NHTSA Investigating Another Tesla Crash

by Steph Willems

Published: January 3rd, 2020

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

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

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

Alan Well, it will take 30 years to fix Nissan up after the Renault Alliance reduced Nissan to a paltry mess.I think Nissan will eventually improve.
Alan This will be overpriced for what it offers.I think the "Western" auto manufacturers rip off the consumer with the Thai and Chinese made vehicles.A Chinese made Model 3 in Australia is over $70k AUD(for 1995 $45k USD) which is far more expensive than a similar Chinesium EV of equal or better quality and loaded with goodies.Chinese pickups are $20k to $30k cheaper than Thai built pickups from Ford and the Japanese brands. Who's ripping who off?
Alan Years ago Jack Baruth held a "competition" for a piece from the B&B on the oddest pickup story (or something like that). I think 5 people were awarded the prizes.I never received mine, something about being in Australia. If TTAC is global how do you offer prizes to those overseas or are we omitted on the sly from competing?In the end I lost significant respect for Baruth.
Alan My view is there are good vehicles from most manufacturers that are worth looking at second hand.I can tell you I don't recommend anything from the Chrysler/Jeep/Fiat/etc gene pool. Toyotas are overly expensive second hand for what they offer, but they seem to be reliable enough.I have a friend who swears by secondhand Subarus and so far he seems to not have had too many issue.As Lou stated many utes, pickups and real SUVs (4x4) seem quite good.
28-Cars-Later So is there some kind of undiagnosed disease where every rando thinks their POS is actually valuable?83K miles Ok.new valve cover gasket.Eh, it happens with age. spark plugsOkay, we probably had to be kewl and put in aftermarket iridium plugs, because EVO.new catalytic converterUh, yeah that's bad at 80Kish. Auto tranny failing. From the ad: the SST fails in one of the following ways:Clutch slip has turned into; multiple codes being thrown, shifting a gear or 2 in manual mode (2-3 or 2-4), and limp mode.Codes include: P2733 P2809 P183D P1871Ok that's really bad. So between this and the cat it suggests to me someone jacked up the car real good hooning it, because EVO, and since its not a Toyota it doesn't respond well to hard abuse over time.$20,000, what? Pesos? Zimbabwe Dollars?Try $2,000 USD pal. You're fracked dude, park it in da hood and leave the keys in it.BONUS: Comment in the ad: GLWS but I highly doubt you get any action on this car what so ever at that price with the SST on its way out. That trans can be $10k + to repair.