Connect with us

News

Tesla says Autopilot was engaged during Model X fatal crash

Published

on

Tesla recently released an update confirming that Autopilot was activated on the ill-fated Model X when the SUV crashed into a concrete barrier last Friday near Mountain View, CA.

According to the company’s update, the Model X’s Autopilot was engaged with the car’s adaptive cruise control set to minimum in the moments leading up to the crash. Tesla also noted that the Model X’s driver received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier on in the drive. The driver’s hands were not detected on the steering wheel for 6 seconds before the accident occurred as well.

Ultimately, Tesla stated that the driver of the ill-fated Model X had about five seconds and 150 meters of unobstructed view of the concrete divider before the accident took place. Logs from the electric SUV, however, revealed that no action from the driver was taken.

Tesla also highlighted that the absence of a crash attenuator — a highway safety device designed to absorb the impact of a collision — was a key reason why the fatal Model X crash was so severe. Tesla noted that it has “never seen this level of damage to a Model X in any other crash.”

As we noted in a previous report, the crash attenuator, better known as a crash cushion, was destroyed in a vehicular accident 11 days before the fatal Model X crash. This is in line with an image that Tesla provided on its first blog post about the incident, when the company showed a picture of the damaged crash cushion a day before the Model X’s collision. 

Local news agency ABC7 News was able to get in touch with the driver of the vehicle that collided with the crash cushion 11 days before the Tesla accident. According to the news agency, the previous crash involved James Barboza, who was driving a 2010 Toyota Prius at 70 mph. Barboza walked away from the crash with lacerations on his face and complaints of pain all over his body. The Toyota Prius driver was eventually arrested for driving under the influence.

In a statement to ABC7, Steven Lawrence — a lawyer who specializes in highway safety — stated that the crash cushion, which could have saved the Model X driver’s life, should have been repaired long before the accident. According to Lawrence, 11 days is far too long to fix a crash cushion, especially in areas where the Model X accident took place.

“Some states have as short as a 3-day repair time for high traffic locations. And if you look at the material in California, this thing should have been repaired within a week. Again, there are a lot of questions about what happened and what went wrong, but it should have been repaired in under 11 days.” Lawrence said.

CalTrans issued a statement to the local news agency on Thursday, addressing the delay in its repair of the road safety device. While CalTrans admitted that the crash cushion should have been repaired within 7 days after the 2010 Prius collided with the crash attenuator, the agency noted that storms in the area delayed the repair.

“Once our Maintenance team has been notified, the Department’s goal is to repair or replace damaged guardrail or crash attenuators within 7 days or 5 business days, depending on weather. These are guidelines that our Maintenance staff follow.

Advertisement

“However, as in this case, storms can delay the fix. In this incident, as soon as maintenance was aware of the damaged attenuator, efforts were made to place cones or safety barricades at the site, and the replacement work was scheduled.”

As noted in a previous report, the Tesla Model X has a 5-star safety rating from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), due to its safety features such as its 12-airbag system and its huge crumple zone. Roughly 85,000 successful Autopilot trips have been done by Tesla owners in the same stretch of road as the ill-fated Model X since the driver-assist feature was introduced in 2015, with around 200 trips being conducted every day.

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

Swedish unions consider police report over Tesla Megapack Supercharger

The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Charging/X

Swedish labor unions are considering whether to file a police report related to a newly opened Tesla Megapack Supercharger near Stockholm, citing questions about how electricity is supplied to the site. The matter has also been referred to Sweden’s energy regulator.

Tesla Megapack Supercharger

The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm. Unlike traditional charging stations, the site is powered by an on-site Megapack battery rather than a direct grid connection. Typical grid connections for Tesla charging sites in Sweden have seen challenges for nearly two years due to union blockades.

Swedish labor union IF Metall has submitted a report to the Energy Market Inspectorate, asking the authority to assess whether electricity supplied to the battery system meets regulatory requirements, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). The Tesla Megapack on the site is charged using electricity supplied by a local company, though the specific provider has not been publicly identified.

Peter Lydell, an ombudsman at IF Metall, issued a comment about the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. “The legislation states that only companies that engage in electricity trading may supply electricity to other parties. You may not supply electricity without a permit, then you are engaging in illegal electricity trading. That is why we have reported this… This is about a company that helps Tesla circumvent the conflict measures that exist. It is clear that it is troublesome and it can also have consequences,” Lydell said.

Police report under consideration

The Swedish Electricians’ Association has also examined the Tesla Megapack Supercharger and documented its power setup. As per materials submitted to the Energy Market Inspectorate, electrical cables were reportedly routed from a property located approximately 500 meters from the charging site.

Tomas Jansson, ombudsman and deputy head of negotiations at the Swedish Electricians’ Association, stated that the union was assessing whether to file a police report related to the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. He also confirmed that the electricians’ union was coordinating with IF Metall about the matter. “We have a close collaboration with IF Metall, and we are currently investigating this. We support IF Metall in their fight for fair conditions at Tesla,” Jansson said.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla HW4.5 spotted in new Model Y, triggers speculation

Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45.”

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s Hardware 4.5 computer appears to have surfaced in newly delivered Model Y vehicles, prompting fresh speculation about an interim upgrade ahead of the company’s upcoming AI5 chip.

Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45,” suggesting Tesla may have quietly started rolling out revised autonomy hardware.

Hardware 4.5 appears in new Model Y units

The potential Hardware 4.5 sighting was first reported by Model Y owner @Eric5un, who shared details of a Fremont-built 2026 Model Y AWD Premium delivered this January. As per the Model Y owner, the vehicle includes a new front camera housing and a 16-inch center display, along with an Autopilot computer labeled “AP45” and part number 2261336-02-A.

The Tesla owner later explained that he confirmed the part number by briefly pulling down the upper carpet liner below the Model Y’s glovebox. Other owners soon reported similar findings. One Model Y Performance owner noted that their December build also appeared to include Hardware 4.5, while another owner of an Austin-built Model Y Performance reported spotting the same “AP45” hardware.

These sightings suggest that Tesla may already be installing revised FSD computers in its new Model Y batches, despite the company not yet making any formal announcements about Hardware 4.5.

What Hardware 4.5 could represent

Clues about Hardware 4.5 have surfaced previously in Tesla’s Electronic Parts Catalog. As reported by NotATeslaApp, the catalog has listed a component described as “CAR COMPUTER – LEFT HAND DRIVE – PROVISIONED – HARDWARE 4.5.” The component, which features the part number 2261336-S2-A, is priced at $2,300.00.

Longtime Tesla hacker @greentheonly has noted that Tesla software has contained references to a possible three-SoC architecture for some time. Previous generations of Tesla’s FSD computer, including Hardware 3 and Hardware 4, use a dual-SoC design for redundancy. A three-SoC layout could allow for higher inference throughput and improved fault tolerance.

Such an architecture could also serve as a bridge to AI5, Tesla’s next-generation autonomy chip expected to enter production later in 2026. As Tesla’s neural networks grow larger and more computationally demanding, Hardware 4.5 may provide additional headroom for vehicles built before AI5 becomes widely available.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Grokipedia is getting cited by OpenAI’s ChatGPT

Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia.

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia developed by rival xAI, which was founded by Elon Musk. The citations appeared across a limited set of queries.

Reports about the matter were initially reported by The Guardian

Grokipedia references in ChatGPT

Grokipedia launched in October as part of xAI’s effort to build an alternative to Wikipedia, which has become less centrist over the years. Unlike Wikipedia, which is moderated and edited by humans, Grokipedia is purely AI-powered, allowing it to approach topics with as little bias as possible, at least in theory. This model has also allowed Grokipedia to grow its article base quickly, with recent reports indicating that it has created over 6 million articles, more than 80% of English Wikipedia. 

The Guardian reported that ChatGPT cited Grokipedia nine times across responses to more than a dozen user questions during its tests. As per the publication, the Grokipedia citations did not appear when ChatGPT was asked about high-profile or widely documented topics. Instead, Grokipedia was referenced in responses to more obscure historical or biographical claims. The pattern suggested selective use rather than broad reliance on the source, at least for now.

Broader Grokipedia use

The Guardian also noted that Grokipedia citations were not exclusive to ChatGPT. Anthropic’s AI assistant Claude reportedly showed similar references to Grokipedia in some responses, highlighting a broader issue around how large language models identify and weigh publicly available information.

In a statement to The Guardian, an OpenAI spokesperson stated that ChatGPT “aims to draw from a broad range of publicly available sources and viewpoints.” “We apply safety filters to reduce the risk of surfacing links associated with high-severity harms, and ChatGPT clearly shows which sources informed a response through citations,” the spokesperson stated.

Anthropic, for its part, did not respond to a request for comment on the matter. As for xAI, the artificial intelligence startup simply responded with a short comment that stated, “Legacy media lies.”

Continue Reading