
Tesla Autopilot and Euro NCAP - camtarn
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/the-trashing-of-tesla-autopilot-by-euro-ncap-129683.html
======
jaysonelliot
The article claims that the NCAP's problems with automated systems was that
"apparently they work too well."

It then goes on to enumerate a host of problems with Tesla's Autopilot,
including a lack of geofencing, poor monitoring of human attention, "late or
no response" to cut-in-and-out scenarios, AutoSteer's resistance to human
control, and the system's trouble with some curves, and of course Tesla's
inconsistent and confusing messaging about what exactly Autopilot is meant to
be.

Far from being a "trashing," it sounds like the Euro NCAP did exactly what it
was supposed to do, which is to advocate for safety.

~~~
fossuser
I really don’t like geofencing or aggressive human attention monitoring so the
lack of both of those things are features. The steering wheel attention
requests are pretty frequent anyway.

The other complaints are largely remedied by being a safe driver - the car
says all over the place what the limitations of autopilot are when you go to
use it.

~~~
simion314
Did you read about the case where the driver was sleeping and the car did not
stop because it did not realize it? Do you think this is a feature?

~~~
fossuser
I don’t think that’s what has happening given how much it asks you to touch
the wheel.

Same thing could happen with cruise control and be even more dangerous.

~~~
simion314
What do you mean? I imagine the driver was sleeping with the hands on the
wheel.

IMO this systems that work for 99% of cases but stil require 100% driver
attention are dangerous and it should include as much software and hardware to
make sure the human is paying attention and not sleeping or watching movies

~~~
fossuser
It doesn't really work for 99% of cases, it works for maybe 60% and most of
that is uninterrupted freeway driving without construction zones.

I think it'd be hard to sleep with your hands on the wheel and cause enough
resistance to keep the car from complaining. Though I suppose it's possible -
I thought the driver was drunk in that case (could be mistaken)?

~~~
simion314
From what I read the drunk driver is a different guy then the sleeping driver,
you can google for more info.

------
bdz
Original article [https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-
releases/testi...](https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-
releases/testingautomation/)

Test method and results with links to every model
[https://www.euroncap.com/en/vehicle-safety/safety-
campaigns/...](https://www.euroncap.com/en/vehicle-safety/safety-
campaigns/2018-automated-driving-tests/)

Tesla (.pdf) [https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/41590/euro-ncap-automated-
dri...](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/41590/euro-ncap-automated-
driving-2018-tesla-model-s-datasheet.201810171432105270.pdf)

------
jlv2
Having used it for about 24K miles, I think Tesla AutoPilot works incredibly
well (using software 9.0 and AP2.0 hardware in my Model S).

And I'm really glad it isn't crippled with some geofencing that would limit it
to where I could enable it.

Having said all that, the name is a terrible and implies something it isn't
capable of yet. It's a dangerously bad marketing choice.

~~~
usaphp
I own latest 5 series bmw and paid for all the driving assistance add-ons, and
while the adaptive cruise control is awesome, the line keeping assist is
completely useless and works absolutely terrible, not sure who decided to
charge money for this incomplete piece of software, it's unusable, my friend
has a model X and it's a day and night difference between the two, Tesla
autopilot is just in a different league compared to bmw line assist thing.

------
noisy_boy
Tesla should just rename their ADS from AutoPilot to CoPilot.

~~~
ginko
Isn't the point of a copilot that it can safely fly and land a plane unlike an
autopilot.

~~~
Someone1234
Planes can land entirely on autopilot.

Just requires the airport to have ILS, and a fairly modern autopilot.

~~~
mikeash
_Some_ can. Airplane autopilots are tremendously varied. Some are as simple as
a gyroscope hooked up to the ailerons to keep the wings level. I’m always
baffled as to why people think “autopilot” implies any sort of autonomy.

~~~
Someone1234
> I’m always baffled as to why people think “autopilot” implies any sort of
> autonomy.

It is literally in the name.

~~~
mikeash
“Auto” just means “self.” Do autobiographies write themselves? Does the word
“automobile” imply no driver is needed?

~~~
simion314
Auto can mean also automatic, autonomous , you are trying to defend the
meaning of autopilot by bringing aviation definition, it would be similar to
me telling all the people that they are using language wrong because in
chemistry or math the word X ids defined to mean something a bit different.

in physics acceleration is used when things slow down too, but at least in my
language this is weird and in day to day use acceleration means increase in
speed, you want to understand how/why most people define autopilot as more
then dr5iver assist then just ask them and stop telling them they are wrong
because in domain X the word is used different.

~~~
mikeash
I’m not saying they’re wrong. I’m saying their understanding of the word
baffles me. That’s not the same thing, and it’s kind of annoying to be
attacked just for not understanding people.

~~~
simion314
Let me try to explain, people are not knowledgeable on how airplane autopilot
works, what people understand when they hear autopilot is from what they had
seen in movies or games, read in books or what the words actual mean.

~~~
mikeash
There are contrary examples that normal people would know too. For instance,
it’s common to use the phrase “on autopilot” to describe the state of a person
who does something really stupid because they were following a routine without
thinking.

------
ralph84
Airplanes have autopilot and no one thinks that means there’s no pilot in
front. Sure some drivers test the limit of their Tesla, just like some drivers
test the limit of their Porsche or Ferrari.

~~~
tacomonstrous
This is a silly semantic argument. Many people drive cars; very few fly
aircraft. The meaning of a word in the second context has little to do with
the first.

~~~
paulddraper
Please elaborate. In what more common context does autopilot imply no standby
human operator?

~~~
detaro
Standby, yes. Tesla's Autopilot appears to not be able to guarantee that sub-
second reactions to random situations aren't necessary, at which point it's
IMHO not "standby" anymore.

An airliner's autopilot can do this for phases of the flight, backed up by
ATC, collision warning systems, height over ground and the relative emptiness
of the sky.

In other situations, it needs close supervision too, but the first case
probably leads the general public to associate the term with "standby".

~~~
paulddraper
In that case, the analogy to airplane autopilot is indeed inappropriate.

Airpline autopilot can have a standby human operator, with more than a second
transition time.

------
leesec
> Overall, the results were satisfying. In Tesla’s case, they were disastrous.
> And not because ADS don't work, but because apparently they work too well.

Misleading title much?

~~~
thumb
I don't know; they seem to be trashing Autopilot plenty in the article.

~~~
hn_throwaway_99
I disagree. The article concludes "Tesla's Autopilot is a great technology,
perhaps the most advanced ADS on the market". What they are "trashing" seems
to be the hyperbolic marketing of Tesla, which I feel at this point has been
discussed ad nauseum and has gotten so much press that this just feels like a
rehashing of "Tesla greatly oversold this!" that tons of people (myself
included) have already commented.

~~~
tobltobs
It is not only marketing the criticize, also the general handling:

"In the small obstacle ‘pot hole’ scenario, all the cars tested allowed the
driver to cooperatively steer and manage the situation apart from the Tesla.
The Tesla system does not allow the driver to deviate from the lane centering
path and will disengage when a driver inputs steering torque."

------
ineedasername
Their most important point stems from the name: "Autopilot". That right there
begins the host of issues that arose from how Tesla marketed their features in
a way that oversold them. And I am genuinely impressed by what Tesla has
accomplished with their system, it's just that it's safe use-cases are much,
much narrower a true "autopilot"

I wonder if there is even a safe "in between" phase between normal driving and
truly, fully self-driving vehicles. Or will many people put too much trust in
the tech to make it a safer alternative until it's much more mature. Think of
airplane pilots, where "autopilot" is also not really a fully self-
flying/landing/takeoff system: they have tons of specialized training to
hammer home the limitations and work safely within the system. There's even a
body of research literature on the topic of when too much automation makes
pilots too complacent, and decades of engineering with that problem in mind.

It all just makes me think that Waymo may have it right in not targeting any
type of transitional state between traditional and full automation.

~~~
labcomputer
To be fair, the Tesla Autopilot functions at a higher than an aviation
autopilot.

In aviation, an autopilot follows a fixed path and makes no attempt to avoid
other aircraft or terrain.

There is no such thing as an automated takeoff. Automated landings, in
practice, require the pilot to hand-fly the last part of the approach (except
at a fleetingly small number of airports with cat IIIc approaches, where a
ground navaid, not GPS, provides a high precision signal to guide the
autopilot).

State of the art automation of aircraft speed consists of the pilot dialing a
different speed to the autothrottle, which is effectively a traditional, non-
adaptive cruise control.

------
YeGoblynQueenne
This is going to be controversial perhaps, so I apologise in advance, but I'm
continuously struck by the tendency of the tech industry (some sectors of it
anyway) to overstate matters. Tesla's driver assistance system is an
"autopilot"; Waymo's rides with human (safety) drivers are "autonomous";
DeepMind's AlphaZero that plays chess, Go and shogi [1] is a "general-purpose
game playing agent"; Google translate that uses English as an intermediary
language has developed an "interlingua".

I really don't get how this works. To me all this sounds like completely
ridiculous. Yet, some of those claims appear in actual publications, in high
profile journals. Otherwise, people fall over each other to buy that hot AI
stuff. I mean, what the hell?

Perhaps we must persist in educating people about the abilities, and
limitations, of current technology?

______________

[1] And nothing else. Not even tick-tack-toe. It has a model of a board with
squares and of pieces making chess-like moves, so it can't deal with anything
else.

------
njarboe
Tesla is going a different route to full automation than any other company.
They seem to think the fastest way to full automation is going to be a gradual
progression from where they are now (low level SAE 3) to level 4/5\. Most
others, and most importantly the leader Waymo (Google (Alphabet)), have
decided the human society can't handle the risks of a level 3 system and won't
deploy cars with those features. Waymo seems to have got to level 4 for the
driving conditions around Phoenix so they are now starting to deploy the
system to the public.

At level 3 humans aren't driving the car but are suppose to pay attention so
that they can take over if a problem arises. In general humans are not good at
that task. Some of them will fail at it, the car will crash, people will get
hurt/die, and maybe in this "safety first" world, automatic driving gets a bad
name and is "set back" a decade.

Elon Musk has stated that he believes more in a "safety third" kind of
philosophy. In an interview I saw he stated that with his kids he tells them
that "don't panic" is a good first principle for dealing with life and
"safety" would probably go third. It's important but not the prime directive
of life. What is second is still up for consideration.

So the love/hate for Tesla's Autopilot strategy probably comes down to how you
feel about risking people's lives to possibly save many more. Here is a
question to ask yourself. If Tesla's autocar strategy causes 100 deaths of
people who volunteer to take the risk before really good automation is
developed, but Tesla's courage/recklessness has a 50% chance of saving a
million (choose your own number) lives due to the speed-up of the
implementation of self driving cars, would you support that? I would and so
would many others, but many would not. This is a deep difference in values and
that is why I think there is so much love/hate around the issue.

Maybe Tesla wants to call it Autopilot because they hope they can
incrementally improve it so that someday they get to level 4/5 and won't have
the need to change the name at some arbitrary place along the way to full
autopilot competency. Cruise control was a bit of a misnomer also but people
seem to be fine with the word at this point.

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
Autopilot is level 2 autonomy.

Noone has level 3 autonomy, yet.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Level...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Levels_of_automation)

Level 2 – Partial automation The driver must be able to control the vehicle if
corrections are needed, but the driver is no longer in control of the speed
and steering of the vehicle.[6] Parking assistance is an example of a system
that falls into this category[7] along with Tesla's autopilot feature.[8] A
system that falls into this category is the DISTRONIC PLUS system created by
Mercedes-Benz.[9] It is important to note the driver must not be distracted in
Level 0 to Level 2 modes.

~~~
njarboe
Reading over the SAE (J3016) Automation Levels here[1] it seems to me that the
Tesla Autopilot is now into level 3, especially for highway driving. If you
can go exit to exit without any direction from a human, I would definitely say
level 3 has been reached. Fine details of the definition between one level and
another should probably only interesting to lawyers and their clients.

Waymo not level 3? Seems they claim to be level 4 for their Phoenix rollout.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-
driving_car](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car)

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
Yes, they do. That's their marketing schtick. That their cars are already
fully autonomous.

However, that's just preposterous. It's a bit as if Boeing claimed their
planes have anti-gravity because they're just better planes (I know next to
nothing about planes- Boeing's name chosen completely at random). Waymo are
not particularly farther than anyone else on the path to fully autonomy-
they're just doing the smart thing and not trying to drive where their system
can't, or leaving it to the public to test their limits.

~~~
njarboe
More like Boeing claimed to have anti-gravity that only worked in Seattle.
Very exciting, really anti-gravity, but not yet useful for full scale
implementation on planes that need to fly everywhere.

------
magic-chicken
TL/DR

Tesla ADS is the best on the market but it is marketed as an autopilot, which
is wrong and caused some overconfident owners to die.

~~~
oblio
Your comment makes it sound like the two mistakes are equivalent.

They might have been overconfident, but if the misleading marketing leads to
__deaths __, I don 't think the finger should be pointed to "overconfidence".

~~~
dsfyu404ed
>Your comment makes it sound like the two mistakes are equivalent.

It's a TL;DR. Of course it sacrifices nuance for brevity.

>They might have been overconfident, but if the misleading marketing leads to
deaths, I don't think the finger should be pointed to "overconfidence".

I generally agree with you but there is a good argument to be had that the
driver is responsible. These were personally owned vehicles, not rentals. It's
not like the owners who died didn't have time to become familiar enough with
the system to reach the same performance conclusions (i.e. "it's basically
just really good lane keeping and adaptive cruise") as Euro NCAP did. I get
that products for the general consumer are supposed to be stupid proof but
everyone knows that marketing bends the truth by only ever showing the ideal
case. Nobody expects fancy AWD and electronic nannies to let them navigate
snow covered hairpin roads with 100% accuracy every time like in the car
commercials. Nobody expects to rely on automatic braking or cross traffic
detection to not get in accidents when backing out of a driveway. The same
goes for Tesla's autopilot. It is unreasonable to expect Autopilot to perform
the way the marketing implies in 100% of circumstances.

~~~
simion314
>It's not like the owners who died didn't have time to become familiar enough
with the system to reach the same performance conclusions

This means if a Tesla kills me in the first 2 weeks I am not responsible since
as per your argument I did not had enough time to realize the marketing
deception and the actual capabilities of the car, it is not like I was trained
like real pilots to drive this specific car model.

------
sabertoothed
Article from October.

~~~
taneq
Man, those six weeks completely changed the self-driving landscape, what with
the... um... nah it's about the same but Waymo is now charging for rides.

~~~
sabertoothed
For those people with shares it matters. New information changes share price.
Old information tends to be reflected already.

------
make3
the title is extremely inaccurate

------
decebalus1
[meta] Whenever there is something remotely critical of Tesla, the comment
section is a mess. Downvotes left-and-right, people are divided on bullshit
semantics, etc.. I really don't get why. Same thing (but worse, actually)
happens on Reddit.

Is Tesla PR so 'well connected' to astroturf basically everywhere or did their
marketing succeeded in creating an army of people who emotionally associate
Tesla with the future of humanity? It's just a car folks, take a chill pill.

~~~
Someone1234
I don't think Tesla needs to astroturf, they have plenty of supports who will
happily defend them for free.

Similar things happen in Apple threads, sports threads (elsewhere), and the
games console wars. People just don't like their chosen sacred cow getting
criticized.

------
dmode
What a clickbait headline. The trashing is...wait for it.. because of the name
Autopilot and because it is too good. Saved you a click

