Stuck in Reverse? Tesla Abandons Radar, Restricts Features

by Matt Posky

Published: May 27th, 2021

stuck in reverse tesla abandons radar restricts features

Tesla is abandoning radar on its more affordable vehicles so it can deploy something that sounds like a vintage color motion picture process where the hues really manage to jump off the screen.

“ Tesla Vision” is the current process the company will use to collect and interpret the information necessary to operate semi-automated systems on the Model 3 and Model Y. But it feels like a step backward, if we’re being honest, and will result in cars that have “temporarily limited” abilities.

With autonomous systems and advanced driving aids apparently hitting a brick wall in terms of development, their shortcomings have become glaringly apparent. Still, the best systems seem to be the ones with the most versatile sensor arrays and Tesla’s new setup certainly looks more basic on the surface. The manufacturer previously utilized a forward-facing radar that theoretically allowed it better imaging capabilities in conditions where a camera might be lacking (e.g. extremely low-light conditions or estimating distance). Tesla Vision throws that out the window for a solution that only needs to use the eight cameras spread across the vehicle.

From Tesla:

We are continuing the transition to Tesla Vision, our camera-based Autopilot system. Beginning with deliveries in May 2021, Model 3 and Model Y vehicles built for the North American market will no longer be equipped with radar. Instead, these will be the first Tesla vehicles to rely on camera vision and neural net processing to deliver Autopilot, Full-Self Driving and certain active safety features. Customers who ordered before May 2021 and are matched to a car with Tesla Vision will be notified of the change through their Tesla Accounts prior to delivery.

With many of the companies leading the charge toward true vehicular autonomy using cameras, radar, and lidar, it’s surprising to see Tesla trimming down its own hardware — especially when the changes will result in the cars missing out on some features. Autosteer will now be limited to a maximum speed of 75 mph and require a longer minimum following distance. Customers may also find their vehicles shipped without Smart Summon and Emergency Lane Departure Avoidance.

Those are some heavy losses on a vehicle that you probably bought specifically for its technical showpieces. Though the company said these setbacks will only be temporary, it has also promised full self-driving (FSD) for years now and recently took heavy criticism for underdelivering. Tesla plans on restoring features over several weeks, via over-the-air updates. But we wouldn’t assume anything here.

We’re wondering what the reasoning behind this was. While the company has always said it wasn’t interested in lidar, it has been actively pursuing radar technologies for years. Its current system, the ARS4-B from Continental, is also a fairly popular unit that can be found in plenty of vehicles with modest price tags.

Perhaps the required 77-GHz radar chipset has fallen prey to the dreaded semiconductor shortage. Of course, that’s just speculation on the part of your author based partly on these changes only pertaining to the North American market. Tesla certainly hasn’t said that’s the reason and probably wouldn’t want to admit it if there was a slick way to circumvent the problem (cough).

But the thing that’s truly troubling is how the manufacturer is effectively beta testing this new system on its flesh-and-blood customers. All sensors are fallible and having redundancies is never a bad idea. We’ve seen vehicles from all manufacturers act erratically when camera arrays are covered in road grime or assaulted with an overabundance of sunlight. Tesla products are no different and it’s difficult to imagine Tesla Vision is going to help the company make full self-driving a reality by the end of this year. Not that it really matters. The automaker has repeatedly delayed FSD, with the last empty promise targeting May 2021. Elon Musk has since claimed the driving suite will be ready sometime this summer. But you’ll still have to be ready to take over control of the vehicle at a moment’s notice, which kind of defeats the purpose of having it.

[Image: Tesla]

#Ads #AdvancedDrivingAids #Autopilot #Decontenting #ElonMusk #FSD #FullSelf-driving #Model3 #ModelY #Semiconductor #Tesla

Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments

Join the conversation

10 of 31 comments

Islander800 on May 27, 2021

Gee, maybe Sir Elon is feeling the NHTSA breathing down his neck as they're stepping up investigations into his "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Drive" features that have bamboozled his gullible sycophants into believing his machines can actually DRIVE THEMSELVES and are getting killed in the process. Here's a friendly suggestion, Musk - cease and desist from calling your software "Auto Pilot" and "Full Self-Drive" before you get that order from the NHTSA - because they're no such thing and you're a threat to public safety by insisting on referring to them as such.

Like Reply
ToolGuy on May 29, 2021

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Fatality and Injury Reporting System Tool is starting to get some meaningful figures (there is a data lag) for Tesla. https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/query In the U.S., 2018MY sales volumes for Tesla were similar to [slightly higher than] Audi. The customer/driver profile 'should' be somewhat similar. (Don't know miles driven for each brand.) According to NHTSA, the number of 2018MY Tesla vehicles involved in fatal crashes (all calendar years, data through 2019) is 18. The corresponding figure for Audi is 30. [Interestingly (to me), 28% of the Tesla crashes involved a Speeding Vehicle (similar to BMW), but only 3% of the Audi crashes.] Buick and Chrysler also have similar sales volumes for 2018MY. The fatal crash figures for these brands are 19 and 49, respectively. (But you should check my work.)

Like Reply
- See 7 previous
- Scoutdude on May 29, 2021
  
  To me the fact that 28% of the Tesla crashes involved speeding and 3% of Audis says the customer/driver profile is statistically different. On the other hand the fact that only 3% of the Audi involved speeding would seem to indicate that the drivers are "safer", which in theory would result in a lower crash rate.
  
  Like
- Mcs on May 29, 2021
  
  @Scoutdude The FAA has graduated licenses for pilots. Drone pilot, sport pilot etc. Maybe we need something like that for autos. Especially now that we're seeing extremely high horsepower ratings. There are a lot of accidents where the car has way more power than what the driver could handle.
  
  Like
- ToolGuy on May 29, 2021
  
  @mcs The 49 fatal crashes for 2018MY Chrysler vehicles is (potentially) illuminating because it consists of Chrysler 300 and Chrysler Pacifica models [only]. Of the 49, 23 were Chrysler 300 and 26 were Pacifica. [Note that the following data elements are independent (don't add the percentages).] • 65% of the Chrysler 300 fatal crashes were at Nighttime. 54% for Pacifica. • 78% of the Chrysler 300 drivers were Male. 50% for Pacifica. • 22% of the Chrysler 300 fatal crashes were Interstate. 12% for Pacifica. • 17% of the Chrysler 300 fatal crashes Involved Speeding. 8% for Pacifica. • 13% of the Chrysler 300 fatal crashes Involved a Distracted Driver. 19% for Pacifica. • 47% of the Chrysler 300 fatal crashes had a Highest Driver Blood Alcohol Content of greater than zero [43% were .08+ g/dL]. 25% [20% at 0.08 g/dL] for Pacifica.
  
  Like
- Scoutdude on May 29, 2021
  
  @mcs Some states do have a graduated license program for new drivers under 18. For example in my state you can't carry unrelated passengers until you reach 18.
  
  Like
- ToolGuy on May 29, 2021
  
  @Scoutdude Of the 18 2018MY Tesla fatal crashes: • 13 were Model 3; 3 were Model S and 2 were Model X. • All 7 which Involved Speeding were Model 3 (no Speeding Involved with Model S or Model X). • 1 Fire Occurrence (on a Model X). • 2 Model 3 fatal crashes on Interstate; all other fatal crashes were Non-Interstate. • No Distracted Drivers or Drowsy Drivers reported; no fatal crashes Involving a Police Pursuit; no Work Zones. • 3 of the 18 had Highest Driver BAC of 0.08+ g/dL (Model 3). • Of the 18, only 4 Female drivers (3 in Model 3, 1 in Model S, 0 in Model X).
  
  Like
- ToolGuy on May 29, 2021
  
  @ToolGuy Of the 7 2018MY Tesla Model 3 fatal crashes (data through 2019) which Involved Speeding, the driver count is as follows: . 3 Males, in California . 2 Females, also in California . 1 'Florida Man' . 1 Male in Virginia [If I write an angry letter to the California Legislature (on behalf of the employees and shareholders of TSLA) pointing out the obvious inadequacies of current driver training and traffic enforcement programs in the Golden State, will TTAC back me up?]
  
  Like
- ToolGuy on May 29, 2021
  
  @ToolGuy We can focus our anger on these five Counties, to start: Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, San Francisco.
  
  Like
- ToolGuy on May 30, 2021
  
  @ToolGuy Driver ages listed: . California Males: 22, 32, 37 . California Females: 21, 38 . Florida Male: 18 . Virginia Male: 46 [Note that the State refers to where the crash happened, not necessarily where the person resides. Also note that "Involving Speeding" does not necessarily mean that a particular driver was speeding (could be a multi-vehicle accident with another driver speeding).]
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Redapple2 Love the wheels
Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”