# Detroit truck crash



## bwilson4web

On March 11 at ~3:20 AM, a Tesla drove into a trailer in Detroit. I can't identify the model. News reports are two people were seriously injured. The NHTSA is sending a team of investigators.

UPDATE:





They report the Tesla driver ran a red light. Although nagging, I drive with 'traffic aware' enabled for this very reason.

Bob Wilson


----------



## garsh

Yet another life-threatening injury that could have been prevented by better safety standards for trailers.

https://drivetribe.com/p/underride-...pxQsT72Qlj1kGHEpVA?iid=DDm4H1RoQOits6qNl6Em0Q


----------



## Garlan Garner

I think Elon is looking to stay clear of the possibility of these types of articles - These people don't care about what level of autonomy this is. They just want to shut Tesla and its autopilot down IMO.

What other manufacturer gets this kind of investigation over a single accident?

The NHTSA said on Monday it is "aware of the violent crash that occurred on March 11 in Detroit involving a Tesla and a tractor trailer. We have launched a *Special Crash Investigation (SCI) team *to investigate the crash."

Why send a *Special Crash Investigation (SCI) team ? *Other vehicles crash into semi's every day.


----------



## JasonF

I've said this before - Americans are technophobic, and we have regulatory agencies whose motto is "how can we make sure this never happens again?"

Unfortunately the answer to both of those is ban the scary rogue machine behavior (Autopilot) until it meets an arbitrary standard of compliance that represents human control. Possibly requiring eye tracking, but if even that's too scary, requiring much more frequent or continuous driver input.

The bad part for us though is if NHTSA decides to ban Autopilot from U.S. roads until Tesla recalls all its cars and physically modify them with a specific prescribed device, they might simply abandon the entire Autopilot concept and put all of their bets on FSD for the future.


----------



## Garlan Garner

JasonF said:


> I've said this before - Americans are technophobic, and we have regulatory agencies whose motto is "how can we make sure this never happens again?"
> 
> Unfortunately the answer to both of those is ban the scary rogue machine behavior (Autopilot) until it meets an arbitrary standard of compliance that represents human control. Possibly requiring eye tracking, but if even that's too scary, requiring much more frequent or continuous driver input.
> 
> The bad part for us though is if NHTSA decides to ban Autopilot from U.S. roads until Tesla recalls all its cars and physically modify them with a specific prescribed device, they might simply abandon the entire Autopilot concept and put all of their bets on FSD for the future.


I agree with you concerning "technophobic".

However I hope they are also looking to find out how they can make sure that happens less with all cars. 
I hope they are also looking to find out - when it does happen - how can we make sure people don't get hurt as much.


----------



## JasonF

Garlan Garner said:


> However I hope they are also looking to find out how they can make sure that happens less with all cars.
> I hope they are also looking to find out - when it does happen - how can we make sure people don't get hurt as much.


I also don't think they will ban Autopilot and attach restrictions to it - for the far less altruistic reason that General Motors contributes a ton of lobbying and research money to the American regulatory agencies, and their Supercruise would suffer, too.

But that also means the regulators might either intentionally or unintentionally hold up Supercruise as the gold standard, and require all such autosteer applications to have the same features: Only allowed on specific, pre-mapped controlled highways in decent weather, and there must be eye tracking to make sure the driver is looking at the road at all times, _plus_ occasional driver input via the steering wheel.


----------



## bwilson4web

Is the traffic light aware feature in AutoPilot or just the FSD owners?

Bob Wilson


----------



## JasonF

bwilson4web said:


> Is the traffic light aware feature in AutoPilot or just the FSD owners?


My Autopilot doesn't see traffic lights or stop signs, so I would have to guess it's either an FSD feature or requires HW3.


----------



## Johnm6875

JasonF said:


> My Autopilot doesn't see traffic lights or stop signs, so I would have to guess it's either an FSD feature or requires HW3.


Looks like a Model Y, so HW3.


----------



## Klaus-rf

I don't see any info to indicate the car was on AP or even TACC. 

And where are the "Tesla Fire" barkers?? Oh, right. No fire. My bad.


----------



## Needsdecaf

garsh said:


> Yet another life-threatening injury that could have been prevented by better safety standards for trailers.
> 
> https://drivetribe.com/p/underride-...pxQsT72Qlj1kGHEpVA?iid=DDm4H1RoQOits6qNl6Em0Q


To be fair, not hitting the truck in the first place would have been more ideal...


----------



## garsh

Needsdecaf said:


> To be fair, not hitting the truck in the first place would have been more ideal...


Of course. But fixing trailer designs means that all cars are prevented from underriding the trailer. Unfortunately, it's not possible to fix stupid.


----------



## shareef777

bwilson4web said:


> On March 11 at ~3:20 AM, a Tesla drove into a trailer in Detroit. I can't identify the model. News reports are two people were seriously injured. The NHTSA is sending a team of investigators.
> 
> UPDATE:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They report the Tesla driver ran a red light. Although nagging, I drive with 'traffic aware' enabled for this very reason.
> 
> Bob Wilson


 Looks like a Y. I can't fathom how ANYONE inside that vehicle survived. Is it Autopilot's fault? Sure, to a degree, but that's no different then the multitude of deaths attributable to social media, various medicines, power tools, etc.

When not used as instructed ANYTHING can become deadly.


----------



## iChris93

shareef777 said:


> Is it Autopilot's fault? Sure, to a degree,


Is there anything saying it was in use? Do you blame AP even if it wasn't in use?


----------



## lance.bailey

what I am wondering is emergency braking/collision avoidance. is that not a thing? i get some pretty harsh braking when the car thinks I am going to drive into something (parked cars on a curved side street anyone?) perhaps the braking was not enough and the warnings did not garner any response by the driver.

or maybe - and this is just supposition - since trucks are mostly air underneath, would the sensors react better with underride rails?


----------



## garsh

lance.bailey said:


> what I am wondering is emergency braking/collision avoidance. is that not a thing?


Yes, but most AEB systems do not work reliably for detecting stationary objects. And that's because they rely on radar, and radar can't tell the difference between a car, a coke can, and an overhead sign. Therefore they only reliably detect vehicles when those vehicles are in motion with respect to the rest of the surroundings.


----------



## lance.bailey

good point - Volvo explicitly states that detection of vehicles that have a great difference in speed is not reliable (i paraphrase).


----------



## shareef777

iChris93 said:


> Is there anything saying it was in use? Do you blame AP even if it wasn't in use?


I don't, but I'm sure regulators do. They'd blame complacency and all the benefits of Tesla's.


----------



## Garlan Garner

The instructions of FSD beta clearly state that a person should be paying attention.


If this person was paying attention.....then he wanted to hit the truck. I certainly hope not, but probable.


----------



## iChris93

Garlan Garner said:


> The instructions of FSD beta clearly state that a person should be paying attention.
> 
> If this person was paying attention.....then he wanted to hit the truck. Sad, but probable.


Where does it say FSD beta was in use?


----------



## JWardell

People are missing the point.
Autopilot or not it doesn't matter.
Collision avoidance should have avoided the accident, or reduced it to a minimal speed, whether or not autopilot was engaged.
But Teslas have a notorious history of not noticing white trailers crossing their path.
Now the radars in Teslas and nearly all cars are programmed to ignore stationary objects detected at highway speeds, so they are not a nuisance braking for signs and bridges, so that could be the case here. And sometimes the white trailer is similar in contrast to the sky in the background so the cameras don't pick up the object either.
But no matter the case it's still the driver's fault for not paying attention.


----------



## Garlan Garner

JWardell said:


> People are missing the point.
> *Autopilot or not it doesn't matter.*
> Collision avoidance should have avoided the accident, *or reduced it to a minimal speed*, whether or not autopilot was engaged.
> But Teslas have a notorious history of not noticing white trailers crossing their path.
> Now the radars in Teslas and nearly all cars are programmed to ignore stationary objects detected at highway speeds, so they are not a nuisance braking for signs and bridges, so that could be the case here. And sometimes the white trailer is similar in contrast to the sky in the background so the cameras don't pick up the object either.
> But no matter the case it's still the driver's fault for not paying attention.


I understand your premise, however Autopilot matters concerning "perception". Lawmakers live on perception. If they perceive something to be the case.....then that's what it is. They don't spend time on any one thing. I don't want them to have a knee-jerk reaction and do something to FSD.

Maybe Collision avoidance "did" reduce the speed - but not fast enough.

How far can the radar see in a Model y? 6 car lengths?

What is the vantage point distance of the front cameras?


----------



## M3OC Rules

JWardell said:


> People are missing the point.
> Autopilot or not it doesn't matter.
> Collision avoidance should have avoided the accident, or reduced it to a minimal speed, whether or not autopilot was engaged.
> But Teslas have a notorious history of not noticing white trailers crossing their path.
> Now the radars in Teslas and nearly all cars are programmed to ignore stationary objects detected at highway speeds, so they are not a nuisance braking for signs and bridges, so that could be the case here. And sometimes the white trailer is similar in contrast to the sky in the background so the cameras don't pick up the object either.
> But no matter the case it's still the driver's fault for not paying attention.


I thought after the sky background issue they switched to using the radar. Now it sounds like they may be getting rid of the radar with the next version of FSD Beta which sort of implies they are still using the radar now.


----------



## garsh

M3OC Rules said:


> I thought after the sky background issue they switched to using the radar.


AEB has always relied on radar.

Back when they used mobileye hardware, Tesla started augmenting the radar-based AEB system with vision as well. When Josh Brown hit a trailer sideways, the radar failed because the trailer wasn't detected as being in motion, and the cameras failed because the color of the trailer was too similar to the sky.

I'm pretty sure Tesla is using a similar approach (radar + camera) for AEB in newer cars, and I'm guessing the same failure mode happened here. A better neural network for detecting trailers would benefit greatly.


----------



## bwilson4web

This has me puzzled. My understanding is there was (is?) a complete re-write? 

Is the current approach based on pattern matching to identify objects and make a 3-dimensional model? 

Identification of a semi-trailer seems not that hard of a problem.

Bob Wilson


----------



## Garlan Garner

garsh said:


> AEB has always relied on radar.
> 
> Back when they used mobileye hardware, Tesla started augmenting the radar-based AEB system with vision as well. When Josh Brown hit a trailer sideways, the radar failed because the trailer wasn't detected as being in motion, and the cameras failed because the color of the trailer was too similar to the sky.
> 
> I'm pretty sure Tesla is using a similar approach (radar + camera) for AEB in newer cars, and I'm guessing the same failure mode happened here. A better neural network for detecting trailers would benefit greatly.


Just wondering......

At 60mph - a car travels 88ft every second.

Tesla camera can see 820 feet. Tesla radar can see 524 feet.

Camera can see = 9 seconds ahead, Radar can see = 6 seconds ahead.

It takes about 5 seconds to stop a Tesla - according to Tesla.

Leaves 4 seconds for camera to act. Leaves 1 second for radar to act.

I realize that's a lifetime for Teslas' computers....but....

I wonder if AEB isn't failing and is actually working, but isn't determining what to do fast enough.

I wonder if there are skid marks on the ground from AEB....and where do they start - if so.....


----------



## garsh

Garlan Garner said:


> I wonder if AEB isn't failing and is actually working, but isn't determining what to do fast enough.


I think the NN currently isn't very good at recognizing trailers crossing a road under certain lighting and sky conditions.
Once it determines that there is an obstacle, it can react within thousands of a second.


----------



## mrau

Another crash this morning in Michigan. Involves a parked state police car. Driver said he was on Autopilot. The 22 year old driver had a suspended license. Looks like driver error.

Luckily no injuries.

https://www.wlns.com/news/tesla-on-autopilot-crashes-into-state-police-patrol-car-in-lansing/


----------



## Garlan Garner

garsh said:


> I think the NN currently isn't very good at recognizing trailers crossing a road under certain lighting and sky conditions.
> Once it determines that there is an obstacle, it can react within thousands of a second.


If radar is controlling this.....it sounds like a simple thing.

Something ahead of me is standing still.....I'm moving....I should stop. What the object is - is immaterial.

or am I thinking too simplistically?


----------



## Garlan Garner

mrau said:


> Another crash this morning in Michigan. Involves a parked state police car. Driver said he was on Autopilot. The 22 year old driver had a suspended license. Looks like driver error.
> 
> Luckily no injuries.
> 
> https://www.wlns.com/news/tesla-on-autopilot-crashes-into-state-police-patrol-car-in-lansing/
> View attachment 37578
> 
> 
> View attachment 37579


LOL....most people driving with suspended licenses try to blame something/someone else.

Glad no one is hurt.


----------



## Needsdecaf

Exactly one year ago today, to the day, almost to the hour, my car, while on autopilot, ran over a large piece of metal debris in the middle of the highway. It was dark, I was on following distance 2, and moving in heavy traffic around 60 MPH. The object was short enough that the lifted pickup truck in front of me cleared it, but tall enough to impact my car (and at least 4 others). 

The car never made a move. No reaction before impact. No auto brake, no steering, nothing. It just plowed straight over it. 

To be clear, I am NOT blaming the car. I was actually driving as told, both hands on the wheel, and eyes up and forward. As soon as I saw the object, I knew I was doomed to hit it, as I was in the left lane with a concrete barrier just to my left. There was a car to my right and also one directly behind. I had nowhere to go. I really only had enough time to process the above and say "Sh!t". 

My point in that is that no safety system is faultless.


----------



## Needsdecaf

Garlan Garner said:


> If radar is controlling this.....it sounds like a simple thing.
> 
> Something ahead of me is standing still.....I'm moving....I should stop. What the object is - is immaterial.
> 
> or am I thinking too simplistically?


So your car should stop for bridge abutments, overhead signs, signals on the road? Those are all non-moving radar returns (and more) your car sees "in it's path" while driving.


----------



## garsh

Garlan Garner said:


> Something ahead of me is standing still.....I'm moving....I should stop. What the object is - is immaterial.
> 
> or am I thinking too simplistically?





Needsdecaf said:


> So your car should stop for bridge abutments, overhead signs, signals on the road? Those are all non-moving radar returns (and more) your car sees "in it's path" while driving.


Exactly. Radar can't distinguish between a coke can and a car in front of you.
You don't want your car to slam on the brakes for every coke can sitting on the road.
Also, the radar system that Tesla currently uses can't distinguish vertical location - it knows something is in front of you, but can't tell if it's above you, below you, or directly in front.

This is why EVERY car company that has implemented AEB includes a big disclaimer that:

It is only meant to reduce crash severity, not avoid crashes altogether, and
It will not prevent collisions with "slow moving" objects.
Tesla is _trying_ to do better than these other systems by also using visual data, but they still have a lot of work to do to make it foolproof.


----------



## Garlan Garner

Needsdecaf said:


> So your car should stop for bridge abutments, overhead signs, signals on the road? Those are all non-moving radar returns (and more) your car sees "in it's path" while driving.


Your Tesla should stop at anything in front of you ( 4 feet or lower ) that it will hit. The car should measure the size ( not a coke can - not big enough ) and stop. That's what Cadillac does. Should it work with every object....no. It shouldn't be blamed for running into a spear pointed directly at it.....but another car or anything larger - without question.

Just like every other car manufacturer does. AEB is old tech and works well.

Works well = not perfect.


----------



## garsh

Garlan Garner said:


> Your Tesla should stop at anything in front of you that it will hit.


Of course!


> The car should measure the size ( not a coke can - not big enough ) and stop.


Radar can't measure size.
Have you ever wondered why a "stealth plane" is reported to look like "a small bird" to radar? 🐦


> Just like every other car manufacturer does.


Please show me a manufacturer that states that their AEB system will stop for stationary objects.
Every one I've investigated in the past has the same disclaimer due to radar's limitations.


----------



## Garlan Garner

garsh said:


> Of course!
> Radar can't measure size.
> Please show me a manufacturer that states that their AEB system will stop for stationary objects.
> Every one I've investigated in the past has the same disclaimer due to radar's limitations.


Radar signature works. It works well and is cheap. It measures the size of things on the signal return.

That's what my DJI FPV drone uses to determine where to land and where to not land. That's also what my drone uses to self steer around objects as small as a light pole. I can land my drone 2 miles away from me.
Sure.....a drone isn't a car, but I'm only saying that Radar signature works and can at a small cheap price.

Disclaimers are out there about everything these days. IMO disclaimers are easy- free insurance in court cases.

I'm not trying to get off topic, but DJI ( my drone manufacturer) put out a disclaimer on the first page of instructions that "This drone's functions may not operate like a drone and are not designed so, so use at your own risk.". LOL.


----------



## lance.bailey

Garlan Garner said:


> ...
> If this person was paying attention.....then he wanted to hit the truck. I certainly hope not, but probable.


that is a pretty big "if" leading to an even bigger conclusion, and an implication (to me at least) of a suicide attempt.

There are so many reasons why the person was not or could not be paying attention - kids in the back, fighting with spouse, adjusting tune-in (again), getting into a song (once tune-in is working), medical emergency, dropped a cigarette, looking for [sun]glasses, .... i think that the driver not paying attention when they hit a semi is much more likely than the driver was paying attention.

and if they were paying attention, they may not have wanted to hit the truck

- watch my Tesla autobrake and avoid the collision (this will be so cool)
- let's scare our dates a little (even cooler than testing collision avoidance)
- that's a mighty high truck, think we can fit underneath? (sorry, that movie was a work of fiction)
- he'll move out of the way (i've seen this excuse with car/train impacts)
and the classic for all dumb-*ss moves:
- hold my beer ...

attributing an intention of deliberately ramming a semi as probable discounts the ever present probability of just plain stupid.

If this person was paying attention.


----------



## Garlan Garner

lance.bailey said:


> that is a pretty big "if" leading to an even bigger conclusion, and an implication (to me at least) of a suicide attempt.
> 
> There are so many reasons why the person was not or could not be paying attention - kids in the back, fighting with spouse, adjusting tune-in (again), getting into a song (once tune-in is working), medical emergency, dropped a cigarette, looking for [sun]glasses, .... i think that the driver not paying attention when they hit a semi is much more likely than the driver was paying attention.
> 
> and if they were paying attention, they may not have wanted to hit the truck
> 
> - watch my Tesla autobrake and avoid the collision (this will be so cool)
> - let's scare our dates a little (even cooler than testing collision avoidance)
> - that's a mighty high truck, think we can fit underneath? (sorry, that movie was a work of fiction)
> - he'll move out of the way (i've seen this excuse with car/train impacts)
> and the classic for all dumb-*ss moves:
> - hold my beer ...
> 
> attributing an intention of deliberately ramming a semi as probable discounts the ever present probability of just plain stupid.
> 
> If this person was paying attention.


Didn't want to discuss the "IF".

Looks like we don't have to.

Tesla Model Y crash in Detroit likely caused by reckless driving, not Autopilot: police (teslarati.com)


----------



## garsh

Garlan Garner said:


> Radar signature works. It works well and is cheap. It measures the size of things on the signal return.


It does not measure size well at all. Again, stealth technology takes advantage of this fact.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/upgrading-autopilot-seeing-world-radar
"A discarded soda can on the road, with its concave bottom facing towards you can appear to be a large and dangerous obstacle"


----------



## Needsdecaf

Garlan Garner said:


> Tesla Model Y crash in Detroit likely caused by reckless driving, not Autopilot: police (teslarati.com)


What's with this? Two crashes in as many days with a driver having a suspended license?

_The Wayne County Prosecutor's office has announced that charges are being filed against the Tesla driver, 22-year-old Jean Paul Guerrero. Guerrero is being charged with reckless driving causing serious injury, a felony, and *driving with a suspended license*, a misdemeanor.

All the indications that we have at this point are that the vehicle was not in Autopilot mode, that the driver was in control of the vehicle at the time of the crash," LeValley said._

LOL, an unfortunate turn of phrase. I would gather the driver was not at all in control of the vehicle at the time of the crash. Unless he meant to decapitate himself and his passenger.


----------



## bwilson4web

I'm loath to add this: https://www.mycentraljersey.com/sto...ick-nj-crash-with-tractor-trailer/7054371002/

_Mon, March 29, 2021, 9:24 PM_​_(Reuters) - The U.S. auto safety agency said on Monday that it will collect information about an accident in which a Tesla vehicle crashed into a tractor-trailer in New Jersey._​​_The Tesla driver, a 44-year-old, said he had his cruise control on "when he momentarily lost focus on the roadway" and drove his car under the trailer on Monday morning, according to a statement from the South Brunswick Township Police Department._​​_"The impact was so severe it shredded the roof off the passenger's side of the vehicle."_​​_The Tesla was destroyed in the crash, but the driver received minor injuries._​









Bob Wilson


----------



## jsmay311

bwilson4web said:


> I'm loath to add this: https://www.mycentraljersey.com/sto...ick-nj-crash-with-tractor-trailer/7054371002/
> 
> _Mon, March 29, 2021, 9:24 PM_​_(Reuters) - The U.S. auto safety agency said on Monday that it will collect information about an accident in which a Tesla vehicle crashed into a tractor-trailer in New Jersey._​​_The Tesla driver, a 44-year-old, said he had his cruise control on "when he momentarily lost focus on the roadway" and drove his car under the trailer on Monday morning, according to a statement from the South Brunswick Township Police Department._​​_"The impact was so severe it shredded the roof off the passenger's side of the vehicle."_​​_The Tesla was destroyed in the crash, but the driver received minor injuries._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Wilson


Lucky guy.

Truck was broken down on the shoulder and the driver drifted out of the lane, so no Autopilot involvement.

"_The driver told Kim he had his cruise control on when he momentarily lost focus on the roadway and his vehicle drifted onto the shoulder where it struck a 2005 Freightliner tractor-trailer which was broken down, police said._"

I wonder if the TACC slowed the car down before the collision.


----------



## iChris93

jsmay311 said:


> I wonder if the TACC slowed the car down before the collision.


Depending on the model year, it could just be dumb cruise control.


----------



## lance.bailey

i have line crossing alerts turned on my model 3. when I go through the counterflow lanes on the George Massey tunnel it upsets the car to no end. If i tap the turn signal before "crossing the line" it confuses the drivers behind me to no end.

just can't win


----------



## JasonF

lance.bailey said:


> i have line crossing alerts turned on my model 3. when I go through the counterflow lanes on the George Massey tunnel it upsets the car to no end. If i tap the turn signal before "crossing the line" it confuses the drivers behind me to no end.
> 
> just can't win


There's one driveway I enter occasionally that's slightly downhill, and is new enough that the white roadside stripe crosses it (the driveway is newer than the road). Every time I turn into it, the car thinks I'm going off the road, and applies emergency steering.


----------



## shareef777

JasonF said:


> There's one driveway I enter occasionally that's slightly downhill, and is new enough that the white roadside stripe crosses it (the driveway is newer than the road). Every time I turn into it, the car thinks I'm going off the road, and applies emergency steering.


I have a regular driveway, no markings, and minimal slope (maybe 1 or 2% incline). Backing up my brothers 2021 RAM truck into it, even at slow speeds (1-2mph), it ALWAYS applies the emergency brakes really hard with absolutely nothing behind me. I still don't get what it's thinking/seeing.


----------



## iChris93

JasonF said:


> There's one driveway I enter occasionally that's slightly downhill, and is new enough that the white roadside stripe crosses it (the driveway is newer than the road). Every time I turn into it, the car thinks I'm going off the road, and applies emergency steering.


I remember when they introduced this emergency steering and there was a fork in the road and it tried to swerve me the wrong way. Quickly turned off that "feature" and haven't turned it back on.


----------



## JasonF

shareef777 said:


> I have a regular driveway, no markings, and minimal slope (maybe 1 or 2% incline). Backing up my brothers 2021 RAM truck into it, even at slow speeds (1-2mph), it ALWAYS applies the emergency brakes really hard with absolutely nothing behind me. I still don't get what it's thinking/seeing.


Reminds me of a Top Gear where Jeremy Clarkson had his SUV lock the brakes because he drove into a parking space with shrubs in front of it too quickly. Then he tried to demonstrate it for James May, and crashed into his SUV instead. Or was it minivans? I forget which. If you want a second reference for it, it's the same one where James May kept driving off in the wrong vehicle because they "all look alike".


----------



## Garlan Garner

lance.bailey said:


> i have line crossing alerts turned on my model 3. when I go through the counterflow lanes on the George Massey tunnel it upsets the car to no end. If i tap the turn signal before "crossing the line" it confuses the drivers behind me to no end.
> 
> just can't win


FSD doesn't work in a tunnel?


JasonF said:


> There's one driveway I enter occasionally that's slightly downhill, and is new enough that the white roadside stripe crosses it (the driveway is newer than the road). Every time I turn into it, the car thinks I'm going off the road, and applies emergency steering.


FSD doesn't work in a driveway?



iChris93 said:


> I remember when they introduced this emergency steering and there was a fork in the road and it tried to swerve me the wrong way. Quickly turned off that "feature" and haven't turned it back on.


Was that FSD?

_________

Wait - what feature were you all using? That's a better question. I shouldn't have assumed you were using FSD as people assumed in the Detroit crash.


----------



## iChris93

Garlan Garner said:


> Was that FSD?


I think it's called lane departure avoidance.


----------



## lance.bailey

the massey tunnel counterflow lanes, not the tunnel itself.


----------



## JasonF

Garlan Garner said:


> FSD doesn't work in a driveway?


I don't have FSD, that's just the emergency lane departure steering.


----------



## jsmay311

iChris93 said:


> Depending on the model year, it could just be dumb cruise control.


It was a 2020.


----------

