The auto industry is distancing itself from Tesla in response to new crash reporting rule

TruckElectric

Well-known member
First Name
Bryan
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Threads
769
Messages
2,482
Reaction score
3,273
Location
Texas
Vehicles
Dodge Ram diesel
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
The auto industry is distancing itself from Tesla in response to new crash reporting rule

NHTSA is requiring reporting of crashes involving vehicles with driver-assistance and autonomous capabilities


Tesla Cybertruck The auto industry is distancing itself from Tesla in response to new crash reporting rule jbareham_180213_2301_0149.0
Photo by James Bareham / The Verge

The auto industry is holding its fire — for now — over the new requirement to report crashes involving vehicles equipped with partially and fully autonomous driving systems. But automakers are also distancing themselves from the company that appears to be the primary target of the new rule: Tesla.

The rule, issued yesterday by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, requires companies like Tesla and Alphabet’s Waymo to report incidents involving driver assistance and autonomous systems within one day of learning of a crash, a major change that signals a tougher stance by regulators.

CAR COMPANIES ARE TAKING A WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH
So far, car companies are taking a wait-and-see approach, mostly lauding NHTSA’s commitment to safety and transparency, while objecting to the perceived conflation of driver-assistance systems, like Tesla’s Autopilot, with fully autonomous vehicles like those operated by Waymo. While many autonomous vehicles are deployed in states with regulations on the books, advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) like Tesla’s Autopilot fall in a legal gray area that allowed incidents to escape further examination.

Most of the individual companies declined to comment on the ruling, preferring to speak through the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group that represents all of the major automakers and their suppliers — but notably not Tesla. The alliance released a statement that singled out “misuse and abuse” of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS).

“As we evaluate NHTSA’s new reporting obligations, it’s critical that consumers know and understand the benefits—and limitations—of these features to build and improve confidence in proven vehicle safety technologies,” said John Bozzella, the group’s president, in a statement. “Misuse and abuse of Level 2 ADAS systems is extremely dangerous and threatens consumer acceptance and confidence in vehicles equipped with potentially life-saving ADAS technologies.”

“MISUSE AND ABUSE OF LEVEL 2 ADAS SYSTEMS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS”
Bozzella also noted that last April, “automakers representing nearly 99 percent of the new vehicles sold in the US” signed a pledge committing to “effective driver monitoring systems for Level 2 vehicles.” Driver monitoring systems typically rely on in-car cameras to ensure that drivers are watching the road while using driver-assistance systems.

Companies like General Motors and Ford currently sell cars with camera-based eye-tracking systems that are meant to make sure drivers pay attention while using hands-free driving features.

But Tesla, which many observers noted seems to be the primary target of this new NHTSA rule, has historically resisted regulatory pressure to add better driver monitoring in its cars. That may be changing, though. The latest software update release notes imply that Tesla will begin using the camera above the rear-view mirror in the Model 3 and Model Y to help make sure people pay attention to the road while using Autopilot.

But the company hasn’t said anything publicly about this change. And a spokesperson for Tesla did not respond to a request for comment for this story, which isn’t surprising considering the company has eliminated its public relations department and hasn’t responded to a request for comment in nearly two years.

Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk have long been criticized for overstating the capabilities of the company’s Autopilot system, which in its most basic form can center a Tesla vehicle in a lane and around curves and adjust the car’s speed based on the vehicle ahead. The use of brand names like Autopilot and “Full Self-Driving” has also helped contribute to an environment in which Tesla customers are misled into believing their vehicles can actually drive themselves.

TESLA HAS BEEN CRITICIZED FOR OVERSTATING THE CAPABILITIES OF AUTOPILOT
Since Tesla introduced Autopilot in 2015, there have been at least 11 deaths in nine crashes in the US that involved the driver assistance system. Internationally, there have been at least another nine deaths in seven additional crashes.

The company’s silence is especially notable given the company’s shifting relationship with US regulators. NHTSA, which enforces federal motor vehicle safety standards, has been criticized for misrepresenting Autopilot’s safety record and for giving the company a pass on customers who misuse the technology. NHTSA recently disclosed that it has opened 27 investigations into crashes of Tesla vehicles, 23 of which remain active. Despite this, Tesla CEO Elon Musk recently tweeted that “NHTSA is great.”

The National Transportation Safety Board, which investigates crashes involving partially and fully autonomous vehicle crashes, has proven more willing to point fingers at Musk’s company. An NTSB investigation into the 2018 death of a Tesla owner in California said Autopilot was partly to blame. Musk has been much more hostile toward the agency, at one point hanging up on the chairman of NTSB.

Another trade group, the Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets, which represents AV companies including Waymo, Argo, Aurora, Cruise, and others, echoed similar concerns voiced by the legacy auto industry about grouping their vehicles in with Level 2 cars like Tesla.

“Clear national reporting standards can be an important means to increase public understanding of autonomous vehicles,” said Ariel Wolf, general counsel of the group, in a statement. “But there must be a distinction between our members’ autonomous vehicles—which do not require human intervention to operate safely—and driver assistance technology like Tesla’s, which requires an attentive driver.”

“CLEAR NATIONAL REPORTING STANDARDS CAN BE AN IMPORTANT MEANS TO INCREASE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES”
In his statement, Wolf implied that the NHTSA rule was issued without consulting industry players about what was being required of it. He said that the coalition hopes to “restart ... constructive conversations” with the agency on the work of improving safety.

Speaking of safety, auto safety groups lauded the new NHTSA rule requiring crash reporting. Cathy Chase, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said the rule will provide NHTSA with the necessary data to “determine the safety of the crash avoidance and automated driving systems,” which the government has previously lacked.

Chase noted that the rule is especially timely given that legislation currently pending in Congress barely requires any data collection from the private sector. “History and experience have repeatedly shown that voluntary agreements fail to yield accurate, comprehensive and reliable results,” she said.

Two car companies, Volkswagen and Honda, replied to The Verge’s request for comment on the new rule. VW, which is working with Argo on autonomous vehicle technology, said it looks forward to “working with NHTSA on the principles underlying the standing order announced today.”

Meanwhile, Honda, which has invested in Cruise and helped design the company’s fully driverless shuttle, noted that its current driver-assistance products, AcuraWatch and Honda Sensing, on the sale in the US “are considered Level 1 ADAS. Thus, there is no immediate requirement related to our vehicles.”

SOURCE: THE VERGE
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

Diehard

Well-known member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Threads
23
Messages
2,127
Reaction score
4,248
Location
U.S.A.
Vehicles
Olds Aurora V8, Saturn Sky redline, Lightning, CT2
Country flag
I agree with Elon; “NHTSA is great” . They are trying to do what I am paying them to do. Protect me. All car manufacturers already have incentive to make their products safe in a competitive market however additional safety has additional cost and at some point they have to decide what is safe enough and when things go wrong they have reasons to protect their investment.

When there is a crash, a simple response from the company "trust us it was not the car, it was the driver" is not good enough. I still remember the last time Government trusted what the car and the company was saying ( Dieselgate ). Independent investigation improves public trust. It is good for the industry and good for public safety. Checks and balances are working as they should. These articles just need to make everything sounds like a conflict to get readers. There is no targeting.
 

Jhodgesatmb

Well-known member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Threads
65
Messages
5,082
Reaction score
7,301
Location
San Francisco Bay area
Website
www.arbor-studios.com
Vehicles
Tesla Model Y LR, Tesla Model 3 LR
Occupation
Retired AI researcher
Country flag
As long as all of the automobile companies claiming to have ADAS systems (which appears to be all of them) are required to do the same reporting per accident, and not just Tesla, I am completely fine with this ruling. I am a bit tired of the media and even the NHTSA jumping to conclusions without data so providing the data within 24 hours 'might' help to reduce misinformation (though I am leery of that happening).
 

Huntsman

Well-known member
First Name
Kevin
Joined
Dec 22, 2019
Threads
6
Messages
195
Reaction score
327
Location
Alabama, U.S.A.
Vehicles
F150
Occupation
Heavy Equipment Ops
Country flag
Speaking of Crashes, I have been anticipating Cybertruck crash test data and I understand such testing may not actually take place. My source is the internet - eee gads!!! A Rivian video suggests manufactures can certify their vehicles safety without physically crashing them.
 

John K

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Threads
41
Messages
2,803
Reaction score
5,768
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicles
Volt, CT reserve day 2
Country flag
Speaking of Crashes, I have been anticipating Cybertruck crash test data and I understand such testing may not actually take place. My source is the internet - eee gads!!! A Rivian video suggests manufactures can certify their vehicles safety without physically crashing them.
Hmmm… skeptical.
 


BillyGee

Well-known member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
708
Reaction score
1,534
Location
Northern California
Vehicles
Model Y P, Model 3 LR, Founders CT (Ordered)
Occupation
Technician
Country flag
I'm all for safer cars being on the road for everybody, especially as someone who drives all day everyday. I just can't help but find the timeline of these kinds of changes somewhat hilarious. It almost seems like all of these agencies in the media didn't care about auto safety the same way until Tesla came along and started doing things everyone else said were impossible for the last few decades. The level of scrutiny that gets thrown at Tesla specifically is mind-numbing when you consider that everyone else is playing copycat with them at this point. What's even more hilarious is every time a hoop gets thrown at them they jump through it, and for good measure they set the loop on fire and do a flip. Then, when everyone else is asked to follow those rules the media goes silent.

It's getting so tiresome seeing every other story about Tesla being how they're going to fail any day now and how their kills passengers willy nilly, how their batteries will instantaneously catch fire at random, all of the stuff that's completely not true but gets run ad nauseam. I visually see multiple car accidents on a daily basis but I don't read headlines about which specific vehicle was involved or what kind of safety features they have, but if it's a Tesla I hear about it for 3 days and then hear about it from my friends and family for weeks.
 

DarinCT

Well-known member
First Name
Darin
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
357
Reaction score
625
Location
California
Vehicles
M3, CT triM
Country flag
I'm all for safer cars being on the road for everybody, especially as someone who drives all day everyday. I just can't help but find the timeline of these kinds of changes somewhat hilarious. It almost seems like all of these agencies in the media didn't care about auto safety the same way until Tesla came along and started doing things everyone else said were impossible for the last few decades. The level of scrutiny that gets thrown at Tesla specifically is mind-numbing when you consider that everyone else is playing copycat with them at this point. What's even more hilarious is every time a hoop gets thrown at them they jump through it, and for good measure they set the loop on fire and do a flip. Then, when everyone else is asked to follow those rules the media goes silent.

It's getting so tiresome seeing every other story about Tesla being how they're going to fail any day now and how their kills passengers willy nilly, how their batteries will instantaneously catch fire at random, all of the stuff that's completely not true but gets run ad nauseam. I visually see multiple car accidents on a daily basis but I don't read headlines about which specific vehicle was involved or what kind of safety features they have, but if it's a Tesla I hear about it for 3 days and then hear about it from my friends and family for weeks.
But safe is boring and boring doesn't sell the news. Boring does however make long tubes in the ground. #see what I did there.

In 10 years, the same type of story will be hyped, death news, hell, it might be because people drive their own cars. "We're all gonna die" somehow is news.
 

S.H.Peterson

Well-known member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Mar 23, 2023
Threads
11
Messages
270
Reaction score
452
Location
Alabama
Vehicles
Currently Dodge Truck owner
Occupation
Insurance
Country flag
QUOTE:
" Since Tesla introduced Autopilot in 2015, there have been at least 11 deaths in nine crashes in the US that involved the driver assistance system. Internationally, there have been at least another nine deaths in seven additional crashes. "

This is 1.37 deaths every year. Statistcially zero.
This does NOT include the number of lives it has SAVED.
It says reports need to made where ADAS and Full autopilot systems are INVOLVED.
This just means that instances where it was ACTIVE.
Does not take into account driver error: Intoxicated, distracted, incorrect operation
Does not take into account that these systems cannot predict or safegaurd the operator 100% of the time from all external threats or actions.

A FAR more accurate number is simply this:
Where did ADAS systems CAUSE a crash by failure of design independant of outside system mitigating circumstances?

This is more grasping for control by NHTSA. Any and every governmental beurocracy's prime directive is to achieve continued funding by validating the need for its existence. THEN comes whether or not what they are supposdd to be doing is effective and necessary.
To validate their existence and greater need for power, they need a boogeyman (boogerwoman if you so need) to frighten.

Im NOT a Tesla fanboy. I want real and legitimate numbers that mean something.

This is hardly more than scare hyperbole to secure control.
And I think its a lot of crap.
 

BillyGee

Well-known member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
708
Reaction score
1,534
Location
Northern California
Vehicles
Model Y P, Model 3 LR, Founders CT (Ordered)
Occupation
Technician
Country flag
Im NOT a Tesla fanboy. I want real and legitimate numbers that mean something.

This is hardly more than scare hyperbole to secure control.
And I think its a lot of crap.
You're asking for proper statistical analysis, do you not remember high school? People don't want to know how numbers work, they just want to be mad.
 


S.H.Peterson

Well-known member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Mar 23, 2023
Threads
11
Messages
270
Reaction score
452
Location
Alabama
Vehicles
Currently Dodge Truck owner
Occupation
Insurance
Country flag
You're asking for proper statistical analysis, do you not remember high school? People don't want to know how numbers work, they just want to be mad.
SO true! Kids are also not taught civics and how money aactually works either... sad.
 

cvalue13

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2022
Threads
74
Messages
7,145
Reaction score
13,750
Location
Austin, TX
Vehicles
F150L
Occupation
Fun-employed
Country flag
Speaking of Crashes, I have been anticipating Cybertruck crash test data and I understand such testing may not actually take place. My source is the internet - eee gads!!! A Rivian video suggests manufactures can certify their vehicles safety without physically crashing them.
A few distinctions as I understand it:

Manufacturer testing:

Manufacturers do their own testing, which data they need not release to anyone. What testing they must do need not include any specific thing, including physical crash testing. But, manu’s do have to certify to federal regulators their cars are safe - and be at risk for massive penalties (and public trust repercussions) if their assertions end up false.

NHTSA testing:

They don’t do physical crash tests of every model. They prioritize what to test, and even then have a backlog.

Low volume vehicles don’t get tested. Because of this various classes of vehicles don’t typically get tested - eg luxury vehicles, etc.

I’d say Rivian, for example, would not get NHTSA crash tested, unless Rivian pushes for it in order to give consumers the certification stars.

this pop article is an interesting overview

Self-Driving and NHTSA:

Separately per the thread, NHSTA has a pretty good public-awareness page on self-driving tech, that I think - if given the gloss of tone of a regulatory body - is pretty evenhanded if not bullish about self driving. (I didn’t read every word, so I’m sure someone can pluck choice quips still.)
Sponsored

 
Last edited:
 




Top