revtothelimit - motorbike forum

Tesla's are supposed to not be self-driving - Tesla's Autopilot 'tricked' to operate without driver

The Autopilot feature in Tesla vehicles can be tricked into operating without a driver, an influential consumer magazine in the US has found.

Consumer Reports engineers looked into claims that Autopilot can operate without a driver present.

They tested the Model Y on a closed track and concluded the system could be "easily tricked".

It comes days after a fatal Tesla crash in Texas. Police believe no one was in the driver's seat.

Tesla's Autopilot is an advanced driver assistance system that Tesla says "enhances safety and convenience behind the wheel".

Original article:

https://www.consumerreports.org/autonom ... vers-seat/

An opportunity to express your views.

I haven't been through it, so have no idea what in particular they want your views on

https://www.research.net/r/endeavourcommunitysurvey

‘Self-driving’ cars to be allowed by the end of the year. Sort of.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56906145

As mentioned earlier:

https://trl.co.uk/projects/eu-general-s ... 20vehicles.

EU General Safety Regulation
TRL's Experience Developing the EU General Safety Regulation and the Pedestrian Safety Regulation
Published on 17 July 2020

includes

In 2019, the European Commission requested TRL to support in the development of secondary type approval legislation for the following vehicle safety measures (GSR5):

Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (light duty, vehicles and pedestrians/cyclists)
Driver Monitoring
Driver Drowsiness and Attention monitoring and Warning (DDAW),
Advanced Distraction Recognition (ADR), and
Driver Readiness Monitoring for Automated Driving (DRMAD)
Event Data Recorder
Emergency Lane Keeping System
Frontal Full-Width Impact
Pedestrian and Cyclist Enlarged Head Impact Zone
Intelligent Speed Assistance
Reversing Safety
Tyre Pressure Monitoring (heavy duty vehicles)
Direct Vision & Pedestrian and Cyclist detection (heavy duty vehicles)

FYI

https://www.sae.org/news/press-room/202 ... automation

With the rapid advancement of driving automation, SAE International, in collaboration with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), announced today an important update to the industry’s most-cited reference for driving automation capabilities: SAE J3016™ Recommended Practice: Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, commonly referenced as the SAE Levels of Driving Automation™. SAE J3016 provides a taxonomy with supporting terms and definitions for SAE’s six levels of driving automation. The SAE Levels range from no driving automation at Level 0 to full driving automation at Level 5, in the context of motor vehicles and their operation on roadways.

This latest update to SAE’s Levels of Driving Automation refines the previous version of the Recommended Practice with the addition of several new terms, substantial refinement and clarification of misinterpreted concepts, and restructuring of certain definitions into more logical groupings. Notable changes to this version of the Recommended Practice include:

Further clarity on the differences between SAE Level 3 and SAE Level 4, including the role of the fallback-ready user, the possibility of some automated fallback at SAE Level 3, and the possibility of some alerts to in-vehicle users at SAE Level 4.

Additional terms and definitions for two distinct remote support functions: remote assistance and remote driving, as well as the users who perform those functions: remote assistant and remote driver.

SAE Level 1 and 2 driving automation systems have been given the name “Driver Support Systems” as a counterpart to the term “Automated Driving Systems” used for SAE Levels 3-5.

Explanation for how classifications of sustained driving automation fit into the broader context of driver assistance and active safety features.

Reasoning for not including warning and momentary driving intervention systems in the classification of the Levels of Driving Automation.

Definitions for vehicle types have been grouped together by Conventional Vehicle, Dual-mode Vehicle and ADS-dedicated Vehicle.

Defining and clarifying the concept of failure mitigation strategy.


“As the development of automated driving technologies continues on a global scale, SAE J3016: Levels of Driving Automation has evolved to align with the developing technologies and deployment strategies. Our collaborative partnership with ISO allowed us to expand and refine the Recommended Practice to better equip international customers with clear, concise and consistent language and definitions,” said Barbara Wendling, chairperson for the SAE J3016 Technical Standards Committee. “Since its launch in 2014, the mobility industry has looked to SAE’s Levels of Driving Automation for citation in official documents where precise language is essential, such as in laws, regulations, guidance documents and standards.”

https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/

All taxonomy content from the 2019 version remains unchanged in this latest version. The new version of the graphic is available here.
https://www.sae.org/binaries/content/as ... 5.3.21.pdf

US agency orders autonomous vehicle makers to report crashes

The United States government’s highway safety agency has ordered automakers to report any crashes involving fully autonomous vehicles or partially automated driver-assist systems.

The move Tuesday by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) indicates the agency is taking a tougher stance on automated vehicle safety than in the past. It has been reluctant to issue any regulations of the new technology for fear of hampering the adoption of the potentially life-saving systems.

The order requires vehicle and equipment manufacturers and companies that operate the vehicles to report crashes on public roads involving fully autonomous vehicles, or those in which driver-assist systems were operating immediately before or during a crash.

Coincidentally, this was on LinkedIn yesterday:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/trl_auto ... 17408-oKV8
TRL’s Head of Automated Transport, Camilla Fowler says that for our vision of driverless future to be real, the UK must lead in developing and implementing a UK safety monitoring and investigation unit to underpin continuous learning and improvement from AV collisions and near misses.

Links to document:
https://bit.ly/3iGTNZV

Including:

"Develop and implement a UK safety monitoring and investigation unit to monitor safety, analyse data, investigate incidents and provide timely feedback and recommended actions. "

https://highways-news.com/drunk-driver- ... autopilot/


Drunk driver “saved” by Tesla autopilot
Sarah Hawkes
by Sarah Hawkes

INTERNATIONAL, SAFETY, TECHNOLOGY
4 . 08 . 2021
A Tesla has pulled itself over to the side of the road and stopped safely after its technology realised its driver was slumped unconsciously over the wheel.

vgtv.no has published the footage, captured on a mobile phone camera in Norway, showing the Model S applying the brakes and cruising to a stop.

The report says the 24-year-old driver was allegedly drunk at the wheel after a night out and fast asleep in the driver’s seat.

It appears the car realised he was unresponsive, so its Autopilot system kept it in lane and away from other vehicles on the road before pulling it to a stop inside a tunnel.

Video:
https://www.vgtv.no/video/222494/kjoere ... vne-paa-e6

Would have been better if it hadn't let him drive away!

The Spin Doctor wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:23 pm Would have been better if it hadn't let him drive away!

Are you suggesting that all cars are fitted with alcolocks as standard, instead of optional?

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... from-2022/

13th Nov 2019

Breathalysers must be able to be fitted into all new cars from 2022 following a landmark decision by the European Council.


(That's as well as:

The mandatory fitment of Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning (DDAW) systems is one of the new safety features mandated by EU Regulation 2019/2144 on "the type approval requirements of motor vehicles and their trailers, and systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, as regards their general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users", more commonly referred to as General Safety Regulation 2 or GSR 2. Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning (DDAW) systems are defined in (EU) 2019/2144 as systems that "assess the driver's alertness though vehicle systems analysis and warn the driver if needed". From July 6, 2022, the fitment of DDAW systems becomes mandatory for all new types of M and N category vehicle (i.e. all passenger carrying and all goods carrying motor vehicles) and, from July 7, 2024, the fitment of such systems will become mandatory for all new vehicles falling into those categories. )

What I mean is that writing up the story that "the drunk driver was able to get into and set the car in motion then fall asleep at the wheel before the car stopped itself" as a 'win' for self-driving technology is disingenuous. Far better that the car never got moving! Whether that is a driver decision or some kind of lock-out is another question, but if drivers believe they can drive drunk and let the car do the work, that's not a good position.

Horse wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:36 pm

The Spin Doctor wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:23 pm Would have been better if it hadn't let him drive away!

Are you suggesting that all cars are fitted with alcolocks as standard, instead of optional?

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... from-2022/

13th Nov 2019

Breathalysers must be able to be fitted into all new cars from 2022 following a landmark decision by the European Council.


(That's as well as:

The mandatory fitment of Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning (DDAW) systems is one of the new safety features mandated by EU Regulation 2019/2144 on "the type approval requirements of motor vehicles and their trailers, and systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, as regards their general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users", more commonly referred to as General Safety Regulation 2 or GSR 2. Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning (DDAW) systems are defined in (EU) 2019/2144 as systems that "assess the driver's alertness though vehicle systems analysis and warn the driver if needed". From July 6, 2022, the fitment of DDAW systems becomes mandatory for all new types of M and N category vehicle (i.e. all passenger carrying and all goods carrying motor vehicles) and, from July 7, 2024, the fitment of such systems will become mandatory for all new vehicles falling into those categories. )

That sounds expensive, I wonder how much Tesla spent lobbying for it.

The Spin Doctor wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:51 pm What I mean is that writing up the story that "the drunk driver was able to get into and set the car in motion then fall asleep at the wheel before the car stopped itself" as a 'win' for self-driving technology is disingenuous. Far better that the car never got moving!

Really?

Alcolock technology has been around for decades and drivers have been climbing into (and on to) vehicles while under the influence for far longer. Their vehicles probably won't have taken any preventative action, so why are you so affronted that the Tesla didn't?

Horse wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 8:37 pm

The Spin Doctor wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:51 pm What I mean is that writing up the story that "the drunk driver was able to get into and set the car in motion then fall asleep at the wheel before the car stopped itself" as a 'win' for self-driving technology is disingenuous. Far better that the car never got moving!

Really?

Alcolock technology has been around for decades and drivers have been climbing into (and on to) vehicles while under the influence for far longer. Their vehicles probably won't have taken any preventative action, so why are you so affronted that the Tesla didn't?

Will you stop misrepresenting what I said?

I am not 'affronted' - that's YOUR interpretation.

What I said was that spending billions to develop a system then justify it as a 'good thing' because it brings a drunk driver safely to a stop is disingenuous. That means - dictionary definition - "slightly dishonest, or not speaking the complete truth". A genuinely safer system would be to have stopped the driver ever moving off.

But the standard vehicle couldn't have done either...

The Spin Doctor wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:44 pm
Will you stop misrepresenting what I said?

I am not 'affronted' - that's YOUR interpretation.

Apologies for misunderstanding; 'transmit receive error'?

But

The Spin Doctor wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:44 pm What I said was that spending billions to develop a system then justify it as a 'good thing' because it brings a drunk driver safely to a stop is disingenuous.

Read the article again. The 'claim' - and let's be clear, it's the publisher's, not Tesla's - is that it stopped because it identified that the driver was not in control, nothing directly to do with the reason for that. As I've posted recently, that technology (in some form) will be in the EU regs in the future.

FWIW

Newly introduced federal legislation in the Senate would require all new passenger vehicles to have passive alcohol-detection systems by 2024.

There has to be a 'first' for all safety innovations to be standard fitment. Seatbelts, ABS ESC etc, 'pedestrian friendly' wiper mountings ... Standards develop, EuroNcap 5* is harder to achieve now than when first introduced.

So what do you think cars should have that they don't have now now and isn't on the cards?

The Spin Doctor wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:44 pm A genuinely safer system ...

... Would probably struggle to include bikes. Isn't this a 'be careful of what you wish for' moment?

Horse wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:17 pm The 'claim' - and let's be clear, it's the publisher's, not Tesla's

ICBA to search but I'd lay good odds that the publisher got it direct from a press release. Press 'stories' are rarely investigative when it's something like this, they are nearly all regurgitated press releases, often transcribed word-for-word. I see enough of them when I'm researching stories for Elevenses.

Horse wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:17 pm So what do you think cars should have that they don't have now now and isn't on the cards?

Drivers that take responsibility for their actions / decisions.

MrLongbeard wrote: Fri Aug 06, 2021 2:37 pm

Horse wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:17 pm So what do you think cars should have that they don't have now now and isn't on the cards?

Drivers that take responsibility for their actions / decisions.

OK, I'll bite and take you seriously.

What needs to be done differently, that hasn't been tried already (and presumably, as you're suggesting it, what has been tried hasn't worked)?