Connect with us
tesla autopilot tesla autopilot

News

How Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving fared during a 6,400-mile drive

Credit: Tesla

Published

on

A Tesla owner recently critiqued the performance of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving after the conclusion of a 6,400-mile trip across the United States. According to the driver, more than 99 percent of the trip was driven utilizing Tesla’s semi-autonomous driving functions, with the critiques showing the automaker’s strengths and weaknesses in terms of how both Autopilot and FSD can affect a drive of this substantial distance.

Tim Heckman took his Model S Plaid equipped with FSD Beta and Tesla Vision on the 6,392-mile trip from Los Angeles to Reading, Pennsylvania,  and back, recording most of the (currently unreleased) footage on a GoPro mounted inside the vehicle. There were undoubtedly positives but also negatives, as Heckman describes the utilization of Autopilot and FSD on a trip of this length as an advantage in the “personal cost” of driving this many miles in a matter of two weeks.

But where Tesla’s systems helped, it hurt elsewhere. Heckman describes frustration with the company’s recent transition to a camera-only approach, known as Tesla Vision, the suite’s lack of consistency outside of California, and where the company might have spent its focus over the past few years during the development.

Advertisement
-

No Radar, No Problem?

As Heckman took the drive in a Model S Plaid with camera-based Tesla Vision, the lack of radar was the first point of emphasis. Autopilot was more accurate and less stressful in a previous Tesla that equipped both cameras and radar for operation, Heckman said. “The removal of radar on the highway was a huge mistake,” he said in a Tweet. “Tesla Vision very often misidentified vehicles in front as being much closer than they are, trigging strong phantom braking. Sometimes losing 20mph of speed before I can react, which is a huge safety concern.”

During some points of the drive, the vehicle would recognize cars and adjust speeds that were not actually there. Additionally, Tesla Vision’s performance in low-visibility conditions like rain and fog was not ideal. Past iterations of the suites proved more effective, in Heckman’s opinion.

The automaker rolled out Tesla Vision in early 2021 in the Model 3 and Model Y, and the Model S and Model X received the update in 2022. When Tesla announced it would transition to a camera-only system, CEO Elon Musk explained that radar had helped solve the shortfalls that cameras couldn’t solve. However, it was never in the plan to rely on both radar and cameras.

“And when your vision works, it works better than the best human because it’s like having eight cameras, it’s like having eyes in the back of your head, beside[s] your head and has three eyes of different focal distances looking forward. This is — and processing it at a speed that is superhuman. There’s no question in my mind that with a pure vision solution, we can make a car that is dramatically safer than the average person,” Musk said during the Q1 2021 Earnings Call.

Speed Limit Changes

Another huge problem Heckman described was a slow decrease in speed after the reduction of speed limits in an area. This occurred on streets and not on the highway, but still raised some concern. Heckman noted it took “many seconds” to reach the legal speed when limits decreased by as much as 20 MPH.

Were Autopilot and FSD beneficial during this trip?

Yes.

“I love long road trips, and Autopilot makes them easier,” Heckman said. Despite the issues, it was still a pleasant experience and something he hopes to do again on his next trek from LA to PA.

Advertisement
-

Heckman said he believes the lack of progress and improvements when speaking in terms of highway performance may be related to Tesla’s focus on solving self-driving on city streets.

“As a result of changing focus, Autopilot experience is worse than when we got our Model 3 in summer 2019,” he said.

Fun Fact: Tim told me his two longest days of driving were from Fort Worth, TX, to Burbank, CA, equating to roughly 1,404 miles, and from Burbank, CA, to Amarillo, TX, for 1,079 miles.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

News

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading