Connect with us

News

Fatal 2021 Tesla crash tied to excessive speed, not Autopilot: NTSB

Credit: Reuters/Twitter

Published

on

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) confirmed on Wednesday that its investigation into an April 2021 fatal crash involving a Tesla Model S found no indications that the vehicle was operating on Autopilot at the time of the incident. Instead, the probable cause of the crash was determined to be the driver’s excessive speed, alcohol impairment, and inability to maintain control of the vehicle.

Two men were fatally injured in the accident, which resulted in the ill-fated Tesla Model S bursting into flame. The men were determined to be 69-year-old engineer Everett Talbot and 59-year-old Dr. William Varner. One man was found in the front passenger seat while the other was found in the back seat. 

Following the crash, Harris County Pct. 4 Constable Mark Herman told reporters that investigators were “100% certain” that there was no one in the fill-fated Model S’ driver’s seat when it crashed. This prompted widespread coverage from numerous media outlets, with several immediately declaring the fatal incident as a “driverless” crash. 

“They are 100% certain that no one was in the driver seat driving that vehicle at the time of impact. They are positive… Several of our folks are reconstructionists, but they feel very confident just with the positioning of the bodies after the impact that there was no one driving that vehicle,” Herman told journalists. He later noted that a search warrant had been executed on Tesla to secure data about the tragic incident.

Advertisement

But while the idea of a fatal Tesla Autopilot crash may be compelling, there were immediately some issues with the idea. For one, the absence of lane markings in the area’s streets meant that Autopilot could not have been engaged. Traffic-Aware Cruise Control could only go up to 30 mph in the area as well. For context, the incident involved the Model S accelerating to 67 mph before it crashed.

Other details, such as the allegation that firefighters had to call Tesla for help due to the Model S’ supposed uncontrollable fire, were debunked by the fire chief for The Woodlands Township Fire Department a few days after the incident made international news. 

Needless to say, the findings of the NTSB have revealed that the fatal accident did not involve Autopilot at all. The agency noted that a review of the data from the crash showed “no use of the Autopilot system at any time during this ownership period of the vehicle, including the time frame up to the last transmitted timestamp on April 17, 2021.” 

The agency also noted that the probable cause of the crash was the “driver’s excessive speed and failure to control his car, due to impairment from alcohol intoxication in combination with the effects of two sedating antihistamines, resulting in a roadway departure, tree impact, and post-crash fire.”

The NTSB further noted that “the available evidence suggests that the driver was seated in the driver’s seat at the time of the crash and moved into the rear seat” and that “it was not possible to determine whether the doors were manually operational following the power loss.” These conclusions are in line with footage retrieved from the owner’s home, which showed the driver entering the ill-fated Model S’ front seat before driving away. 

Advertisement

Tesla has not issued a comment about the matter as of writing. Teslarati also conducted a deep dive into the matter in 2021. A link to that report, which includes pertinent background about the incident, can be viewed below.

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Ford is charging for a basic EV feature on the Mustang Mach-E

When ordering a new Ford Mustang Mach-E, you’ll now be hit with an additional fee for one basic EV feature: the frunk.

Published

on

Credit: Ford Motor Company

Ford is charging an additional fee for a basic EV feature on its Mustang Mach-E, its most popular electric vehicle offering.

Ford has shuttered its initial Model e program, but is venturing into a more controlled and refined effort, and it is abandoning the F-150 Lightning in favor of a new pickup that is currently under design, but appears to have some favorable features.

However, ordering a new Mustang Mach-E now comes with an additional fee for one basic EV feature: the frunk.

The frunk is the front trunk, and due to the lack of a large engine in the front of an electric vehicle, OEMs are able to offer additional storage space under the hood. There’s one problem, though, and that is that companies appear to be recognizing that they can remove it for free while offering the function for a fee.

Ford is charging $495 for the frunk.

Interestingly, the frunk size varies by vehicle, but the Mustang Mach-E features a 4.7 to 4.8 cubic-foot-sized frunk, which measures approximately 9 inches deep, 26 inches wide, and 14 inches high.

When the vehicle was first released, Ford marketed the frunk as the ultimate tailgating feature, showing it off as a perfect place to store and serve cold shrimp cocktail.

Ford Mach-E frunk is perfect for chowders and chicken wings, and we’re not even joking

It appears the decision to charge for what is a simple advantage of an EV is not going over well, as even Ford loyal customers say the frunk is a “basic expectation” of an EV. Without it, it seems as if fans feel the company is nickel-and-diming its customers.

It will be pretty interesting to see the Mach-E without a frunk, and while it should not be enough to turn people away from potentially buying the vehicle, it seems the decision to add an additional charge to include one will definitely annoy some customers.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla to improve one of its best features, coding shows

According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.

Published

on

Credit: @jojje167 on X

Tesla is looking to upgrade its Matrix Headlights, a unique and high-tech feature that is available on several of its vehicles. The headlights aim to maximize visibility for Tesla drivers while being considerate of oncoming traffic.

The Matrix Headlights Tesla offers utilize dimming of individual light pixels to ensure that visibility stays high for those behind the wheel, while also being considerate of other cars by decreasing the brightness in areas where other cars are traveling.

Here’s what they look like in action:

As you can see, the Matrix headlight system intentionally dims the area where oncoming cars would be impacted by high beams. This keeps visibility at a maximum for everyone on the road, including those who could be hit with bright lights in their eyes.

There are still a handful of complaints from owners, however, but Tesla appears to be looking to resolve these with the coming updates in a Software Version that is currently labeled 2026.2.xxx. The coding was spotted by X user BERKANT:

According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.

Finally, the new system will prevent the high beams from glaring back at the driver. The system is made to dim when it recognizes oncoming cars, but not necessarily objects that could produce glaring issues back at the driver.

Tesla’s revolutionary Matrix headlights are coming to the U.S.

This upgrade is software-focused, so there will not need to be any physical changes or upgrades made to Tesla vehicles that utilize the Matrix headlights currently.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

xAI’s Grok approved for Pentagon classified systems: report

Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations. 

Published

on

xAI-supercomputer-memphis-environment-pushback
Credit: xAI

Elon Musk’s xAI has signed an agreement with the United States Department of Defense (DoD) to allow Grok to be used in classified military systems.

Previously, Anthropic’s Claude had been the only AI system approved for the most sensitive military work, but a dispute over usage safeguards has reportedly prompted the Pentagon to broaden its options, as noted in a report from Axios.

Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations. 

The publication reported that xAI agreed to the Pentagon’s requirement that its technology be usable for “all lawful purposes,” a standard Anthropic has reportedly resisted due to alleged ethical restrictions tied to mass surveillance and autonomous weapons use.

Advertisement

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to meet with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in what sources expect to be a tense meeting, with the publication hinting that the Pentagon could designate Anthropic a “supply chain risk” if the company does not lift its safeguards. 

Axios stated that replacing Claude fully might be technically challenging even if xAI or other alternative AI systems take its place. That being said, other AI systems are already in use by the DoD. 

Grok already operates in the Pentagon’s unclassified systems alongside Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google is reportedly close to an agreement that will result in Gemini being used for classified use, while OpenAI’s progress toward classified deployment is described as slower but still feasible. 

The publication noted that the Pentagon continues talks with several AI companies as it prepares for potential changes in classified AI sourcing.

Advertisement
Continue Reading