Advanced Brake Warning Systems Explained

Modern vehicles are evolving faster than ever, and safety innovation sits at the heart of that transformation. Among the most significant breakthroughs is Advanced Brake Warning (ABW) — a system designed to detect potential collisions, warn drivers, and in many cases, automatically apply the brakes before impact. This technology, once confined to luxury models, is now spreading rapidly across mainstream brands, reshaping how we drive and how accidents are prevented.

---

What Is Advanced Brake Warning?

Advanced Brake Warning refers to systems that sense when a vehicle is about to brake suddenly — or when a collision appears imminent — and either alert the driver or automatically slow the car down. Unlike traditional brake lights, which activate only when a driver presses the pedal, ABW systems anticipate braking events and can trigger earlier visual or audible alerts.

The earliest version appeared in Israel in 1989, when engineers developed a mechanism that illuminated brake lights the instant a driver released the accelerator abruptly, warning trailing motorists of an impending stop. That simple concept became the foundation for today’s complex radar-, lidar-, and camera-based safety suites that continuously analyze traffic, speed, and obstacles.

---

How Advanced Brake Warning Works

Advanced Brake Warning systems blend sensors, software, and predictive modeling to detect danger faster than a human could. Here’s how a modern setup functions:

1. Environmental Sensing
   Radar, lidar, or cameras monitor the space ahead, measuring the distance and relative speed between vehicles.

2. Driver-Input Monitoring
   Software watches how the driver releases the accelerator, steers, or presses the brake pedal. A quick lift-off or delayed braking can indicate panic or distraction.

3. Warning Stage
   When a risk is detected, the system issues visual, audible, or haptic cues — flashing dashboard icons, alarms, or seat vibrations — urging immediate action.

4. Brake Pre-Charging
   Some systems pre-pressurize the braking circuit so that the slightest pedal touch produces full braking force.

5. Automatic Intervention
   If the driver fails to react, the car applies the brakes automatically through Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB).

6. Post-Impact Support
   After a collision, certain models apply the brakes again to prevent secondary impacts or keep the vehicle stable.

Together, these layers can shave critical fractions of a second off reaction time — often the difference between a near miss and a crash.

---

Why It Matters

The benefits of Advanced Brake Warning and AEB are clear:

• Fewer Rear-End Crashes: Bosch research shows up to 34 percent of rear-end collisions could be avoided if all vehicles used AEB.

• Shorter Stopping Distances: Pre-charging brakes can reduce stopping distance by several feet.

• Pedestrian Protection: Systems detect walkers or cyclists crossing in front of the car, particularly valuable in urban settings.

• Fleet Savings: Fewer accidents mean reduced insurance claims and downtime for delivery and logistics operators.

• Regulatory Momentum: The U.S. NHTSA has mandated that all new passenger vehicles include AEB with pedestrian detection by 2029.

---

Limits and Challenges

Despite their promise, these systems have constraints:

• False Triggers in dense traffic can annoy drivers.

• Sensor Blind Spots in fog, rain, or snow reduce accuracy.

• Driver Over-Reliance can cause complacency.

• Cost Barriers still limit adoption in entry-level trims.

• Standardization Issues slow global rollout as governments debate visual-signal regulations.

The bottom line: ABW is a tool, not a substitute for attentive driving.

---

Cars That Feature Advanced Brake Warning or AEB (2025 Models)

Toyota — Safety Sense 3.0

Models such as the Camry Hybrid, Corolla, RAV4, and Highlander include Toyota’s Pre-Collision System, combining radar and cameras with pedestrian and cyclist detection.

Subaru — EyeSight Driver Assist

Every Outback, Forester, and Crosstrek uses twin stereo cameras to monitor traffic and apply full braking automatically when needed.

Hyundai — SmartSense

The Elantra, Tucson, and Santa Fe Hybrid come standard with Forward Collision-Avoidance Assist, detecting vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists.

Nissan — Safety Shield 360

The Sentra, Altima, and Rogue provide front and rear automatic braking plus cross-traffic alerts.

Mazda — i-Activsense

Models like the CX-5, CX-90, and Mazda3 feature full-speed AEB, including night-time pedestrian detection.

Audi — Pre Sense Front

Vehicles such as the A6, A7, and Q8 e-tron use radar-camera fusion to deliver precise automatic braking up to highway speeds.

GMC — Pro Safety Package

The Terrain, Acadia, and Sierra 1500 now include Forward Collision Alert and AEB as standard across most trims.

---

Tesla’s Vision-Based Approach

1. Tesla Vision

Tesla eliminated radar and ultrasonic sensors between 2021 and 2023, creating a camera-only, AI-driven perception system. Known as Tesla Vision, it interprets surroundings using neural networks that mimic human sight, allowing the vehicle to identify obstacles, lane markings, and movement patterns purely through cameras.

2. Forward Collision Warning

Tesla’s Forward Collision Warning (FCW) alerts the driver with beeps and vivid red visual cues on the dashboard whenever a potential frontal impact is detected.

3. Automatic Emergency Braking

If the driver fails to respond, Tesla’s AEB automatically slows or stops the vehicle. The system works from 5 to 90 mph and recognizes vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists.

4. Obstacle-Aware Acceleration

This unique safeguard reduces throttle power if an obstacle is detected ahead, preventing sudden acceleration into stationary objects — particularly useful in parking situations.

5. Continuous Improvement Through Software

Every Tesla receives over-the-air (OTA) updates that refine braking algorithms, improve recognition accuracy, and add features without requiring a service visit. This means a 2021 Model 3 can benefit from the same braking intelligence as a 2025 Model Y.

6. Vision Limitations

Because Tesla relies solely on visual input, performance can degrade in heavy fog, blinding sunlight, or snow-covered conditions that obscure cameras. The company counters this with deep-learning prediction models that infer object motion even when visibility drops.

---

How Tesla Compares to Other Automakers

Sensor Philosophy: Vision vs Radar

Most automakers — Toyota, Subaru, Hyundai, Audi — employ radar and cameras in tandem for redundancy. Radar measures distance and speed reliably in any weather; cameras add object recognition.
Tesla, by contrast, uses vision-only AI, betting that advanced neural networks can achieve the same precision without radar. This simplifies hardware but demands exceptional software training and clear visibility.

Update Advantage

Tesla’s biggest edge is continuous software evolution. Traditional automakers ship updates with each new model year, whereas Tesla pushes improvements directly to existing owners. Braking behavior, warning sensitivity, and object-detection accuracy can all improve overnight through OTA updates. Toyota and Subaru systems remain hardware-bound; Audi offers updates but primarily through dealership service.

Performance in Real-World Tests

Independent evaluations by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) show Tesla’s pedestrian AEB performs strongly in daylight and moderate conditions. Radar-based systems like Subaru’s EyeSight still lead in fog, snow, and night-time detection. Tesla’s system shines on clear highways but relies on perfect camera calibration to maintain reliability.

System Integration

Tesla integrates braking, steering, and navigation through a single neural-network architecture that underpins Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD). This holistic design allows the car not just to react to danger but to predict driver intent, merging acceleration and braking data with route planning.
Other brands use modular systems: AEB and adaptive cruise share limited data, functioning independently. Tesla’s unified approach means each braking event helps train the system fleet-wide.

Bottom Line

Tesla’s method emphasizes software agility and fleet learning, while traditional automakers prioritize sensor redundancy and weather resilience. Radar-fusion systems deliver steady, all-condition reliability; Tesla’s pure-vision model evolves faster through AI and updates. Both philosophies are steering the industry toward the same goal — zero collisions.

---

The Road Ahead

1. Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Communication
   Next-generation braking systems will exchange data with surrounding vehicles and infrastructure, allowing chain-reaction warnings before a human senses danger.

2. Smart Tires and Road Condition Data
   Companies such as Goodyear are developing sensors that detect wet or icy pavement and feed friction data into braking logic.

3. AI Prediction and Contextual Awareness
   Machine-learning models now forecast not just collisions but driver intent, predicting lane changes or hesitation.

4. Regulatory Deadlines
   By 2029, all U.S. light vehicles under 10,000 lbs must include AEB with pedestrian detection. Low-volume manufacturers have until 2030.

5. Retrofit Possibilities
   As hardware costs drop, after-market kits could soon add advanced braking and warning systems to older vehicles.

---

Tips for Drivers

• Stay Engaged: Never depend solely on automation; remain alert.

• Maintain Sensors: Clean camera lenses and radar panels regularly.

• Know Your Alerts: Learn what each tone or icon means in your vehicle.

• Install Updates: Apply software patches promptly, especially for OTA-capable cars like Tesla.

• Check Recalls: Manufacturers occasionally recalibrate AEB for sensitivity or range issues.

---

Conclusion

Advanced Brake Warning and Automatic Emergency Braking represent a revolution in vehicle safety — technologies that think faster than humans and act when milliseconds matter.

Tesla leads with a vision-only, software-driven model that constantly improves, proving that artificial intelligence can enhance physical safety systems. Toyota, Subaru, and Audi, meanwhile, continue to refine radar-camera fusion for unmatched consistency in any weather. Together, these strategies are converging on the same outcome: safer roads, fewer collisions, and the steady march toward autonomous mobility.

In the near future, every new vehicle — from family sedans to electric SUVs — will come equipped with advanced braking intelligence. What began as a simple warning light in 1989 has evolved into one of the most effective life-saving technologies ever placed in a car.

Where Are Driverless Uber Cars Being Used? (2025 Update)

Where Are Driverless Uber Cars Being Used?

Autonomous vehicles are rapidly becoming part of the transportation landscape, and Uber is one of the companies leading the charge by partnering with self-driving technology leaders like Waymo and WeRide. For riders, policymakers, and business leaders, the most pressing question is: where are driverless Uber cars being used right now? This article explores the current cities where Uber’s autonomous rides are active, the partnerships enabling them, and the future expansion of driverless ride-hailing.

Waymo on Uber: U.S. Deployments

In the United States, Uber has integrated Waymo’s fully autonomous vehicles into its ride-hailing platform in select cities. Austin, Texas, became one of the first cities to allow riders to hail a fully autonomous Waymo Jaguar I-PACE through the Uber app. Riders in specific service zones within Austin can request a ride as usual, and in some cases, the match comes back with a driverless vehicle. In June 2025, Uber and Waymo expanded this collaboration to Atlanta, Georgia, covering a 65-square-mile service area including Downtown and Buckhead. Here, autonomous rides operate at standard UberX or Comfort EV pricing, making the technology more accessible to everyday commuters. Beyond Uber, Waymo independently offers its Waymo One driverless service in cities like Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Silicon Valley. In Phoenix, residents were among the earliest to access fully autonomous rides, and the service now operates across large portions of the metro area. San Francisco riders can hail Waymo One vehicles across the city and nearby Daly City, while Los Angeles has access to a 120-square-mile operating zone. Silicon Valley joined the list in 2025, extending coverage to Mountain View, Palo Alto, Los Altos, and Sunnyvale. This geographic spread shows that Uber’s integration with Waymo is not limited to isolated pilot projects but is part of a broader strategy to embed autonomous vehicles into major metropolitan ride-hailing markets.

International Expansion Through WeRide

Uber’s ambitions for driverless rides extend beyond the U.S., largely through its partnership with WeRide, a Chinese-based autonomous driving company. The most significant example of this collaboration so far is Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, where Uber riders can hail WeRide autonomous taxis directly through the app. This marks the first time Uber has fully integrated an international autonomous operator into its platform. According to Business Insider, WeRide plans to expand to as many as 15 cities worldwide over the next five years. That roadmap suggests Uber users in other international markets may soon have access to driverless rides without relying solely on U.S.-based partners. WeRide’s collaboration with Uber not only extends Uber’s reach but also accelerates global acceptance of robotaxis by showing how such services can blend into existing ride-hailing apps.

Driverless Uber Cars by Country

Country	Cities / Regions	Partner	Car Models Used	Estimated Fleet Size	Status
United States	Austin, Atlanta (Uber integration); Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley (Waymo One independent)	Waymo	Jaguar I-PACE (all-electric SUV)	~500–700 vehicles across U.S. hubs	Active deployments
United States	Arlington (pilot), Miami, Washington D.C., Dallas, Denver, New York City (planned)	Waymo/Uber	Jaguar I-PACE	TBD (pilot fleets usually 50–100 vehicles at launch)	Pilot / Planned
United Arab Emirates	Abu Dhabi	WeRide	Nissan e-Power EVs, RoboTaxi fleet	~100–200 vehicles	Active
United Kingdom	London (pilot announced)	Wayve/Uber	Electric AV test fleet (Wayve-modified EVs)	~50–75 vehicles (pilot scale)	Planned pilot
China (future expansion)	Global rollout planned via WeRide (15 cities internationally)	WeRide	RoboTaxi fleet (varies by city, typically EVs)	Goal of 1,000+ vehicles globally over 5 years	Planned expansion

Pilots, Trials, and Future Deployments

Not every city has active service yet, but several have been identified for upcoming integration. Arlington, Texas, has been highlighted as a future pilot city for Uber’s autonomous fleet. The program is still in development, but Arlington could become the first city in the U.S. to natively integrate autonomous vehicles directly within Uber’s platform on a municipal scale. Other planned expansions include London, where Uber will run a self-driving pilot with Wayve, a UK-based autonomous company. According to MarketWatch, this would be Uber’s most significant European experiment and could pave the way for large-scale adoption across the continent. In the U.S., upcoming service expansions are expected in Miami, Washington D.C., Dallas, Denver, and New York City. Waymo also announced plans to introduce service in Nashville through Lyft in 2026, and while that does not directly involve Uber, it signals a competitive marketplace where autonomous vehicles are quickly becoming mainstream.

Why Some Cities Don’t Have Uber Driverless Cars Yet

Deploying autonomous ride-hailing is far from simple. Each city presents unique challenges that require Uber and its partners to carefully plan deployments. Local regulations play a major role, as some municipalities are more open to AV testing and operations while others maintain strict oversight. Safety is another key factor, as companies must prove their systems can handle complex driving conditions before regulators allow large-scale operation. Infrastructure limitations also matter: dense urban centers with complicated intersections or inconsistent GPS coverage may require more mapping and simulation before a launch. Even in cities where Uber already offers autonomous rides, such as Austin or Atlanta, operations are confined to defined geofenced zones. These zones are chosen based on safety, mapping readiness, and rider demand, meaning not all neighborhoods are covered equally.

Rider Experience in Driverless Ubers

For riders in cities with active deployments, using a driverless Uber is straightforward. They simply order a ride through the Uber app, and if an autonomous vehicle is available, they are matched with it. The rides are typically priced the same as UberX or Comfort tiers, ensuring affordability. The vehicles are fully electric, most commonly the Jaguar I-PACE, equipped with Waymo’s advanced self-driving systems. Riders experience a door-to-door trip with no human driver, monitored remotely for safety and intervention if needed. For Uber, these deployments help reduce reliance on human drivers while aligning with the company’s sustainability goals by focusing on electric vehicle fleets.

Safety and Public Perception

Safety remains the most debated issue in driverless car adoption. Proponents argue that removing human error—the cause of most road accidents—can significantly improve roadway safety. Opponents worry about software glitches, edge-case driving scenarios, and cybersecurity risks. Uber’s decision to partner with companies like Waymo and WeRide reflects a strategy to work with the most experienced developers of self-driving systems. According to Waymo, its vehicles have completed millions of autonomous miles with strong safety records, reinforcing Uber’s case for deployment. Public perception is slowly shifting as more riders experience the technology firsthand. In cities like Phoenix and San Francisco, growing adoption has normalized the idea of hailing a ride with no driver at the wheel.

The Future of Uber’s Driverless Rides

Looking forward, Uber’s roadmap suggests a steady rollout of autonomous vehicles across U.S. cities and global markets. Key trends include integration with electric mobility, expansion of geofenced service zones, and partnerships with international AV companies beyond Waymo and WeRide. London will serve as a testing ground for Uber’s European expansion, while Abu Dhabi shows the viability of driverless services in the Middle East. Meanwhile, U.S. cities like Miami, Dallas, and New York represent opportunities to prove scalability in large, dense markets. If these deployments succeed, Uber may move from offering autonomous rides as a niche option to positioning them as a mainstream feature within its platform.

Conclusion

Driverless Uber cars are no longer an experimental novelty—they are operating today in cities like Austin, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, and Abu Dhabi. They are soon expanding into London and other major global markets. While challenges remain in regulation, safety validation, and infrastructure readiness, Uber’s partnerships with Waymo, WeRide, and others are accelerating adoption worldwide. For riders, the experience is seamless: open the Uber app, request a ride, and possibly be matched with a fully autonomous vehicle. For Uber, it represents the next frontier in mobility, combining sustainability with cutting-edge technology. The global rollout is still in its early stages, but the foundation is clear: driverless Uber cars are here to stay, and their footprint will only grow in the coming years.

Driverless Waymo Pulled Over by Phoenix Police Caught on Video

A viral video out of Phoenix, Arizona shows police pulling over a fully autonomous Waymo vehicle—with no one in the driver’s seat. The incident, captured by a nearby motorist, has sparked a wave of concern over how driverless cars behave in high-pressure, real-world scenarios such as police stops, detours, and construction zones.

What Happened

In the video:

• A Waymo car entered a construction zone and briefly drove into oncoming traffic.

• Phoenix police activated their lights to intervene.

• The car did not initially respond or pull over properly.

• Eventually, it stopped—though with no human driver to engage, police appeared unsure how to handle the situation.

The Waymo vehicle reportedly attempted to "correct" its position mid-stop, further complicating the traffic stop.

Waymo’s Statement

Waymo acknowledged the event, stating that the vehicle experienced a "challenging situation" due to unexpected road signage and lane shifts. The company said it is analyzing the incident and working to refine its AI response to emergency vehicles and construction reroutes.

Rising AV Incidents: The Bigger Picture

This isn’t an isolated case. Incidents involving Waymo and other autonomous vehicle operators are being documented with increasing frequency—especially in cities that have allowed full driverless operation.

Notable Statistics:

• San Francisco emergency services reported 55 AV-related disruptions in just six months of 2023, including blocked fire trucks and ambulances.

• In Phoenix, at least 12 driverless vehicle incidents were reported to local authorities between 2022 and 2024, according to the Arizona Department of Transportation.

• A Consumer Reports survey from late 2024 found that 63% of Americans are “not confident” in current AV safety standards.

• Over 500 formal complaints about AV behavior were filed with the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) in 2023 alone.

Other Cities Seeing AV Safety Concerns

San Francisco, CA

• Waymo and Cruise vehicles have stalled in intersections, blocked emergency responders, and confused school zones.

• In one incident, multiple AVs surrounded an active fire scene, preventing a hose from being connected.

Austin, TX

• Waymo vehicles were documented blocking lanes during peak traffic.

• Complaints also cited robotaxis stopping in mid-turn due to confused traffic light signals.

Los Angeles, CA

• Several neighborhoods have reported AVs double-parking, idling in bike lanes, and failing to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks.

The Legal and Safety Implications

These incidents raise difficult questions:

• Who’s liable when there’s no driver?

• How can law enforcement interact with vehicles that can’t respond verbally?

• Are current state regulations and oversight strong enough to keep pace with technology?

As AV testing expands, so does the gap between technology and accountability.

Final Thoughts

The Phoenix video is more than just viral content—it’s a wake-up call. While Waymo and others promise improvements, incidents like this show that real-world driving still presents too many edge cases for AVs to handle with full confidence.

Until comprehensive oversight, public trust, and technical reliability are in sync, driverless cars remain a high-tech experiment with very real-world consequences.

Top Self-Driving Car Companies: Major Differences & Deployment

Leading Self-Driving Car Companies and Their Deployment Strategies

The advent of autonomous driving cars marks a significant shift in the automotive industry, with several companies spearheading this technological revolution. Each company has developed distinct approaches and technologies, tailored to their vision of the future of autonomous driving. This article delves into some of the top self-driving car companies and explores where and how they are deploying their technologies.

How to Disable a Self-Driving Cars with Traffic Cones

Innovative or Malicious? SF Group Targets Self-Driving Cars with Traffic Cones

Why a Waymo Might Not Recognize a Green Light

Waymo, the autonomous driving technology company, has made significant strides in developing self-driving cars capable of navigating complex urban environments. These vehicles rely on a sophisticated array of sensors, cameras, and AI algorithms to interpret and respond to their surroundings. However, there are instances where a Waymo might fail to recognize a green light. Several factors could contribute to this issue, ranging from technical limitations to environmental challenges. 

Waymo Autonomous Vehicle Involved in Incident with Cyclist in San Francisco

Waymo, a leader in autonomous vehicle technology, has made significant strides in developing and deploying its driverless taxi service. As the company expands its fleet and operations, understanding the safety performance and accident rates of Waymo’s autonomous taxis becomes increasingly important. This evaluation is crucial for assessing the readiness and reliability of autonomous vehicles in everyday urban settings. 

Driving Towards Safety: Emerging Trends in Automotive Safety Technology

In an era where road safety is a top priority, automotive manufacturers are continuously innovating to enhance vehicle safety through cutting-edge technology. From advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) to vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, let's explore the latest trends shaping the landscape of automotive safety.

Where Do Self-Driving Cars Struggle? Top Challenges and Progress

Self-driving cars, also known as autonomous vehicles, have been the subject of immense technological advancements in recent years. With the promise of safer and more efficient transportation, self-driving cars have captured the world's attention. However, as with any emerging technology, they face several challenges and limitations. In this article, we will explore the areas where self-driving cars struggle, shedding light on the ongoing efforts to overcome these obstacles.

How Do Self-Driving Cars Use Sensors and Mapping To Prevent Accidents

Self-driving cars use advanced sensors and automated mapping technologies to prevent accidents by constantly monitoring their surroundings, making real-time decisions, and responding to potential hazards. These technologies work together to create a comprehensive picture of the car's environment and enable the vehicle to navigate safely and avoid collisions. Here's how they work:

New Software Uses AI to Identify the Most Hazardous City Intersections

City traffic intersections can be challenging and dangerous for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists alike. Identifying high-risk intersections is crucial for improving road safety and reducing accidents. In a groundbreaking development, new software leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing the way cities pinpoint their most hazardous intersections. By analyzing vast amounts of traffic data, this cutting-edge technology is helping authorities take proactive measures to enhance road safety and save lives.

What Companies Does Waymo Work With and Where?

Google's Waymo Car

Tesla Autopilot Would Avoid 90% of Car Accidents

Tesla has made statements suggesting that their Autopilot system, an advanced driver-assistance feature, has the potential to improve overall vehicle safety and reduce the risk of accidents. However, it is important to approach such claims with caution and consider several factors:

Limitations of Autopilot: Tesla's Autopilot is designed to assist drivers with certain driving tasks but is not a fully autonomous system. It still requires driver attention and supervision. The system has limitations and may not be able to handle all driving scenarios or unexpected events.

Variability in Accident Scenarios: Car accidents can occur due to various factors, including the actions of other drivers, pedestrians, adverse weather conditions, and mechanical failures. While Autopilot may help prevent certain types of accidents, it may not be effective in all possible scenarios.

Reliability and Validation: The claim that Autopilot could avoid 90% of car accidents would need to be supported by comprehensive and independent studies analyzing real-world data. It is important to examine the methodology and evidence behind such claims.

Reporting Bias: It is worth considering the possibility of reporting bias, as accidents involving Tesla vehicles equipped with Autopilot might receive more media attention, leading to a potential overemphasis on those incidents.

Assessing the safety impact of any advanced driver-assistance system like Tesla's Autopilot requires extensive research, analysis of real-world data, and independent evaluation. It is always crucial for drivers to remain vigilant, follow traffic laws, and be prepared to take control of the vehicle at all times, even when using driver-assistance systems.

To stay informed about the latest developments and safety information regarding Tesla's Autopilot system, it is recommended to refer to official statements from Tesla, follow updates from regulatory authorities, and consult reliable sources of automotive news and analysis.

No One Driving Tesla in Fatal Crash - Map of Location in Texas

SPRING, Texas (KTRK) -- Two people died in a fiery crash involving a 2019 Tesla Model S and its autopilot functionality while taking it for a test drive on Saturday night, according to authorities.

Constable Mark Herman said one person was found in the front passenger seat and another in the back seat. Both died in the fire.

The flames reportedly took hours to extinguish, and Harris County Precinct 4 Constable Mark Herman said the investigation has led them to believe that there was no one driving the car when the crash occurred.

The crash happened just after 9 p.m. on Hammock Dunes Place in the Carlton Woods Creekside subdivision. The victims were said to have been two men who were 59 and 69 years old, however police have not released their names yet.

Firefighters and medics were called to the scene after reports of an explosion in the woods after the Tesla ran off the road, authorities said.

The Tesla was traveling from a cul-de-sac on Hammock Dunes Place and did not negotiate a curve. The vehicle crashed into a tree before bursting into flames.  

Constable Herman said the 2019 Tesla Model S was traveling on a roadway and at some point, the vehicle, which deputies said was traveling at a high rate of speed, came to a slight curve. Deputies say the car went off the roadway, crashed into a tree and burst into flames.

Crews found two bodies inside the vehicle, a man in the front passenger seat and another man in the back passenger seat.

The batteries on board the Tesla continued to ignite despite efforts to douse the flames, authorities said. It reportedly took around four hours and more than 30,000 gallons of water before firefighters decided to let the fire burn itself out.

KPRC 2 reporter Deven Clarke spoke to one man’s brother-in-law who said he was taking the car out for a spin with his best friend, so there were just two in the vehicle. The owner, he said, backed out of the driveway, and then may have hopped in the back seat only to crash a few hundred yards down the road. He said the owner was found in the back seat upright.

Read local news reports. 

Read the comments on Reddit for possible reasons.

No One Driving Tesla in Fatal Crash - Map of Location in Texas from r/SelfDrivingCars

Assessing the Safety of Autopilot Vehicle Technology

Representing the midway point between traditional human-operated vehicles and self-driving cars of the future, autopilot capabilities like those featured in Tesla vehicles are marketed as a safer and more convenient way to drive. Is that the truth, or a self-serving sales pitch? 

To answer that question, let’s start by drawing comparisons to autopilot systems commonly found in modern-day aircraft. Autopilot has been a standard piece of aviation technology for decades. That’s because these systems make air travel safer and more convenient for pilots and passengers. 

Despite these safety advantages, autopilot is never used during take-off or landing. The same basic principle applies to similar technology featured in modern-day automobiles. For example, Tesla Autopilot isn’t meant to navigate the tight spaces and loosely regulated traffic of Tesla charging stations in downtown Los Angeles. However, it can be safely engaged when the vehicle is on the open and unobstructed interstate. 

The takeaway from this comparison is that, despite their limitations, autopilot systems provide added safety and convenience. Users must be able to harness this technology responsibly and resist the urge to abuse it or take it for granted. 

But what about news reports of fatal crashes and collisions involving vehicles with their autonomous driving features engaged? Doesn’t that prove they aren’t as safe as the automakers claim they are? No, it doesn’t. In fact, it highlights how safe these systems truly are.

 Consider the last time you read a news story about a vehicle fatality involving standard human-operated cars. It only makes the news when the circumstances are especially tragic or otherwise remarkable, yet fatal car accidents happen in our cities and towns every single day. It’s too common to be considered newsworthy. 

On the flipside, fatal car crashes involving advanced autopilot features are newsworthy because the technology generates questions and controversy. Just because we hear about a deadly incident involving autopilot doesn’t mean it’s a common occurrence. It’s certainly not as common as “traditional” motor vehicle accidents. 

The limitations and potential dangers of autopilot and autonomous driving feature ultimately highlight how, as mentioned earlier, the technology is a placeholder in the grand scheme of things. Ten years from now, driverless cars will reign supreme. When that happens, the safety of autopilot will get eclipsed by the improved safety brought about through completely autonomous vehicles. 

Think of autonomous driving capabilities as the iPod of advanced vehicle technology. Remember those things? They changed our lives for about five years, then the iPhone came along and with it the age of the smartphone. Nobody has an iPod anymore, even though we all did once.

The same fate - more or less - awaits the autopilot technology featured in Tesla vehicles and those made by several other automakers. Today it represents the pinnacle of consumer-accessible automobiles, but those days are numbered. 

Are you thinking about buying a vehicle with autonomous driving technology built-in? If so, it’s imperative to remember the limitations of these systems. They offer a chance for motorists to traverse with reduced risk and enhanced convenience, but only when used correctly and responsibly.

700 Pedestrians Die Every Day Wordwide

We talk a great deal about how cars congest our cities and pollute the atmosphere. We talk less about how they keep killing and injuring people simply trying to get from A to B on two feet.

Lately, our auto industry conversation about road safety has been dominated by visions, sold by Silicon Valley, of vehicles that minimize or even eliminate the need for input from a fallible human driver. Every year, more cars come armed with “pedestrian detection and avoidance” systems; soon, these systems will likely be standard issue. And not long after that, we are promised, sensors and self-improving algorithms will take over the driving process altogether, eliminating human error from roads and ushering in a new golden age of safety for all their users, whether or not they’re cocooned by a car’s steel frame. Since 2017, General Motors, the US’s largest car manufacturer, has claimed that it is developing self-driving vehicles in the service of a “triple-zero” world: zero crashes, zero emissions and zero congestion.

Car companies swear they are here to help – by selling us products that hardly ever hit anyone or anything. But the truth is that this promise is, at best, a distraction. In fact, much of our discourse around cars, self-driving or otherwise, is less about transforming the status quo than maintaining it, obscuring paths to progress exactly when we need them most, and leaving pedestrians right in the line of fire.

Ask a room full of road safety experts what is causing pedestrian fatalities to increase and most will admit that, well, they are not exactly sure. Every time a car hits a pedestrian, it represents the intersection of a vast number of variables. At the level of those involved, there is the question of who is distracted, reckless, drunk. Zooming out, there are factors such as the design and condition of the road, the quality (or absence) of a marked pedestrian crossing, the speed limit, the local lighting, the weight and height of the car involved. In a crash, all these variables and more converge at high speed in real-world, non-laboratory conditions that make it hard to isolate the influence of each variable.

Ask that same room of road safety experts a slightly different question – not exactly why US pedestrians fatalities have risen lately, but instead why the US has more of them than any other wealthy country – and the answers will come flooding out. In recent months, after conversations with more than a dozen such experts, I became familiar with a particular tone of voice: deep frustration at how obvious it all is, but wrapped in a package of professional cheeriness. 

Here is what the frustrated safety experts will tell you: Americans are driving more than ever, more than residents of any other country. More of them than ever are living in cities and out in urban sprawl; a growing number of pedestrian fatalities occur on the fringes of cities, where high-volume, high-speed roads exist in close proximity to the places where people live, work, and shop.

Speed limits have increased across the country over the past 20 years, despite robust evidence that even slight increases in speed dramatically increase the likelihood of killing pedestrians (car passengers, too – but the increase is not as steep, thanks to improvements in the design of car frames, airbags and seatbelts). American road engineers tend to assume people will speed, and so design roads to accommodate speeding; this, in turn, facilitates more speeding, which soon enough makes higher speed limits feel reasonable. And more Americans than ever are zipping around in SUVs and pickup trucks, which, thanks to their height, weight and shape are between two and three times more likely to kill people they hit.

More fundamentally, the US is the country in the world most shaped, physically and culturally, by the presumption that the uninterrupted flow of car traffic is an obvious public good, one that deserves to trump all others in the road planning process. Many of its younger cities are designed almost entirely around planning paradigms in which pedestrians were either ignored or factored only as nuisances. 

There is no greater symptom of this worldview than the recurring focus on mobile phones, especially smartphones and their tendency to monopolise our limited attention. Road signs warning against phone use while driving are so commonplace that they almost blend into the landscape. Parents make their kids promise they won’t use their phones while driving. Kids nod and promise they won’t. Phone-tracking studies indicate that most of them do it anyway and that their parents do, too.

In recent years, America’s fear of the distracted driver expanded to include the distracted walker. This is a replay of an old phenomenon: it was the US that invented the concept of the “jaywalker”, a “jay” being an unsophisticated person from the country who did not even know how to walk correctly. In the US, much like anywhere that cars have taken hold, drivers screaming at pedestrians (and cyclists) that they are doing it wrong is a fixture of national life. More recently, numerous states and cities, including San Francisco and New York, have launched public campaigns against inattentive walking, as has the US National Safety Council. Some jurisdictions have passed, or sought to pass, bills that would make using a smartphone while crossing the road an offence punishable by fine. On Twitter, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has weighed in on the pedestrian safety crisis primarily by coaching pedestrians on how to protect themselves. “When you are walking, be predictable”, advises @NHTSAgov.

Safety experts are not terribly excited about pedestrian avoidance technology. It wasn’t that they doubted it might save some pedestrian lives. Instead, their recurring concern was that it reflects an ongoing focus on individual shortcomings – on flawed drivers and walkers – and a neglect of flaws built in to the roads they are forced to use.

“Pedestrian detection will probably help a bit,” says Dan Albert, author of Are We There Yet?, a history of American car culture. “But at the same time, it’s pretty clear that these problems can be addressed without hi-tech solutions. And so what are the car companies up to? It’s not just about some altruistic desire for safety, or they would be including these systems on all of their cars, which very few companies are doing. It’s more about creating a range of products that allows them to maximise profit.”

Of course, people can learn to understand new tools. More troubling is the fact that very little robust evidence has been available as to pedestrian avoidance systems’ real-world benefits. The organisations rating these systems do so based on tests conducted in laboratories and on test tracks, but it has not yet been reliably established how well these tests predict performance on actual roads, with real live pedestrians instead of crash test dummies (not to mention variable light and rain conditions).

The self-driving car “space” is flooded in loose cash. This is why pedestrian avoidance systems are becoming ubiquitous. Investment dollars have both improved the required parts and programmes and pushed down their cost. Otherwise, they would not be affordable enough to sell to any but the richest car-buyers. Meanwhile, the race continues. The tech companies keep saying they are almost there (they know they said they were almost there before, but this time is different, they promise). Almost every major car company has partnered with a lab developing self-driving car technology, either because they think it might become a requirement to stay in business, or because enough of their shareholders think so that they need to make a show of playing along.

One night in March 2018, a 49-year-old woman named Elaine Herzberg was pushing a bicycle laden with grocery bags across a four-lane road in Tempe, Arizona when she was struck and killed by a Volvo X90 operating under the control of Uber’s self-driving software. As is standard practice, a backup safety driver, employed by Uber, was sitting in the car, the idea being that she would take over in the case of error. 1.3 seconds before impact, Uber’s software calculated that emergency braking was called for. According to Uber, self-braking had been turned off to reduce jerky and unpredictable behaviour. With less than a second to go, the safety driver tried––and failed––to swerve away. (The post-crash investigation indicated that she had probably been watching the singing contest The Voice on her phone.) News outlets around the world covered Herzberg’s death in obsessive detail, asking whether it indicated that autonomous vehicles were less “ready” than we had been led to believe.

But, just as the original quest for autonomous vehicles had nothing to do with pedestrian safety, concern over Herzberg’s death often felt curiously divorced from concern for pedestrians in general. Herzberg was killed in March 2018. Between January and June of that year, 124 pedestrians were killed in Arizona, more than all but four other states in absolute terms, and more than all but one on a per capita basis. It goes without saying that none of these pedestrians’ names are known around the world, or that any of them generated a slurry of commentary about whether the American transportation environment is “safe enough” or “as safe as it should be”.

In the US, meanwhile, it remains the case that pedestrian advocates have failed to engineer the cultural process that transforms a scattered mass of dead and injured bodies into a widely recognized problem. They have not come close. When two Boeing 737s went down, killing 346 people, it triggered multiple government investigations. Crash reconstruction and analysis experts showed up. Corporate spokespeople apologized, began handing out checks to victims’ families and swore to do better. Journalists searched for explanations. But cars kill a 737’s worth of American pedestrians every couple of weeks. Internationally, it is more than three 737s per day. And the news cycle barely stutters.

In 2017, for the first time, each US state was required to submit road fatality reduction targets to the federal government. Most states set extremely limited goals: Wisconsin, for example, aimed to have 342 pedestrian fatalities, instead of 361. Several set a rather fatalistic goal of no reduction at all. Eighteen states went a step further, setting as their target an increase in their pedestrian death count. It is not that they want more pedestrians to die. But they know that people are likely to be driving more, they know what their roads are like and they know the laws of physics. Unlike the unending stream of hype coming from the autonomous car sector, these dour projections received no coverage outside of traffic reform circles. Unfortunately, they are more likely to contain the truth.

Read the full article here. 

Tesla Autopilot Gets Confused by Lanes Not Clearly Marked

Another Tesla Driver On Autopilot Nearly Crashes Trying To Recreate Fatal Crash

When the video is slowed down, you can see parts of the white lanes are faded and the car seems to think the left side of the lane — is the right. Fred Barez is a professor of mechanical engineering at San Jose State University. He said, “The lanes are not marked clearly on the road, so the camera attached to the Tesla vehicle is having a difficult time.” Barez is building his own autonomous vehicles with students. He says lanes that aren’t clearly visible can be a challenge for Tesla’s autopilot feature. Barez said, “Tesla believes in having eight cameras all around the vehicle and they monitor the presence of the lanes on the road.”

Site of Tesla Autopilot Fatality on 101

Tesla Autopilot Lane Confusion on 101

On its website, Tesla says it’s now also using a dozen updated ultrasonic sensors “allowing for detection of objects at nearly twice the distance of the prior system.” The company also advises its customers to keep their hands on the wheels, and to pay attention. Barez said, “I believe the Tesla is still pretty safe. It’s just a matter of the driver having to take responsibility as well.” The driver in the deadly crash, according to Tesla, did not take control of the wheel despite warnings. In his video Joshi grabs the wheel seconds before his Tesla would’ve slammed into the median: A couple years ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk told reporters that California needed better lane markings, because it was confusing his cars’ autopilot feature. Tesla did not immediately respond to KPIX 5’s request for comment on Joshi’s video.

Map of Tesla Autopilot Fatality on 101 in Mountain View, CA

BadIntersections.com has started mapping autopilot accidents and locations where drivers feel that Uber and Tesla did not make a good driving decision.  We are calling these locations "Autopilot Issues" on the map.  Hopefully, autonomous vehicle companies will start using this historic data to help improve safety for future drivers at these locations.  Do a search for "autopilot" in the title and you will find the data.  

Disabled Drivers, Adapted Vehicles and Road Safety

Amazing developments in design and technology has enabled manufacturers to develop automobiles that can be driven by motorists suffering from disabilities. Many of these developments involve making the operating of the car much easier by changing how it is controlled - this could include replacing the steering wheel with a joystick, or replacing the pedals with hand controls. In 2016,  there were an estimated 1.9 million disabled drivers in the UK, which made up approximately 6% of licensed drivers.

Are these Vehicles Dangerous?

Some may think that changing the way in which a car operates will make it dangerous to drive. This is not the case, however, as a study revealed that disabled drivers were not found to have a collision involvement that was different from the total population. The reasoning for this is that any motorist, able-bodied or not, must pass a test where they drive to a required standard. Although a disabled motorist may operate the automobile differently, they must still drive to the required standard.

Disabled motorists will learn in an adapted automobile and from a tutor that specialises in teaching disabled drivers - this ensures that they are able to operate an adapted automobile to the same standard that an able-bodied motorist can operate a standard vehicle. The only difference will be that the disabled driver’s license will show that they are only licensed to drive an adapted vehicle and it will state what kind of adapted automobile. Therefore, they will legally only be able to operate the type of vehicle that they passed their test in and, consequently, disabled motorists are just as safe as other users on the road.

The Major Reasons for Collisions

So, what are the major reasons for collisions? Studies show that failure to look is the most commonly reported factor, whilst loss of control is the most frequently reported factor in fatal accidents. Unsurprisingly, driving whilst over the limit and users distracted on their smartphones remain very prevalent issues that lead to many collisions. In terms of the type of motorist that is found to be involved in the majority of collisions, young males remain the most dangerous group.

The adaptations that have been made to automobiles to enable disabled individuals to get behind the wheel are superb, with companies like Allied Mobility leading the way. Due to the fact that these motorists learned in one of these vehicles and passed their test ensures that they are just as safe as other road users, whilst the main reasons for collisions remain the same.

Watch Engadget Car Tech Talk at Live at CES 2017

.@engadget Watch on #Periscope Car tech at CES: the good, bad and ugly https://t.co/wOnbeVSekP

— jeffcohn (@jeffcohn) January 5, 2017

Here is a summary of the CES 2017 panel video below.

Both Honda Nuvis and Concept-I Toyota cars have artificial intelligence (AI) that measures your mood.  They say its your friend or assistant to help you understand what you might need.  A new route home or even some mood music.

Faraday Future also has a mood feature in the car as well.  However, there are rumors that the company is in financial difficulty not paying bills and executives leaving.

Cars will now have multiple modems in the car to use multiple wireless carriers when coverage stinks.  

Hyundai is testing an autonomous car at CES and the one of the people on stage had a close call with a truck on the road.  

10 Ways To Get Respect From Drivers While Riding Your Bike

Why has riding a bike in most cities across the World now become hazardous to your health and you could easily be risking your life and injury.   I have been riding my bike for the last 25+ years to commute around the Hermosa Beach & Manhattan Beach area.  I used to ride my bike for exercise on the streets training for triathlons but ever since I had kids I have stopped.  It is just too risky now and over the years I have seen many injuries and accidents because some drivers don't respect bikers.

It concerns me that driving has become even more hazardous with texting and distracted driving.  However, one thing that has progressed is road rage, especially in the morning.  I can't tell you how many times I have seen angry drivers pass bikers too close.  Why don't more drivers respect the space of bikers on the road?  Don't more drivers realize that kids are riding their bikes to school and need to slow down?  Over the years I have found the following things help to move cars and get more respect from cars while riding.  Passing too close is my biggest pet peeve and here are ways to help get more space.

• Ride with a group of 2 or more people.  Drivers tend to respect riders more in a group. 
• Have a quick look over your shoulder if you start to hear a car approaching. 
• Wear bright colors.  
• Do your best to hug the side of the road or parked cars. 
• Don't ride in the middle of a lane because you never know if a crazy driver is approaching.
• Don't run stop signs or lights. 
• Don't ride too fast down hills or in areas with heavy traffic.  Stopping safely is everything! 
• Always be on guard and never relax while riding. 
• Look inside parked vehicles to make sure a car is not about to pull out or open a car door.  
• NEVER wear headphones!  

I can't tell you how many times I have almost been hit by a car while riding my bike on the side of the road. Why don't more drivers give proper space to bikers on the road?   Most drivers are courteous and pull over a lane on the road or just ride the median to give ample space.   However, on some rides, there is usually that one "knucklehead" driver who does not respect your space and will pass you without pulling out.  These people know what they are doing because they often look in the rearview mirror to see my reaction.  We need to crowdsource a database of these assholes and their license plates!

I am not an overly aggressive rider and tend to hug the side of the road for just these reasons.  What can be done to solve these problems?  Education or steeper fines for not giving bikers ample space?  Here is a good article that talks about the 9 things that drivers need to stop saying in the bikes vs cars debate.

Here is another article that suggests that drivers think that cyclists are annoying.  Why do motorists get so angry at cyclists?    "It's not because cyclists are annoying,” he writes. “It isn't even because we have a selective memory for that one stand-out annoying cyclist over the hundreds of boring, non-annoying ones (although that probably is a factor). No, my theory is that motorists hate cyclists because they think they offend the moral order.”

I would like to see bike radar companies like Ridar take off in the future.  If every car has a bike presence sensor and cars were informed that a bike was nearby this could help.  It would be awesome to see companies like Waze have a function for bikers to let drivers know they are nearby.  However, it is going to take widespread adoption by the automakers.  Hopefully, companies like Garmin and Ridar can make this happen and bring the technology to the masses.