Autopilot probe key to future of ADAS

WASHINGTON — On a Monday morning in January 2018, a Tesla Model S on Autopilot struck the rear of a fire truck parked diagonally on a freeway in Culver City, Calif.

The fire truck, which was responding to an earlier collision, had its emergency lights on when the 2014 model-year electric car crashed into it.

The incident is now one of 11 Tesla crashes involving Autopilot and first-responder scenes being investigated by NHTSA. The formal safety probe covers an estimated 765,000 Teslas from the 2014 to 2021 model years. Most of the crashes occurred after dark and in total resulted in 17 injuries and one death.

Safety experts say the new investigation could be a turning point for holding Tesla accountable if the agency suspects a defect with its advanced driver-assistance system. Longer term, the experts say, data gathered from the Autopilot probe and the agency's crash-report mandate issued in June could spell action by U.S. auto safety regulators to address driver-assist technology and effective driver monitoring more broadly.

"This isn't just relevant for Tesla," David Zipper, a visiting fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, told Automotive News. "Every automaker has looked at what Tesla is doing and wondered if they'll get away with it and also worried about whether bad behavior by Tesla could end up casting a pall over ADAS and autonomous vehicles in general."

NHTSA's order requiring automakers to report crashes involving vehicles equipped with automated-driving technology and its subsequent investigation come as several automakers are deploying more advanced driver-assist technologies on vehicles sold in the U.S.

Toyota's luxury brand Lexus, for example, is debuting its first advanced driver-assistance system known as Teammate this year on certain 2022 LS 500h all-wheel-drive sedans. Some of the technology's automated features are restricted to limited-access highways.

"Tesla doesn't do that," said Sam Abuelsamid, a principal analyst at Guidehouse Insights. "You can activate Autopilot anywhere."

General Motors' Super Cruise, Ford's BlueCruise and Nissan's second-generation ProPilot Assist — all marketed as "hands-free" systems — utilize camera-based driver-monitoring systems that ensure the driver is actively watching the road. The systems, too, are limited in where they can be activated, Abuelsamid said.

"That is going to inherently reduce the likelihood of getting into a scenario where the driver is not paying attention, whereas the Tesla system and some of these other systems don't use the driver monitoring like that," he explained. "They just use a torque sensor in the steering wheel," which isn't as reliable.

In response to the Tesla investigation, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation pointed to the "forceful and public statement" released by major U.S. automakers in April on the importance of effective driver monitoring for Level 2 automated-driving systems when both lane-centering and adaptive cruise control are simultaneously engaged.

"It is critical that consumers learn and understand the benefits — and limitations — of these features to build and improve confidence in these proven safety technologies," John Bozzella, CEO of the alliance, said in a statement. "High-profile crashes hurt consumer acceptance and confidence in vehicles with this technology and will also impact gaining consumer acceptance and trust of higher levels of automation."

The group — which said it supports providing driver monitoring as a standard feature on vehicles equipped with Level 2 systems — represents major U.S. automakers such as GM, Ford and Toyota, as well as some suppliers and tech companies that are working on automated-driving technology.

Tesla is not a member of the alliance. The automaker did not respond to multiple requests from Automotive News for comment. Nor did CEO Elon Musk comment on the probe during the automaker's AI Day last week at its headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif. Musk said only that he was confident of achieving full self-driving with higher safety than humans using current in-car cameras and computers. At the event, Tesla also unveiled chips it designed in-house for its high-speed computer, Dojo, to help develop its automated-driving system. Musk said Dojo would be operational next year.

David Friedman, a former acting administrator at NHTSA who is now vice president of advocacy at Consumer Reports, said the agency's probe is an important step for driver monitoring — a voluntary precaution he hopes NHTSA will require by law.

"People aren't very good at watching paint dry," he said. "If they think that's their only job, they're likely to check out, and it is Tesla's responsibility to ensure they don't."

NHTSA has come under scrutiny by safety advocates for failing to ensure the safety of systems such as Autopilot despite recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board to develop standards for driver-monitoring systems and other safeguards such as limiting where driver-assist technology can be activated.

In the Culver City crash, which did not result in any injuries or deaths, federal investigators at the NTSB determined the probable cause was three-pronged: the Tesla driver's lack of response because of inattention or overreliance on the driver-assist technology, Autopilot's design allowing the driver to disengage and the driver's use of the system in ways inconsistent with manufacturer guidance.
"Prevention is the first way to tackle this," said David Harkey, president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "If you're monitoring the driver, then you do not give them the opportunity to easily disengage from the driving task."

As the technology improves, he said, a challenge for automakers is finding the "sweet spot" between developing systems that help with the driving task while preventing drivers from becoming completely disengaged. At the least, guidance from NHTSA on performance specifications could steer decision-making at the design stage of driver-assist technology, he said.

"We know there are more of these systems coming from all the automakers," Harkey said. "I think [NHTSA] sees a need to step into this and perhaps play a larger role in terms of providing this guidance or moving toward regulation."

Regulation could ensure all companies are producing vehicles with systems that meet the same standards, said Friedman. In the interim, he said, the agency will determine whether there is a defect at play and could hold Tesla accountable for fixing the affected vehicles through a recall and, potentially, a fine.

"We know that car companies can place these limits," he said. "The question is, will they? And if they don't, is that a defect?"

Reuters contributed to this report.