Connect with us

News

Tesla Supercharger-blocking Ford Mustang gets towed after driver flips off Model 3 owner

Credit: Twitter/@dollarn9ne

Published

on

The owners of two Ford vehicles who parked their vehicles in Tesla Superchargers have been taught a valuable lesson: if one were to intentionally block a charging station while other EV owners are waiting to recharge their cars’ batteries, police may be involved. And when police get involved, inconveniences are very likely to happen.

Tesla Model 3 and Model X owner @dollarn9ne shared the incident on Twitter. After arriving at a Supercharger in Walnut Creek, California, he noticed that two Ford cars, a Mustang and a Focus, were parked in spaces that were specifically reserved for Tesla vehicles. The EV owner opted to ask the owner of the Mustang by telling him that the space he was parked at was reserved for Teslas. But instead of acknowledging his mistake and moving his vehicle, the Mustang driver reportedly gave the Model 3 owner a clear middle finger salute instead.

https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208524235519381504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1208524235519381504&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.xautoworld.com%2Fnews%2Fmustang-focus-towed-ice-ing%2F

It was at this moment that the Model 3 owner decided that it’s best to call the authorities, especially since intentionally blocking an EV charging stations can give drivers a citation. Police eventually arrived after @dollarn9ne’s call, and promptly towed both the Mustang and the Focus away. Both drivers were also given a ticket, requiring them to pay the cost of the tow. A citation for knowingly blocking an electric car charging stall was added for good measure.

Some Twitter users familiar with the Walnut Creek Supercharger stated that the spaces were “Tesla Preferred” but could be used by anyone. However, the Model 3 owner explained that the side where he was parked was “Parking for All, but Charging Preferred,” while the two Ford vehicles were in spaces that were allotted only for EVs that are charging. This was why he only called the police on the Ford vehicles, despite there being a Lexus parked beside him.

https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208578467475808262?s=20

The practice known as ICE-ing, or the intentional blocking of an electric car charging stall by an ICE vehicles, is unfortunately common. That being said, some ICE owners who willingly engage in this act do receive a good dose of justice from time to time. A Ford pickup truck in Berlin, Germany was recently towed for doing the same thing. After a mass ICE-ing event during a Yorktown, New York “Cars & Coffee” meet made the rounds online, the organizers of the group also mobilized immediately to prevent such incidents from happening again in the future.

ICE-ing is an issue that can be confronted and taken care of by local authorities. Unfortunately, there have been past instances where physical damage and acts of vandalism are performed on electric vehicles and Supercharger plugs. Thanks to Tesla’s Sentry Mode, many of these perpetrators have been caught and been forced to be held accountable.

Advertisement
-
https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208584845800034304?s=20

Other practices, like “Coal Roll” type attacks have been performed upon owners of electric vehicles as well. Recently, a Model 3 Performance owner in Miami, Florida was subjected to this attack while driving to work in the morning on the busy I-95 interstate.

The powerful movement of electric cars is notable, especially considering the variety of attacks the vehicles and their owners seem to experience. In reality, these attacks are vicious and lead to inconvenience for everyone. There is an etiquette when it comes to charging and it includes being courteous to those who drive vehicles that differ from yours. It would not be advantageous for the owner of an electric car to park at a gas pump just to inconvenience someone. In conclusion, acts like this end poorly for those who choose to knowingly be ugly to owners of electric cars.

H/T to Iqtidar Ali

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