Connect with us
tesla autopilot tesla autopilot

News

NHTSA: Tesla accounts for almost 70% of Level 2 driver-assist crashes in the US, but don’t draw conclusions yet

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

Federal figures released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on Wednesday revealed that Tesla vehicles accounted for almost 70% of reported crashes involving Level 2 driver-assist systems in the United States since June 2021. However, NHTSA officials have warned that no conclusions about the systems’ safety should be drawn just yet. 

The NHTSA noted that the data — which is the first of its kind — does not have proper context yet. It does not take into account the number of vehicles with Level 2 driver-assist systems that automakers have made, the number of cars on the road, or the distance traveled by the vehicles. It is thus only meant to be a guide to identify possible defect trends and help determine if advanced driver-assist systems are actually improving vehicle safety. 

NHTSA Administrator Steven Cliff shared his thoughts on the data during a media event. “I would advise caution before attempting to draw conclusions based only on the data that we’re releasing. In fact, the data alone may raise more questions than they answer,” Cliff said.

As per the NHTSA’s report, a total of 392 crashes were reported by 11 automakers and one supplier from June 2021 to May 15, 2022. Among this number, Tesla vehicles accounted for 273 accidents. Honda was a distant second with 90 reported accidents, while Subaru had 10. Ford reported five accidents, Toyota reported four, and BMW reported three. General Motors reported two accidents

Advertisement

Level 2 driver-assist systems are typically able to control vehicle functions such as steering, lane-centering, braking, and acceleration. Areas where the systems could be enabled vary among manufacturers. GM, for example, allows its Super Cruise system to be used only on pre-mapped US highways, but Tesla allows its Autopilot system to be used on more roads. 

Overall, the NHTSA’s data revealed that crashes involving driver-assist systems have resulted in at least six fatalities and five serious injuries. For context, the NHTSA has estimated that 42,915 people were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes in the United States in 2021. 

While Tesla leads the pack in accidents involving Level 2 driver-assist systems, the company also deploys the largest fleet of vehicles that offer driver-assist technologies. According to the Associated Press, Tesla has more vehicles with partially automated systems operating on American roads than other automakers, with an estimated fleet of 830,000 vehicles. 

In comparison, GM has reportedly sold just about 34,000 vehicles with Super Cruise since 2017. With this in mind, it is then unsurprising to see that there are more reported accidents involving Tesla Autopilot compared to other Level 2 systems from other carmakers. 

Advertisement

The NHTSA’s report 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

Elon Musk

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

Published

on

Ministério Das Comunicações, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.

In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.

Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.

The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.

The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.

SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access

Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”

To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.

Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.

Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.

These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.

Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.

Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.

Suddenly, that price tag was justified.

Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:

“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.

A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.

A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.

As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”

Advertisement



This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.

This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.

Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”

It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.

To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

NASA taps SpaceX to launch the telescope that could unlock new worlds

NASA’s Roman Space Telescope heads to orbit this August aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with massive scientific ambitions.

Published

on

By

SpaceX is set to play a central role in one of NASA’s most anticipated science missions in years. The company’s Falcon Heavy rocket, currently the most powerful operational launch vehicle in the world, will carry the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope into orbit on August 30 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Roman is now in final preparations inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility, where on June 26 technicians used a crane to lift the observatory into a specialized stand for fueling and pre-launch testing.

Roman is named after Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first chief of astronomy, whose career helped shape how the agency approaches space science.

NASA chose SpaceX Falcon Heavy because of Roman’s needs to reach a specific orbit far from Earth, well beyond where a standard Falcon 9 can deliver it. The Falcon Heavy, which first flew in 2018, has since become NASA’s go-to option for missions that need serious muscle without the cost and complexity of older launch systems.

Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)

Roman will carry a field of view at least 100 times wider than the Hubble Space Telescope, meaning it can photograph enormous swaths of the universe in a single shot rather than the narrow slices Hubble captures. That difference in scale is significant. While Hubble reshaped our understanding of the cosmos over 30 years, Roman is built to work faster and wider, surveying hundreds of millions of galaxies at once.

One of Roman’s most compelling capabilities is its potential to discover and photograph planets orbiting stars outside our solar system, and with enough precision to directly image planets that would otherwise be lost. That means scientists could study the atmosphere and surface characteristics of distant worlds rather than simply confirming they exist. Combined with Roman’s sweeping field of view, the telescope could detect thousands of exoplanets, and some of those planets may be in habitable zones where liquid water could exist. No telescope currently in operation has this level of power and capability. That capability alone could change what we know about other worlds, and perhaps finally answer the question: are we the only intelligent lifeforms in existence? 

What Roman actually finds once it reaches orbit is an open question, and that is exactly what makes this launch worth watching.

Continue Reading