Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/will-tesla-become-the-automation-leader-if-not-already.21850/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Will Tesla become the automation leader if not already?

Arthur Hanson

Well-known member
With Tesla mastering the automation of driving and improving it constantly and running highly automated factories and communication systems will not Tesla be the leader in the automation of everything? What other companies can be leaders in applying automation to handle the numerous tasks of the real world? Is there any company that has more experience in automation than Tesla?
 
Teslas strength is having more real world data than anyone else for automated driving. But I wouldn't equate that to "automating everything".

Tesla (and SpaceX) are attracting top talent, even more than some oldies like Lockheed Martin but they do lack actual execution experience in automating ... For others outside of Tesla. Arguably there are some tech or IT contracting large companies that would have more experience here.
 
Teslas strength is having more real world data than anyone else for automated driving. But I wouldn't equate that to "automating everything".

Tesla (and SpaceX) are attracting top talent, even more than some oldies like Lockheed Martin but they do lack actual execution experience in automating ... For others outside of Tesla. Arguably there are some tech or IT contracting large companies that would have more experience here.
Agree.

Tesla's weakness is in mass production and product support ..... all things that people expect in a very expensive automobile.

Also, they tend to put VERY expensive computing onboard the vehicle (compared to traditional OEM's). Their software ecosystem is top notch though. Traditional OEM's could definitely learn something here IMO.

Still, Waymo is cleaning up in autonomous taxis while Tesla remains honor bound to pull off full autonomy with "camera's only" because (and I quote) "people can do it, so can Tesla".

I always chuckle and respond "A person can have a baby in 9 months ......" ;).

Waymo, on the other hand, has embraced LIDAR sensors and has a silly high success rate.

This isn't the end of the story however. The best tech doesn't always win the day. Anyone that remembers Sony Betamax surely knows this. Tesla could still win out for reasons other than statistical data. We will see.
 
Also, they tend to put VERY expensive computing onboard the vehicle (compared to traditional OEM's). Their software ecosystem is top notch though. Traditional OEM's could definitely learn something here IMO.
Agree with the rest of your comments; but just a note here. Tesla does have a LOT more compute onboard than legacy automakers, but per Munro Associates teardowns the cost is a wash or even cheaper due to the level of integration compared to what's typical in the industry.

The legacy automaker dependencies on hundreds of OEMs tends to spread the electronics everywhere and that also means duplication in engineering, etc.

FWIW - VW has invested in Rivian to gain access to their infotainment, so they may be the first to "learn" here.

(The Chinese automakers are more like Tesla than the old car companies in these regards too. Much more vertical integration).

P.S. Support on the car side is definitely an opportunity with Tesla but with 40% as many parts as a combustion vehicle there's a lot less to go wrong or maintain. I've had good experiences personally - they came to my house to do the work at no charge for warranty stuff. No slimey dealer salesmen is a big plus. Tesla consumer solar support is terrible though.
 
Agree with the rest of your comments; but just a note here. Tesla does have a LOT more compute onboard than legacy automakers, but per Munro Associates teardowns the cost is a wash or even cheaper due to the level of integration compared to what's typical in the industry.

The legacy automaker dependencies on hundreds of OEMs tends to spread the electronics everywhere and that also means duplication in engineering, etc.

FWIW - VW has invested in Rivian to gain access to their infotainment, so they may be the first to "learn" here.

(The Chinese automakers are more like Tesla than the old car companies in these regards too. Much more vertical integration).

P.S. Support on the car side is definitely an opportunity with Tesla but with 40% as many parts as a combustion vehicle there's a lot less to go wrong or maintain. I've had good experiences personally - they came to my house to do the work at no charge for warranty stuff. No slimey dealer salesmen is a big plus. Tesla consumer solar support is terrible though.
For years, the tide as moved back and fourth between the end-all-be-all single processing center and many small processing centers model in OEM vehicle architecture.

Remember, these ECU's are JUST computing, they have specialized I/O, signal conditioning, and communications layers. Having all that hardware just sitting around in units that DON'T have the feature is very expensive. Additionally, putting all the compute in the instrument panel creates long runs of wires to reach the physical sensors and actuators (and power). All this copper costs money as well (as do all the connectors).

I only point this out because those studies you point to often neglect to mention these points and instead focus only on the ECU costs alone .... which is misleading.

Electric vehicles in general have FAR fewer parts than ICE vehicles. It is inevitable that they will become less expensive, and more robust than ICE vehicles. It is only a matter of time.

I think that EV makers that have decided that all the knowledge that ICE OEM's learned over the last 100 or so years should just be thrown out because EV's are all new ...... will soon find themselves utilizing many of those old "outdated" processes as they re-learn why things were done that way in the first place.

Tesla's Megacasting as an example. Yes, it simplifies manufacturing, but it drastically increases repair costs and by extension, insurance cost.

Speaking of insurance, many people believe that the biggest barrier to full autonomy is a technical one. I believe it is a financial architecture issue. Question: Who is liable when a fully autonomous vehicle gets in an accident? How can an insurance company representing an individual insure a vehicle vs an individual's driving record?

These questions will be much more difficult to handle IMO than the technical issues (which aren't to be considered small by any stretch either).
 
Speaking of insurance, many people believe that the biggest barrier to full autonomy is a technical one. I believe it is a financial architecture issue. Question: Who is liable when a fully autonomous vehicle gets in an accident? How can an insurance company representing an individual insure a vehicle vs an individual's driving record?

These questions will be much more difficult to handle IMO than the technical issues (which aren't to be considered small by any stretch either).
I agree that the liability issues are significant, but they could be solved today with nothing more than human legislation decisions. The technical problems for autonomous vehicles interacting with human drivers who frequently disregard or consciously break traffic laws is a far tougher problem IMO. For example, high speed red light running has become a significant problem where I live, and catastrophic accidents result often. (I'm not exaggerating. Just several days ago I saw a sedan with its entire front end missing, below the windshield. I wondered how much energy it would take to blow apart a car like that?) I've seen the results of these catastrophic collisions on roads near my home twice so far this year, and multiple times last year. It is very concerning. I'm told by friends they're seeing similar increases in other metro areas.

I wonder how Tesla's FSD would react to a car on-coming to a red light at 70mph while the Tesla is executing a left turn on a green arrow through the intersection? Good human drivers exercise a lot of caution, looking for these lunatics. Dense cities seem like an easier problem, with their lower speeds and fewer opportunities for high-speed driving. I suspect suburban areas with multi-lane divided surface streets will be tough for sensors and software to keep people safe, and the real safety challenge.
 
For years, the tide as moved back and fourth between the end-all-be-all single processing center and many small processing centers model in OEM vehicle architecture.

Remember, these ECU's are JUST computing, they have specialized I/O, signal conditioning, and communications layers. Having all that hardware just sitting around in units that DON'T have the feature is very expensive. Additionally, putting all the compute in the instrument panel creates long runs of wires to reach the physical sensors and actuators (and power). All this copper costs money as well (as do all the connectors).

I only point this out because those studies you point to often neglect to mention these points and instead focus only on the ECU costs alone .... which is misleading.

Electric vehicles in general have FAR fewer parts than ICE vehicles. It is inevitable that they will become less expensive, and more robust than ICE vehicles. It is only a matter of time.

I think that EV makers that have decided that all the knowledge that ICE OEM's learned over the last 100 or so years should just be thrown out because EV's are all new ...... will soon find themselves utilizing many of those old "outdated" processes as they re-learn why things were done that way in the first place.

Tesla's Megacasting as an example. Yes, it simplifies manufacturing, but it drastically increases repair costs and by extension, insurance cost.

Speaking of insurance, many people believe that the biggest barrier to full autonomy is a technical one. I believe it is a financial architecture issue. Question: Who is liable when a fully autonomous vehicle gets in an accident? How can an insurance company representing an individual insure a vehicle vs an individual's driving record?

These questions will be much more difficult to handle IMO than the technical issues (which aren't to be considered small by any stretch either).
Glass half full - The centralized electronics is it makes it a lot easier to switch to a 48V architecture (less wiring thickness), and switch to busses that also greatly reducing wiring. (See the teardowns from Munro). That's really hard to do when everything is distributed across 100 devices each with unique requirements specs. (Tesla goes a step further with not having 100 buttons in each car). This savings doesn't even consider the additional testing and validation costs required for the +complexity in the legacy automaker model. I think it's a bit easier to automate testing for more deeply designs.

The casting piece is interesting. I think the last car produced that was actually cheap to repair was the Ford Crown Victoria, but everything has abandoned full frame steel construction. Yes the mega/gigacasting takes the 'unibody' step even further, but there are still external panels and internal bumpers that don't always mean catastrophic damage. The gigacast probably makes modeling for safety easier too. (The Teslas are the highest rated cars by NHTSA for safety - partially due to not having a motor and transmission that folds into occupants, but also due to the cast design).

Do enough cars get into accidents beyond the exterior panels that the TCO increase for an accident outweighs the cost savings in the production of the vehicles?

Completely agree the insurance around self driving is going to be complex. I can only imagine the lawyers salavating at their fees here :). I'm guessing Waymo right now is shouldering 100% of the risk (robotaxi), in cases for the Teslas (and other cars) with FSD, it's still on the owner right now.

Good discussion btw.
 
I wonder how Tesla's FSD would react to a car on-coming to a red light at 70mph while the Tesla is executing a left turn on a green arrow through the intersection? Good human drivers exercise a lot of caution, looking for these lunatics. Dense cities seem like an easier problem, with their lower speeds and fewer opportunities for high-speed driving. I suspect suburban areas with multi-lane divided surface streets will be tough for sensors and software to keep people safe, and the real safety challenge.
From what I've seen there are a few videos showing it seeing things 'peripherally' that are really hard to predict with human eyes. However, those videos are cherry picked, and there are fail videos as well. I agree suburban and rural tests are harder for FSD.

I'm a sample size of one, but there was at least once my model 3 definitely saved me from rear ending someone else on a highway where everyone stopped without warning, and I was driving a bit too close for conditions. (I occasionally fall into the trap of - if you leave appropriate space, cars continuously pile in front of you on busier highways. Which can put you at risk of being hit in the rear as you now have to break for those people cutting in).

FWIW - https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

1736874109606.png
 
From what I've seen there are a few videos showing it seeing things 'peripherally' that are really hard to predict with human eyes. However, those videos are cherry picked, and there are fail videos as well. I agree suburban and rural tests are harder for FSD.

I'm a sample size of one, but there was at least once my model 3 definitely saved me from rear ending someone else on a highway where everyone stopped without warning, and I was driving a bit too close for conditions. (I occasionally fall into the trap of - if you leave appropriate space, cars continuously pile in front of you on busier highways. Which can put you at risk of being hit in the rear as you now have to break for those people cutting in).

FWIW - https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

View attachment 2684
This is very interesting data.

If we assume that these measurements are taken under similar conditions, similar driving styles, etc and all the accidents are equally severe (and that self-driving doesn't just filter out the higher count, lower risk ones), this is very impressive.

But what would explain non self-driving Teslas having less than half the accident rate of the US average ?

But let's sanity check this data ... UK stats give a typical 3-4 accidents over a driver's lifetime (around 50 years at 10K miles/year ~= 500K miles/3 = 133K miles/accident). These stats suggest the US average is 700K miles (~4x higher) - so less than 0.5 accidents/driver lifetime. And with Tesla FSD that's 0.05. I wonder what the definition of an accident was here.
 
But what would explain non self-driving Teslas having less than half the accident rate of the US average ?

But let's sanity check this data ... UK stats give a typical 3-4 accidents over a driver's lifetime (around 50 years at 10K miles/year ~= 500K miles/3 = 133K miles/accident). These stats suggest the US average is 700K miles (~4x higher) - so less than 0.5 accidents/driver lifetime. And with Tesla FSD that's 0.05. I wonder what the definition of an accident was here.
The base Tesla still has "accident avoidance tech" enabled even if you aren't using self driving or autopilot. So if you are about to rear end someone it'll hit the brakes, or in some cases swerve out of the way.

The cars are also "newer" compared to average US fleet. I'm not sure if that makes a difference (plus and minus) but something to consider. (Newer tires, brakes etc).

EVs also have a lower center of gravity. The driving dynamics are superior vs most. The battery is below your feet.

I also personally think one pedal driving in an EV slightly reduces chance of an accident because as soon as you lift your foot, the car is already decelerating before you even start touching the brakes. That alone could buy you some extra feet/meters of stopping distance in the same time as an automatic petrol car).
 
"Everything" is a pretty broad.

Automation of driving is very different then automation of factories is very different from automation of supply chains is very different then automation of hospitals and so on.

Tesla will likely be a leader in some of these domains, but not "Everything".
 
Back
Top