NHTSA Investigating Another Tesla Crash

by Steph Willems

January 3rd, 2020 11:05 AM

Barely two weeks after the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last opened an investigation into a Tesla crash, the federal agency is once again probing a collision involving a Tesla vehicle — this one a fatal incident.

The agency announced this week that a December 29th crash in Gardena, California that killed two occupants of a 2006 Honda Civic will fall under its purview.

While the existence of an inquiry doesn’t confirm vehicular malpractice on the part of Tesla, the NHTSA does want to confirm whether the 2019 Tesla Model S involved in the Los Angeles County collision was operating on Autopilot at the time of the crash.

In December, the NHTSA opened its 12th Tesla crash investigation after a Model 3 operating on Autopilot smashed into the back of a parked police cruiser in Norwalk, Connecticut. The cruiser had its lights activated at the time.

In the Gardena incident, the Model S exited the 91 freeway, ran a red light, then impacted the rear of the Civic, NBC reported. Police sources provided the basis for this claim.

While Autopilot use hasn’t been confirmed in the Gardena crash, many Tesla customers continue to misuse the company’s semi-autonomous driving system — a tech package combining lane-holding and autosteer functionality. Last year, the automaker added the function of lane changing. Though the company now stresses that drivers using Autopilot must maintain focus on the road ahead and be prepared to take over at a moment’s notice (the vehicle issues prompts to get hands back on the wheel after a certain amount of time), the mere existence of the system opens the door to misuse.

Other advanced driver-assist systems, like Cadillac’s Super Cruise, utilize a driver-monitoring camera to ensure eyes remain on the road. If the Cadillac driver shows too much inattention, the system (eventually) shuts down until the vehicle is stopped and restarted. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has resisted the use of such a camera.

[Image: Tesla]

#Government #Investigation #NHTSA #Safety #Tesla #TeslaModelS

Comments

Join the conversation

9 of 65 comments

Tstag on Jan 06, 2020

The problem with this type of semi autonomous system is that drivers will switch off when tired, often unknowingly. Unlike piloting a plane there are plenty more obstacles cars can crash into. If you switch off flying a plane the chances of an accident are much lower when on auto pilot. Regulators need to recognise this or face increasing numbers of fatalities from this sort of feature

Like Reply
- See 6 previous
- Vulpine on Jan 06, 2020
  
  There is no evidence that what you say is true. While I agree there have been some crashes with this technology, there is no proof that there are MORE crashes using it and at least some evidence that there are fewer. No system is perfect, but I'm willing to give this system the benefit of the doubt until some hard numbers--verifiable numbers--can be presented.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Jan 06, 2020
  
  @Vulpine Even if there's plenty more "Lives Saved", it doesn't justify or offset the deaths caused. What if a career Fire&Rescue paramedic goes on a murderous killing rampage? Did he somehow build up enough "credits" to go scot-free?
  
  Like
- Vulpine on Jan 06, 2020
  
  @DM: I'm sorry you feel that way. Because there are far more deaths caused by irresponsible drivers than there are caused by automation.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Jan 06, 2020
  
  @Vulpine It's not my "feelings", it's just how things work. Lives saved are nameless and simply stats. Great but you can certainly put faces on victims that didn't have to die, get to know their history, families and whatnot. And then place blame on a company, specific part numbers, boardroom decisions, etc.
  
  Like
- Multicam on Jan 06, 2020
  
  @Vulpine Mike, I gotta agree with Vulpine on this one. Think about it this way: if you take 100 sleep-deprived drivers with zero hours of sleep in a 72-hour period and put them on a highway for six hours at 70 mph with traditional cruise control, a number of them will crash and kill people. Maybe 42/100. Maybe 26/100. Point is, it’s dangerous. Now you put those same 100 people- all other things being equal- in Teslas with autopilot, and fewer should have accidents due to its braking and lane-keeping features. Maybe 12/100, maybe 22/100, who knows. Now substitute sleep-deprived driving (which is horribly dangerous and irresponsible, obviously) with other types of irresponsible driving and you should have the same results. It doesn’t minimize the deaths or the value of those lives lost, it just helps compensate for human stupidity. Now, of course, it could be argued that Tesla’s marketing encourages people to use the technology incorrectly, and that could be correct, sure. But then you aren’t comparing apples to apples. Idiot knows nothing about cars but pays attention while cruise control is activated; doesn’t crash; idiot then gets false impression that Autopilot drives for him; idiot then uses Autopilot with different mindset, doesn’t pay attention, and crashes. Regardless, as has been pointed out a million times, the drivers are still responsible.
  
  Like
- Vulpine on Jan 06, 2020
  
  @Vulpine Yes, DM, it is your "feelings". Why? Because you ignore the thousands of families destroyed by drunken drivers every year--drunken drivers who could benefit from a system that may eventually take them home without incident. You ignore the "speed racers" who treat every highway as their personal racetrack, causing crashes often without ever being involved in said crashes. You ignore the heart attack victims whose car could--and has--driven them to the hospital and saved their lives. You ignore the elderly who need to travel to doctors appointments and other needs and don't always have the skills or the courage to drive on today's roads--my late mother being one of them. Yes, DM, it IS your "feelings" because so far, autonomous systems, even if not fully level 3, 4 or 5 as yet, are still helping to prevent more accidents than they cause.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Jan 07, 2020
  
  @Vulpine Again, I'm only talking about the "misuse" of the technology. Those that "believe" Autopilot is "SELF DRIVING" and "turn it loose" in public. So yeah, how can we separate its "correct use" from the bad, meaning wrongful use, where if provable, a driver can held liable for manslaughter. That's the only question here. Except technology can insure a driver is watching the road ahead, like Cadillac's system. Yes nothing is a 100% "foolproof" at this point or "level 2", but Tesla doesn't seem remotely interested in curbing the misuse of Autopilot. And all the while, Elon is laughing all the way to the bank. At least in theory.
  
  Like
Cprescott on Jan 06, 2020

The only bad thing about a crashed Telsa is that the Tesla owner survives while killing someone else.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Chris P Bacon I had a chance to drive 2 Accords back to back as rentals. The first was a base ICE LX. I was underwhelmed. The next was a Sport Hybrid. Like night and day. So much so that I ventured on to the grounds of my local dealer. Was looking for a Sport or Sport-L. Autotrader showed nothing within 250 miles. Dealer confirmed. Told me I'd have to "get on the list" for a delivery, and there was a non-negotiable $3k "market adjustment". I guess I'll have to hope to see one on the Emerald Aisle again.
DungBeetle62 I just this past weekend rented one of these for 5 days in SoCal and with $5.29 the best I could find for gas, this ride's wonderful combination of comfort and thrift was welcome indeed. My biggest real beef is with the entire Accord product line - with that angle of backlight, not having this as a 5-door hatch seems a real waste of space.
RICHARD I bought my wife the exact car in the picture 3 weeks ago. Acceleration is average for the class. Smoothness of the powertrain, competent ride dynamics, quietness, and comfort are definitely pluses. The styling is restrained for sure, but we weren't looking for a shouty car that doesn't deliver on the design statement. She drives about 8,000 miles per year, mostly around town. At the current rate, we expect to buy about 16 gallons of gas per month. This really is a car that appears to do everything well rather than excelling at a few things to the detriment of others.
Ajla "2010-2019 Borrego"The Borrego only had model years 2009 - 2011 in the United States. The Borrego/Mohave did exist in international markets beyond them but the NHTSA of the United States would not be handling a recall on those. It's annoying that apparently the manufacturer, the federal regulator, and automotive press didn't notice this.
SilverCoupe The last Accord I test drove was in 1978, but I ended up buying a VW Scirocco instead. The Accords have put on quite a bit of weight since, then, but then again, so have I!