My Cybertruck rear ended a Silverado. No Collision Avoidance Assist

[Woodrick]

Yeah, they were all trying to follow the navigation's "faster route" to cut through the multiple lanes for the imminent exit.

The GPS should not suggest such "faster route" in its algorithm.

That's a really bad idea.

Just because an GPS navigator says that you miss a turn is no reason to do a U-Turn in the middle of the road to get back.
Or missing an exit doesn't mean that it's okay to back up a quarter mile to get back to your exit.

If you miss a turn, don't be stupid.

Sponsored

 

[H2CT]

The Silverado has more visible damage but the Cybertruck will probably cost a lot more to repair.

Start at the 50 second mark unless you enjoy watching 110 traffic.

Unfortunately no alert from the collision avoidance, neither audible nor emergency breaking. Maybe my speed was too low?

From the video it appears the Silverado wanted you to rear end him. He braked hard and fast and seemingly for no reason…?

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

I don't think the collision detection would have worked in the situation where you were crossing the line intensionally, at that speed, the system probably thought you knew what you were doing. Just an odd situation for it to detect.

Me:Give me a Brake!

Insurance Co.: 'Play it again.....S.A.M

 

[Woodrick]

From the video it appears the Silverado wanted you to rear end him. He braked hard and fast and seemingly for no reason…?

Look closer. The car in front was unable to completely leave the lane. While you can barely see it, you can easily see the space between the car that changed lanes and the car in front of him didn't have enough space. You can actually see the brake lights on the car in front to the merging car's brake lights come on.

 

[H2CT]

Look closer. The car in front was unable to completely leave the lane. While you can barely see it, you can easily see the space between the car that changed lanes and the car in front of him didn't have enough space. You can actually see the brake lights on the car in front to the merging car's brake lights come on.

Ok that feels a little better. I’ve heard some stories like this…

 

[justinpratt]

That is not really true anymore is it? Auto Emergency Brakes, FSD, traffic away cruise control, lane keeping... those all are decisions made by an inanimate object. What a time to be alive!

I am frequently using cruise control and the truck will slow down dramatically out of no where. This scares the passengers, they gasp and look at me. "Sorry the car did it" is a 100% true statement.

Still yet, the driver has control. Or perhaps not, by choice.

 

[Pops]

Still yet, the driver has control. Or perhaps not, by choice.

Well I guess it comes down to if any of those systems take an action, the driver cannot go back and time and change that action.

For example:
If it suddenly does a phantom brake, the driver can only accelerate after that happened.
If it suddenly turns right because it followed the wrong lane maker in a construction zone... the driver can only take action afterwards to correct.
OPs situation, and the CT didnt detect the truck stopping in front of them.

Its interesting that car companies want to absolve themselves of responsibility with the umbrella defense of "the driver must always be ready to intervene". But the vehicles error created the dangerous situation that required intervention in the first place. Inevitably there will not be enough time to correct the error.

 

[REM]

May I offer a title correction?


"I accidently rear ended a Silverado while driving my Cybertruck"

 

[MisterChilidog]

The Silverado has more visible damage but the Cybertruck will probably cost a lot more to repair.

Start at the 50 second mark unless you enjoy watching 110 traffic.

Unfortunately no alert from the collision avoidance, neither audible nor emergency breaking. Maybe my speed was too low?

That sucks; sorry to hear about your misfortune. I have the reverse problem, in terms of collision avoidance - I get the warning alerts for vehicles I'm already slowing down for, and in no danger of actually hitting. Seems a little quick to freak out.

 

[Woodrick]

Well I guess it comes down to if any of those systems take an action, the driver cannot go back and time and change that action.

For example:
If it suddenly does a phantom brake, the driver can only accelerate after that happened.
If it suddenly turns right because it followed the wrong lane maker in a construction zone... the driver can only take action afterwards to correct.
OPs situation, and the CT didnt detect the truck stopping in front of them.

Its interesting that car companies want to absolve themselves of responsibility with the umbrella defense of "the driver must always be ready to intervene". But the vehicles error created the dangerous situation that required intervention in the first place. Inevitably there will not be enough time to correct the error.

What if you are teaching a teenager how to drive and they do any of those situations?

Yes, if the car is going to drive, it's not going to as "Pops may I" before it does it.

 

[Pops]

What if you are teaching a teenager how to drive and they do any of those situations?

Yes, if the car is going to drive, it's not going to as "Pops may I" before it does it.

Good example. If your child makes and error while driving, you can try and save the situation and you might fail. The driver(your teen) would be at fault for the accident, despite your effort to save the situation. In a similar situation FSD isnt responsible per the agreement.

I am not discussing or suggesting legal liability, I am simply pointing out the problematic argument that the owner/driver is always responsible for the accident, even if FSD caused the accident.

I think long term when Full Autonomous vehicles come out that they should be self insured and that should be baked into the cost. If an accident happens when FSD is enabled, that insurance policy pays. That would resolve this issue.

 

[Crissa]

Lane splitting isn't illegal in California, and the origins in air-cooled motorcycles made sense (not just for motorcycle cops on Harleys). There is no question that lane splitting brings with it risks for bikers and drivers alike, and requires hyper alertness. I split lanes the entire time I lived in Los Angeles and there were a few dicey situations but I never had a collision and am, clearly, still around. If you could explain why you mentioned Afghanistan and Singapore maybe we could better evaluate your position.

Lane splitting is actually safer - because the modes of collision are much less likely to include rider sandwich. Side on or oblique collisions are easier to avoid and do less lethal damage.

Even more valuable, it means motorcycles don't contribute to traffic slowdowns.

-Crissa

Sponsored