Unpacking the Autonomous Uber Fatality as Details Emerge [Updated]

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky
unpacking the autonomous uber fatality as details emerge updated

Details are trickling in about the fatal incident in Tempe, Arizona, where an autonomous Uber collided with a pedestrian earlier this week. While a true assessment of the situation is ongoing, the city’s police department seems ready to absolve the company of any wrongdoing.

“The driver said it was like a flash, the person walked out in front of them,” explained Tempe police chief Sylvia Moir. “His first alert to the collision was the sound of the collision.”

This claim leaves us with more questions than answers. Research suggests autonomous driving aids lull people into complacency, dulling the senses and slowing reaction times. But most self-driving hardware, including Uber’s, uses lidar that can functionally see in pitch black conditions. Even if the driver could not see the woman crossing the street (there were streetlights), the vehicle should have picked her out clear as day.

The location of the accident further complicates things. Using information provided by local authorities and images from the scene, we found the the area where the accident took place. The location is a point in the road (northbound Mill Ave.) where a designated bike lane opens up to meet with traffic attempting to make a right turn. Following the incident, the self-driving SUV appears to have stopped in that turn lane with damage visible on the right side of its hood.

However, early reports (written prior to examining the car’s video data) claimed 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg was pushing a bicycle down the center median and crossed into the street when she was struck. There is a walking path there, which includes two pedestrian exits into to the street with a confusing “do not cross” sign. But how the damage came to be on the right side of the vehicle if Herzberg entered from the western median is difficult to make sense of — especially if there was no time to react. At the most likely point of entry, two lanes open for lefthand turns while northbound traffic continues on in the center. There is also a walkway that exits at a narrower point with just two lanes of northbound traffic, but it’s a bit further south.

According to the initial police report, the SUV was traveling at 38 mph and made no attempt to brake. “[Based on video evidence] it’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode [autonomous or not] based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway,” Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Again, the Uber’s lidar should have taken care of that. But, if Herzberg did enter from the median as originally claimed, there is a chance she was obscured by trees until she was already in the road. As the police have not provided the on-board video from the vehicle or established a clear sequence of events, it’s hard to understand exactly what happened.

Moir said the incident occurred within 100 yards of a crosswalk, which would place Herzberg’s most-likely position in the bike line. But the probable entrance point from the median isn’t much further back, so it remains a possibility. We’re hoping the police release the video footage soon. While nobody is excited to see a tragic death caught on camera, it’s the best way to make sense of what happened. We’ve reached out to the Tempe Police Department for clarification and will update accordingly.

Meanwhile, the National Transportation Safety Board has launched its own investigation into the incident. The team consists of Investigator-in-Charge Jennifer Morrison and three additional team members who will examine vehicle factors, human performance, and electronic recorders.

UPDATE: Sgt. Ronald Elcock of the Tempe Police Department confirmed for us that the Herzberg entered traffic from the west side of the road (via the median) and the accident occurred in the northbound lanes. The investigation is ongoing.

[Images: Uber; Google]

Join the conversation
2 of 69 comments
  • PandaBear PandaBear on Mar 22, 2018

    Firmware engineer here. These kinds of accidents will happen when technologies first started, especially during war time because the risk of not acting is worse than the risk of your test pilot dying or your solders killed with failed equipment. It is unfortunate, and it is not avoidable but hopefully all parties involved do the best they can to minimize the probability of it happening. The "driver" should be at least a professional that collect logs and test the car / software with a "fail safe" attitude that makes a failed software do a minimum amount of damage. It is better to have a computer shut down the car or do a false emergency brake than to run over a pedestrian, or cause the car behind you to rear end you than you rear end the car in front of you. Remember: there is no bug free software, and there is no "perfect" human driver. Hopefully the software is safer than the human driver, and is tested as much as possible.

  • Ixim Ixim on Mar 22, 2018

    Three video screenshots show the victim walking her bike into the road from the left clearly illuminated by the headlights. Although the A/V didn't apply the brakes, it's not clear if the human "driver" could have stopped in time either. The victim nearly made it across as it's the right front fender that was damaged. It's still not OK to hit anyone/anything with a motor vehicle; accidents can and will happen. I see no proof that A/Vs will be any better or worse than we humans in that regard.

  • MaintenanceCosts We hear endlessly from the usual suspects about the scenarios where EVs don't work as well as gas cars. We never hear the opposite side of the coin. From an EV owner (since 2019) who has a second EV reserved, here are a few points the "I road trip 1000 miles every day" crowd won't tell you about:[list][*]When you have a convenient charging situation, EV fueling is more convenient than a gas car. There is no stopping at gas stations and you start every day with a full tank.[/*][*]Where there are no-idling rules (school pickup/dropoff, lines for ferries or services, city loading, whatever else) you can keep warm or cool to your heart's content in your EV.[/*][*]In the cold, EVs will give you heat from the second you turn them on.[/*][*]EVs don't care one bit if you use them for tons of very short trips. Their mechanicals don't need to boil off condensation. (Just tonight, I used my EV to drive six blocks, because it was 31 degrees and raining, and walking would have been unpleasant.)[/*][*]EVs don't stink and don't make you breathe carcinogens on cold start.[/*][*]EV maintenance is much less frequent and much cheaper, eliminating almost all items having to do with engine, transmission, or brakes in a gas car. In most EVs the maintenance schedule consists of battery coolant changes and tire maintenance.[/*][*]You can accelerate fast in EVs without noisily attracting the attention of the cops and every passerby on the street.[/*][/list]
  • MaintenanceCosts Still can't get a RAV4 Prime for love or money. Availability of normal hybrid RAV4s and Highlanders is only slightly better. At least around here I think Toyota could sell twice the number of vehicles that they are actually bringing in at the moment.
  • Tree Trunk Been in the market for a new Highlander Hybrid, it is sold out with order time of 6 months plus. Probably would have bit the bullet if it was not for the dealers the refuse to take an order but instead want to sell from allotment whether it fits or not and at thousands over MRSP.
  • AKHusky The expense argument is nonsense. My mach e was $42k after tax credit. Basically the same as similarly equipped edge. And it completely ignores that the best selling vehicles are Rams, F150s, and Silverados, all more expensive that a bolt, MAch e or ID4. As an owner, I'd say they are still in second car territory for most places in the country.
  • Johnster I live in a red state and I see quite a few EVs being purchased by conservative, upper-class Republicans (many of them Trump-supporters). I suspect that it is a way for them to flaunt their wealth and that, over time, the preference for EVs will trickle down to less well-off Republicans.