There’s something so incredibly Tesla about something meant to add a thin veneer of fake quality being executed poorly and causing serious safety issues
I was at a gas station the other day and some guy was fueling up his stupid ass lowered truck. He then blastes off as fast as he could and as a reflex i just had to point and laugh. He actually came back and asked me what's so funny, before showing how good he is at using the accelerator again. These muppeds somehow all look the same.
So…potentially unreliable, potentially unsafe, inefficient, expensive, bad quality control, bad customer support, and buying one supports a complete baby man to try to continue to mess with our country’s politics. What are the benefits of buying one of these again?
The 4/20 restart date makes sense for a start-up company that needs to grab headlines, but that isn’t Tesla any more. They are an established company in the industry now - it’s time for the company to act professional.
I read that Tesla being Tesla reinvented a ton of very standard components that other car manufacturers have been using for decades. So there are a lot of weird issues with Teslas that you wouldn’t see in a car from an established car maker. It’s Tesla ego which makes them think that they can design component better than a whole industry over decades and decades could.
When the Model S came out, I thought it was the height of cool, but I wouldn’t consider buying one of their vehicles now. I think the only reason they even kinda did well was that the rest of the car makers were slow to start making EVs that looked decent and were priced reasonably. Now that the big boys are in the game, Tesla has been dropping the price of some of their models to try and stay competitive. But their cars have always had quality assurance issues, and their support isn’t decent at all, since they try to blame customers for things outside of their control.
However:
Drive by wire is something that they should have implemented decades ago. It is a ridiculously proven and safe technology. Edit: just not in the Cybertruck. Or GM.
In Planes, where there are 3 or more levels of redundant power and hydraulic systems with an ability to fail down to a limited mechanical operation mode if all the other backup systems fail. It's proven because they designed it with a stupid level of failsafes.
There's no redundant power in the Tesla Drive By Wire system, if the power is cut, you lose the ability to steer. You've got brakes, but you're without any of the assistance that the car normally provides. It's so fucking stupid I can't believe it's allowed on the road. If anything goes wrong that cuts power while you're in motion, you're suddenly captive in 3.3 tons of stainless steel without crumple zones, without the ability to steer, with naught but your unaided foot on the brake peddle to determine your outcome. It's nothing like the multiple layers of failures you'd have to endure to find yourself in trouble in a plane both for the power and the hydraulics.
Not even that, with modern brakes being electrically enhanced, they are sometimes almost unpressable when the power is cut. Try turning the ignition off while still rolling and see how hard it gets (may depend on model/brand)
Very true. Perhaps my statement which continued on beyond what you quoted didn't make it clear, but I did point out what you said: "You've got brakes, but you're without any of the assistance that the car normally provides" as well as stating later that you've got "naught but your unaided foot on the brake peddle" both of which were intended to say that it's pretty hard to brake in most cars these days without power brakes.
I don't know how the Cybertruck breaks down on the easy <-> difficult manual braking spectrum, but I imagine that given the high gross vehicle weight and large wheels, it probably steers more towards the difficult end of the spectrum than the easy. Such a dumpster fire of a vehicle.
Ah ok. I assumed you meant stuff like assistance systems. I think you’re right about the break resistance of this thing. It weighs 3 fuckting tons (over 6k lbs), this thing will not be stoppable by muscle power alone. I am so glad, that there is no chance of ever meeting one in my country
First off, the wire control systems in aircraft are absolutely reliable, in part, yes, because of the backups and redundancies. I figured I didn't need to say that.
Because the cybertruck is much worse than you know, based on what you wrote about things going wrong.
You know how sane design has different systems with their own cable bundles, so that if one bundle is damaged, you lose that system, not Everything dead?
Well the Cybertruck puts everything in one singular bundle. If that gets damaged, everything electronic dies. Which can include your backup mirror.
In short: wire control systems, with redundancies, great, long overdue. Cybertruck pos.
The argument for drive-by-wire in personal automobiles is basically that it's safe enough for airplanes, so it should be safe enough for cars.
I mostly buy that. But there's a glaring omission in the reasoning.
In airplanes, there's a full incident investigation for EVERYTHING that goes wrong. Even near misses. It's an industry that (mostly lol boeing) has a history of prioritizing safety. Even at its worst, the safety standards the airline industry and air transportation engineering are orders magnitude more strict than those of the automotive industry and road engineering.
In real terms, automobile incidents should be taken just as seriously. Even near misses should have reporting and analysis. Crashes should absolutely have full investigations. Nearly all automobile deaths are completely avoidable through better engineering of the road systems and cars, but there is mostly no serious culture of safety among automobiles. We chose carnage and have been so immured by it that we don't even think it's weird. We don't think it's weird that essentially everyone, at least in the US, knows someone who died or was seriously injured in a car accident.
So yeah, we should have drive-by-wire. But it should also include other aspects of that safety culture as part of the deal. "Black box" equivalents, for example, and the accompanying post-accident review process that comes with it. A process that focuses not on establishing liability, but preventing future incidents, because establishing liability is mostly a thought-killer when it comes to safety.
...of course, if we actually took road safety that seriously it'd be devastation to the entire car industrial complex. Because much of that industry is focused on design patterns that, in fact, cannot be done safely or sustainably.
I just got done swapping the electric power steering rack in my golf and let me tell you, it was nice to have a mechanical linkage when the old one died. It was also ludicrously expensive for just the part and would have been even more if I couldn’t swap it myself. It’s basically a sealed unit with no obvious way to service it. Some of this stuff is a trade of in ownership costs, and this wasn’t even full drive by wire.
Okay, so understanding that Boeing has been shipping airliners that boing instead of fly or have some bolts missing…
My dad was a frustratingly retired aerospace engineer because there was this period of the 90s where we actually did shrink the defense industry until 9/11 and the contractors started figuring out exactly how to “bribe” people. And one of his side complaints is that any aerospace engineer is probably actually good at being a general-purpose mechanical engineer, except that they’ve generally made the hard stuff actually safe earlier along, but nobody will hire them. His example being fully-automated-digital-engine-controls and fly-by-wire and having three redundant chains.
So, in the aftermath of the whole Toyota throttle-by-wire thing that really didn’t go a whole lot of useful ways, I decided to check out his observation and I did some googling to discover a page where some big company was advertising to the auto industry at large their throttle controllers. And they talk about how they were built with “aerospace technologies” to be reliable and safe. And, looking farther along, it seems like that was not actually three redundant chains, just three threads of execution on the same processor.
Oh yeah, and generally any airplane that does have fly-by-wire and FADEC there is going to always be a set of reversion modes and people have to know about them. Obviously some aspects of this are far stricter because a car can just pull over to the side of the road… but also it needs to do that safely. Witness poor Anton Yelchin dying ignominiously because of the digital gear shifter thing on his Jeep.
But, yeah, the underlying problem is that the cultural expectation is to make cars that will go most places containing capabilities that a vehicle might never actually use in its entire service life and require the minimum amount of knowledge and basically zero knowledge above the collective cultural understanding of a car that’s only mildly changed since a fully-mechanically-linked control system.
…of course, if we actually took road safety that seriously it’d be devastation to the entire car industrial complex. Because much of that industry is focused on design patterns that, in fact, cannot be done safely or sustainably.
every time I see a truck with a 4’ hood line or a 21" touch screen in place of actual controls, I wonder when we’re going to see another Nader, someone to strike out at the manufacturers for pushing shit that is unsafe at any speed.
Planes also don’t evolve in an environment where most people only marginally care about the rules, where a significant minority is composed of unpredictable maniacs, etc. All in all I think it’s more hostile for cars.
or just sensible rules on letting people purchase vehicles appropriate for all the driving public. overweight lifted monster shitwagons aren’t doing anyone favors.
These are all excellent points, and would definitely improve safety.
One you left out is the level of training pilots get both in general and on specific aircraft. They're put into simulators where they can practice emergency procedures. They have minimum amounts of flight time before they can be certified, and also requirements for flying certain hours in a year. They need a certain amount of rest time between flights, undergo psychological screening, and a ton of other regulations that make sure they're qualified.
Drivers licenses in the US can be had with very little training or testing, and they're generally given for an entire lifetime. A friend of mine recently got her license for the first time in her 30s and was terrified at the lack of actual training required to get a license. Her test was just driving around in a residential area with 25 mph speed limits and then parallel parking. No highway time, no professional training, no nighttime driving.
The OG teslas had FOMOCO e-throttle pedal assemblies from Ford.
The problem is that Tesla is constantly changing parts during a model run, sometimes for the better (reliability, simplicity) other times for cost cutting and that is why I’d never own one. Because there are a million iterations finding parts to repair them, and I only buy 10+ year old cars (possibly nothing after 2010 at this rate).
Teslas are built like one time use smartphones. Only good for parts recycling after they fail.
It's not that Musk ever thought Tesla could design "better" components, it's that Musk knew Tesla could design proprietary components, and in there lies the grift.
I read that Tesla being Tesla reinvented a ton of very standard components that other car manufacturers have been using for decades
If there’s one constant in “libertarian” philosophy, it’s that they always inevitably end up reinventing the policies/laws/processes/regulations they tried to ignore in the first place.
I love how little this has to do with a “libertarian” philosophy. It’s cute how you insist on making the dumb choices of some private car company equate to political ideologies lol
Add comment