of-way.
Upvote
20
(45
/
-25)
Do you have a link for this? (I'm not doubting you, I'd just love to have a citation to reference if one is available.)
Upvote
96
(96
/
0)