
Tesla's new radar tech predicts an accident caught on dashcam a second later - obi1kenobi
https://electrek.co/2016/12/27/tesla-autopilot-radar-technology-predict-accident-dashcam/
======
codeddesign
There are going to be haters that come on here and try to down play this
video..

But there is something to be said about a car that can gauge the movement of
others around it, and a car company that is willing to push for a better type
of vehicle. The largest automakers in the world have had the power, finances,
and means to progress vehicles for quite some time and have not. Tesla's are
not perfect, but it terms of what they are doing I give them a big hats off.

~~~
mikestew
_The largest automakers in the world have had the power, finances, and means
to progress vehicles for quite some time and have not_

No offense intended, but you haven't been paying attention if you think that's
the case. For instance, I've read on this very forum how Tesla's driving-
assistance technology is a bit dated (camera and no LIDAR, for instance) in
comparison to Daimler, et. al.

As for other aspects of progress, I don't know what you're looking for. Within
my lifetime alone we've gone from vehicles that need constant maintenance
(ignition points and 5K mile plugs, anyone?) to appliances-on-wheels. My Mom's
'16 Corvette puts out 450bhp, still gets 25mpg, and I'll bet you could put
your nose straight up the pipe and die of boredom before the exhaust fumes get
you. And, unlike something of equivalent horsepower from the 70's, you can
drive it in town.

Large brands made hybrids, EVs like the Leaf that made an EV "everyman's car"
before the Model S and loooong before the Model 3.

So to play it like Tesla's the only one with the guts to do what needs to be
done just means their marketing is working.

Signed,

Owner of Many Shares of TSLA

~~~
obi1kenobi
In my opinion, Tesla's decision to not use LIDAR shows their system is more
advanced than the competition's, rather than it being dated. I have two
reasons:

\- LIDAR is extremely expensive! The LIDAR unit that Google uses costs $80,000
by itself [0], whereas the entire hardware package that Tesla uses is $8,000
[1].

\- Path planning, in my personal experience, is significantly easier given
millimeter-level accurate readings on millions of points every second, than
with 60fps video, even from multiple cameras.

The way I see it, it appears that Tesla has been able to achieve comparable
(or better) progress on self-driving cars with significantly lower-cost
hardware. The name of the game is making self-driving cars the default option,
and that can't happen when the self-driving hardware by itself costs as much
as a luxury car.

[0] [http://articles.sae.org/13899/](http://articles.sae.org/13899/)

[1] [http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/20/13346512/tesla-self-
drivi...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/20/13346512/tesla-self-driving-
autonomous-enhanced-autopilot-cost)

~~~
mikeyouse
Those Google lidar numbers are not reflective of anything that would ship.
Much of what Google is doing is capturing all of the ambient data so each
subsequent car knows more about the environment than the one that preceded it.
You can buy simple solid state lidar units for under $1,000 and there are
several in the pipeline targeting $100/unit. It's much more likely to see
those on any mass market product.

Delphi is probably the largest auto supplier in the world and they recently
invested a significant amount of money into a silicon valley company producing
a solid state lidar who are targeting a $250 price point:

[https://www.google.com/amp/www.forbes.com/sites/lianeyvkoff/...](https://www.google.com/amp/www.forbes.com/sites/lianeyvkoff/2016/08/24/quanergy-
joins-the-unicorn-club/)

If lidar makes self driving safer, there is no reason at all not to use it.

It's worth noting that in the aftermath of the death of a Tesla driver whose
autopilot system couldn't see a white semi trailer, Tesla's sensor supplier
reiterated the need for lidar and redundant sensors:

[https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/07/1...](https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/07/12/tesla-
autopilot-technology-sensor-lidar/%3Fsource%3Ddam)

------
lcw
This is great! I feel like there is going to be a strong opposition to
autonomous vehicles as they become more mainstream and widely available. We
need more videos and examples like this that show the benefits. I understand
auto pilot isn't fully autonomous but these are good building blocks.

I'm really going to cringe when people want to hold on to their super charged
car/truck and drive it recklessly in the name of freedom. We can't publicize
enough the current dangers of driving.

~~~
gambiting
I'm very much against the idea that only autonomous vehicles should be allowed
on the road, but I'm 100% behind technologies like the one demonstrated in the
video,which is essentially auto breaking with radar assist. I think this
technology will be required by law within a few years for all new cars in the
US actually.

------
trevyn
I don't think it "predicted" the accident, it just saw the car two ahead
braking very strongly. (And the car one ahead didn't see that. ;)

------
yladiz
I think this is a much more appropriate use of the technology present in Tesla
cars than allowing it to self drive. I'm firmly in the "shouldn't have worked
that way" camp of Autopilot -- no matter what Tesla or Musk says, the first
thing I would think of as someone who is not a trained pilot is that Autopilot
is a self driving feature of a car, and believe that the wording and
marketing, combined with the reckless use of simple technology like cameras,
instead of stronger technology like the radars here, caused crashes. I'm glad
that even though they have stronger tech they are still toning down the
marketing and the use of any self driving features, so kudos to Tesla (it
might have been due to bad PR but still).

However, I have to wonder why this is news. Other cars have had similar
technology for a long time but when they prevent a crash it's not news. Is the
only reason this is news is because it's Tesla and that they've had high
profile crashes in the past, so they're spinning up the PR machine?

------
AznHisoka
any guesses as to how the car in front of it could have prevented the
accident? what was the human error involved? was it simply a case of being too
close to the car in front of it?

~~~
op00to
Leave adequate following room - at least twice what you think you need, stop
fucking with your phone while behind the wheel.

~~~
themaninthedark
Great, now I'm going to have to keep doubling my following distance forever.

~~~
op00to
You certainly won't run into the car in front of you until you circle the
earth, but then it's the other guys fault!

------
Justin_K
I'm guessing the LIDAR saw the second car up rapidly slowing. You could catch
a peek of it over the smaller car.

~~~
dfcowell
Teslas aren't equipped with LIDAR. I think they're the only self driving
capable vehicle not to use it.

~~~
anxman
It uses the radar for detection by bouncing it under the car in front.

