- RolfGutmann

The Tesla S autopilot was classified between L2 and L3 in the mentioned case. Swiss traffic law says: Both hands on the steering wheel.

translate.google.ch/tr...edit-text=

I read the news article thanks, but I did not see the wording L2, L3, etc. Has something been lost in translation?

2016 - www.dropbox.com/s/1a8a...Levels.jpg
_________________
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - www.linkedin.com/groups/2436720
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - www.linkedin.com/groups/141739
Universal Network Investigations - www.linkedin.com/groups/13536130
Mobile Telephone Evidence & Forensics trewmte.blogspot.com 

No, Tesla S with autopilot is L2-L3 classified in the U.S. (NHTSA).  

static.nhtsa.gov/odi/i...7-7876.PDF

Manufacturer: Tesla Motors, Inc.
Products: MY2014-2016 Tesla Model S and Model X

Problem Description: The Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) or Autopilot systems may not function as designed, increasing the risk of a crash.

4.0 HUMAN MACHINE INTERFACE
4.1 Automation Level. The Tesla Autopilot system is a Level 1 automated system when operated with TACC enabled and a Level 2 system when Autosteer is also activated. Figure 3 shows a summary of the levels of driving automation for on-road vehicles, including the division of responsibility at each level for the driver and system.11 Level 1 and 2 system require continuous attention by the operator to monitor the driving environment and take immediate control when necessary. It is important that operators recognize this responsibility and understand the capabilities and limitations of the system
_________________
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - www.linkedin.com/groups/2436720
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - www.linkedin.com/groups/141739
Universal Network Investigations - www.linkedin.com/groups/13536130
Mobile Telephone Evidence & Forensics trewmte.blogspot.com 

Set aside for a moment the local Laws (and their classifications of vehicles) the base points are IMHO:
1) is the "autopilot engagement" automatic or optional?
2) if it is optional and decided by the driver were ALL conditions prescribed for the engagement fulfilled?
3) what is the failover or fallback provision?
4) if the failover/fallback provision is the disengagement of the "autopilot", which kind of visual, acoustic and sensorial warnings are given? and in how much time the switch is supposed to happen?

Let's think of what we already know and have some experience with, the auto-pilot in large, commercial aircrafts.

These are operated by two highly trained professionals, still the amount of accidents when the autopilot was accidentally disengaged (by the pilot or by a lesser known procedure of the system) or the warnings requiring to take manual control were not early enough (or not loud/clear enough) to allow the pilots to take control have been historically common enough.
In most, if not all of these cases the responsibility was given to the pilots or to lacks in their attention or training.

And usually on planes we are talking of several seconds available.

So my guess is that until the system will be not only completely automatic, a but also not in any way under control of the driver (think of a car without pedals and steering wheel) one way or the other the driver will be held responsible.


jaclaz
_________________
- In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is. - 

Good aspects mentioned. Audi A8 AI alerts 10 seconds all-sensors and then stops the car and starts emergency-flashing. Driver Readyness DR is a precondition to takeback.

DOI: 10.1145/3025171.3025199

www.researchgate.net/p...an_Control  

Interesting article....


A Plane Lesson for Driverless Cars

www.bloomberg.com/news...d-airlines
_________________
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - www.linkedin.com/groups/2436720
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - www.linkedin.com/groups/141739
Universal Network Investigations - www.linkedin.com/groups/13536130
Mobile Telephone Evidence & Forensics trewmte.blogspot.com 

Interesting article too

Thinking of forensic evidence out of an AVL5 crash lets think about where are the important areas or layers of 'gold first'?

Postcrash a vehicle often moved away from the location of crash by forwarding energies. So there is a Crash Location CL and a Real Location RL. Actually by 3D-Laser Scanning coupled with GNSS+ we reverse simulate from RL to CL. But there is a general problem invisible all the time. At the crash timestamp a specific constellation of external factors influencing more or less a crash is no more available. Cars continue to drive further, weather- traffic conditions change constantly and mobile traffic users like bicyles, pedestrians and others are no more available for evidence.

For this we split vehicle sensors in eyes and sensors. Eyes have seen things around visually but sensors only by detecting a bounding surface of objects. All in-car data is fed into the zFAS (A8 AI) as the car mainboard. There are at least 4 major CPUs or GPUs aggregating the sensing into mapping and policy making.

But which data remains in-memory in-car for the RL or was moved to the CarCloud of the manufacturer? I guess more and more data goes to the BigData hungry CarCloud and is lost.

For now we are testing OBDII dataloggers (weDIY) to wireshark the car LTE modem.