Connect with us
Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed

News

Tesla argues human error caused fatal 2019 crash, not Autopilot: report

Credit: Jeremy from Sydney, Australia, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Published

on

Tesla now faces the jury’s verdict in a trial alleging that Autopilot caused a fatality, and the trial is expected to set a precedent for future cases surrounding advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). During closing arguments on Tuesday, an attorney for the plaintiffs pointed to an analysis Tesla conducted two years before the accident, claiming that the automaker knowingly sold the Model 3 with a safety issue related to its steering.

The trial began in California late last month after a 2019 incident in which 37-year-old Micah Lee veered off a highway outside Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour, suddenly striking a palm tree before the vehicle burst into flames. According to court documents, the crash killed Lee and injured both of his passengers, one of whom was an 8-year-old boy.

Lee’s passengers and estate initiated a civil lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that the company knew that Autopilot and its other safety systems were defective when it sold the Model 3.

Tesla has denied any liability in the accident, claiming that Lee had consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel and saying it could not detect if Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash.

This and other trials come as regulatory requirements for ADAS suites are just emerging, and the cases are expected to help navigate future court cases related to accidents with the systems.

Advertisement

According to Reuters, the attorney for the plaintiffs, Jonathan Michaels, showed the jury an internal safety analysis from Tesla in 2017 during closing arguments, in which employees identified “incorrect steering command” as a potential safety issue. Michaels said the issue involved an “excessive” steering wheel angle, arguing that Tesla was aware of related safety problems before selling the Model 3.

“They predicted this was going to happen. They knew about it. They named it,” Michaels said.

Michaels also said that Tesla created a specific protocol to deal with affected customers and that the company instructed workers to avoid accepting liability for the issue. Michaels also echoed prior arguments, saying that Tesla knew it was releasing Autopilot in an experimental state, though it needed to do so to boost market share.

“They had no regard for the loss of life,” Michaels added.

Michael Carey, Tesla’s attorney, said that the 2017 analysis wasn’t meant to identify the defect but instead was meant to help avoid any potential safety issues that could theoretically occur. Carey also said that Tesla developed a system to prevent Autopilot from making the same turn that had caused the crash.

Advertisement

Carey said that the subsequent development of the safety system “is a brick wall standing in the way of plaintiffs’ claim,” adding that there haven’t been any other cases where a Tesla has maneuvered the way that Lee’s did.

Instead, Carey argued to the jury that the crash’s simplest explanation was human error, asking jurors to avoid awarding damages on behalf of the severe injuries encountered by the victims.

“Empathy is a real thing, we’re not saying its not,” Carey argued. “But it does not make cars defective.”

Earlier this month, a federal judge in California ruled in Tesla’s favor in a similar case looking at whether the automaker misled consumers about its Autopilot system’s capabilities. In that case, which had the chance to become a class-action lawsuit, the judge ruled that most of the involved plaintiffs had signed an arbitration clause when purchasing the vehicle, requiring the claims to be settled outside of court.

The cases are expected to set precedents in court for future trials involving Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems and the degree of the automaker’s responsibility in accidents related to their engagement. Tesla is also facing additional information requests from the U.S. Department of Justice related to its Autopilot and FSD beta.

Advertisement

Tesla has received more requests regarding Autopilot and FSD from DOJ

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla teases new market entrance with confusing and cryptic message

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla teased its entrance into a new market with a confusing and what appeared to be cryptic message on the social media platform X.

The company has been teasing its entrance into several markets, including Africa, which would be a first, and South America, where it only operates in Chile.

In September, Tesla started creating active job postings for the Colombian market, hinting it would expand its presence in South America and launch in a new country for the first time in two years.

Tesla job postings seem to show next surprise market entry

The jobs were related to various roles, including Associate Sales Manager, Advisors in Sales and Delivery, and Service Technicians. These are all roles that would indicate Tesla is planning to launch a wide-scale effort to sell, manage, and repair vehicles in the market.

Advertisement

Last night, Tesla posted its latest hint, a cryptic video that seems to show the outline of Colombia, teasing its closer than ever to market entry:

This would be the next expansion into a continent where it does not have much of a presence for Tesla. Currently, there are only two Supercharger locations on the entire continent, and they’re both in Chile.

Tesla will obviously need to expand upon this crucial part of the ownership experience to enable a more confident consumer base in South America as a whole. However, it is not impossible, as many other EV charging infrastructures are available, and home charging is always a suitable option for those who have access to it.

Advertisement

Surprisingly, Tesla seems to be more concerned about these middle-market countries as opposed to the larger markets in South America, but that could be by design.

If Tesla were to launch in Brazil initially, it may not be able to handle the uptick in demand, and infrastructure expansion could be more difficult. Brazil may be on its list in the upcoming years, but not as of right now.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla expands crucial Supercharging feature for easier access

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has expanded a crucial Supercharging feature that helps owners identify stall availability at nearby locations.

Tesla said on Tuesday night that its “Live Availability” feature, which shows EV owners how many stalls are available at a Supercharger station, to Google Maps, a third-party app:

Already offering it in its own vehicles, the Live Availability feature that Teslas have is a helpful feature that helps you choose an appropriate station with plugs that are immediately available.

Advertisement

A number on an icon where the Supercharger is located lets EV drivers know how many stalls are available.

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Essentially, when those drivers needed to charge at a Supercharger that enables non-Tesla EVs to plug in, there was a bit more of a gamble. There was no guarantee that a plug would be available, and with no way to see how many are open, it was a risk.

Tesla adding this feature allows people to have a more convenient and easier-to-use experience if they are in a non-Tesla EV. With the already expansive Supercharger Network being available to so many EV owners, there is more congestion than ever.

This new feature makes the entire experience better for all owners, especially as there is more transparency regarding the availability of plugs at Supercharger stalls.

Advertisement

It will be interesting to see if Tesla is able to expand on this new move, as Apple Maps compatibility is an obvious goal of the company’s in the future, we could imagine. In fact, this is one of the first times an Android Auto feature is available to those owners before it became an option for iOS users.

Apple owners tend to get priority with new features within the Tesla App itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Boring Co goes extra hard in Nashville with first rock-crushing TBM

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

Published

on

Credit: The Boring Company/X

The Boring Company is gearing up to tackle one of its toughest projects yet, a new tunnel system beneath Nashville’s notoriously tough limestone terrain. Unlike the soft-soil conditions of Las Vegas and Austin, the Music City Loop will require a “hard-rock” boring machine capable of drilling through dense, erosion-resistant bedrock. 

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

A boring hard-rock tunneling machine

The Boring Company revealed on X that its new hard-rock TBM can generate up to 4 million pounds of grip force and 1.5 million pounds of maximum thrust load. It also features a 15-filter dust removal system designed to keep operations clean and efficient during excavation even in places where hard rock is present.

Previous Boring Co. projects, including its Loop tunnels in Las Vegas, Austin, and Bastrop, were dug primarily through soft soils. Nashville’s geology, however, poses a different challenge. Boring Company CEO and President Steve Davis mentioned this challenge during the project’s announcement in late July.

“It’s a tough place to tunnel, Nashville. If we were optimizing for the easiest places to tunnel, it would not be here. You have extremely hard rock, like way harder than it should be. It’s an engineering problem that’s fairly easy and straightforward to solve,” Davis said.

Advertisement

Nashville’s limestone terrain

Experts have stated that the city’s subsurface conditions make it one of the more complex tunneling environments in the U.S. The Outer Nashville Basin is composed of cherty Mississippian-age limestone, a strong yet soluble rock that can dissolve over time, creating underground voids and caves, as noted in a report from The Tennessean.

Jakob Walter, the founder and principal engineer of Haushepherd, shared his thoughts on these challenges. “Limestone is generally a stable sedimentary bedrock material with strength parameters that are favorable for tunneling. Limestone is however fairly soluble when compared to other rack materials, and can dissolve over long periods of time when exposed to water. 

“Unexpected encounters with these features while tunneling can result in significant construction delays and potential instability of the excavation. In urban locations, structures at the ground surface should also be constantly monitored with robotic total stations or similar surveying equipment to identify any early signs of movement or distress,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending