[blensor]

While naming a product should usually be up to the company who creates said product, my opinion on this is that Tesla should no longer be allowed to call this "autopilot", for public safety reasons.

Autopilot is a well known word which suggests a certain level of autonomousness and a car that might kill you if you take your attention away for 6 seconds simply does not qualify for that name. Tesla changing the name from autopilot to something better resembling reality would send a strong message to people to be more careful with using it while the attention is somewhere else

[wirrbel]

There is actually a semi-official categorization that Tesla seems to ignore

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Autonomous_car#/Levels_of_drivin...

pilots are level 3 upwards according to this classification. Level 2 systems are called assistants. If tesla would adhere to the industry agreement, they would call their system an "assistant" and not a pilot.

[z6]

Ok, so if they rename it to 'lane guidance' or whatever, everything would be cool?

[Cookingboy]

Yes, it would be much better. They also need to take away the in-your-face Full Self Driving marketing on their Auto Pilot page to eliminate any misleading association.

[illustrioussuit]

I know nothing about aviation, but isn’t “autopilot” on a commercial plane pretty much just “maintain altitude and heading”? Pilots still have to be engaged and active, right?

[Area12]

Don't miss the point here. Tesla doesn't require that you be a licensed air pilot before you buy the car. It doesn't matter what pilots know about autopilots, it's about what the general public believes when they hear "autopilot". I wouldn't be surprised if 50% of the world believes that an autopilot allows both pilots to leave the cockpit for five or ten minutes. So the word "autopilot" misleads them, even if a pilot would know the limitations.

[CaptainZapp]

And in aviation you have the added advantage that you don't just smash into a divider on 35'000 feet with one second notice.

[shkkmo]

No, but you are required to be a licensed driver and the car warns you if you take your hands off the wheel. I don't know how you can claim that the meaning of "autopilot" isn't clear to the drivers.

[kosievdmerwe]

Did your driver's license involve training in how to handle autopilot and its common errors and how to correct them? If not, I'm not sure how having a driver's license is relevant?

[shkkmo]

> If not, I'm not sure how having a driver's license is relevant?

The driver is licensed to operate the motor vehicle. It is their responsibility to be familiar with the safe operation of the vehicle.

> how to handle autopilot and its common errors and how to correct them?

Do you believe that anything additional was required here other than keeping the car in it's lane?

[kosievdmerwe]

The problem is that if the accident was anything like this video[1] then the driver barely had any time to actively correct the problem, a problem that a well-worn and understood system with driver training would have prepared the driver for.

Also, note that the beep is the driver taking over from autopilot.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8a0jfh/autopil...

[cdowns]

In General Aviation at least, there are varying levels of autopilot (depending on how nice the system is you can maintain heading and altitude or fly a pre-programmed course with navigational waypoints), but all of them will fly you right into the side of a mountain or into restricted airspace if you let them. You can't just set it and stop paying attention. It seems that is what people want when they think of "autopilot" for their cars.

[markshead]

If that is the case, autopilot on a plane seems to be more like cruise control expanded to maintain pitch, yaw, and roll than autonomous flying.

[0xffff2]

There is tremendous variability, but this is basically correct. In addition, the sky is wide open and empty compared to even a not so busy street.

Airplane autopilots really are solving a much simpler problem than even a level 3 autonomous car has to solve.

The most advanced autopilots can automatically takeoff and land, but that requires substantial ground equipment at each airport to support.

[binarnosp]

+1, Instead of developing super smarts autopilots we could just instrument the highways so they can tell the car where to go. The instrumented roads could send out warnings and give control back to the driver when there are roadworks ahead.

[Sohcahtoa82]

That would require a massive infrastructure investment. And seeing as we can't seem to even get a good chunk of roads to even be in good repair, I don't have high expectations for the possibility of instrumented roads.

[slavik81]

If we were willing to do that, we could have had self-driving cars decades ago. They were showing off systems with magnetic lane markers on the Discovery Channel when I was a kid.

The exciting thing about self-driving cars this time was that they worked on existing roads, making them financially feasible.

[Osiris]

GM is driving around with LIDAR to create very precise maps of specific highways and their cars use those detailed maps to navigate.

[sundvor]

Key thing that unlike Tesla's self driving system. just about nothing can happen in a plane that will kill you if don't disable the auto pilot in 1-2 seconds.

Perhaps final stages of ILS approach? That'd be the exception, but pilots are trained and certified for this - and definitely not allowed to snooze off then.

(I'm not a pilot, but have spent a fair amount of time and money on various PC flight sims; edit: and used to drive a Mazda 3 with a very good radar cruise control and AEB, before ditching it for a bicycle because getting old and fat).

[cmurf]

I'm a pilot and wouldn't consider them autonomous. In the most sophisticated systems, you can plug in a fairly complex route to destination but there's a disconnect in automaticity when transitioning from cruise to approach. There are standard terminal arrivals, but they all assume contact with ATC for specifics, and in the case of lost communication in instrument flight you're expected to use your best judgment for ambiguous sections of the route clearance. Autopilots don't have judgment, and they also can't do two way communications either, so they're not able to accept ATC clearances directly, a pilot has to do that. So yeah not autonomous.

[rayiner]

Weird pro-Tesla, anti-airliner FUD. A modern airline’s autopilot will handle everything between takeoff and landing, and can land the plane if needed. The A380 auto pilot has been able to respond to TCAS (collision avoidance system) advisories automatically for almost a decade.

GA autopilots may be more limited, but that’s not what the general public is thinking of when you say autopilot.

[JackCh]

I'd wager the general public has overestimated the capabilities of aviation autopilots for quite a long time and only recently have common autopilot systems begun to approach what the public thinks about them. For instance in 1947 a USAF C-54 is reported to have taken off, crossed the Atlantic and landed on autopilot (all under very careful supervision). Needless to say autoland on commercial airliners would not be near ubiquitous for many years following that, but I suspect the general public did not have an accurate understanding of this. Furthermore I suspect many among the general public greatly overestimate the extent to which autopilot controlled take-off exists. "Pilots just push button and take a nap" is a sentiment I've often heard expressed, perhaps only partially in jest.

This is far from a defense of Tesla. On the contrary, the public's ignorance about what capabilities are implied by 'autopilot' suggest to me that Tesla should not be using the word.

[CaptainZapp]

The capabilities you have with automation in modern planes is amazing.

I once had the privilege to sit in the cockpit during an entire flight. That was in the late nineties and probably would be completely out of the question nowadays.

The weather and visibility were shitty and what was really interesting was that they initiated the landing automatically, but when the runway become visible (about 400 meters) the first officer took over and landed the plane manually.

Two other things I learned is the amount of manuals they have available in that very cramped space (maybe maintained electronically nowadays) and that when you think that they just key in a couple sequences into the flight management system to then play solitaire you would be very wrong.

Both pilots where permanently active and on high alert during the entire one hour flight. That may be a bit more relaxed on long distance flights, but people who believe it's like driving a bus are really, really wrong.

it was an amazing and very interesting experience.

[sitharus]

You’re correct, an airline autopilot can do all that under _continual pilot supervision_. The autopilot also cannot communicate with ATC so pilots will adjust the flight path in flight to account for ATC instructions and changing weather. It’s not hands-off.

[ssambros]

It is "hands off", it is not "situational awareness off". And airplane autopilots do not require split-second interventions if something goes wrong, the buffer is usually in a couple of seconds range. Even then trained pilots sometimes fail to correctly take over the flying duties (see Air France Flight 447).

Tesla is claiming that if the drivers hands are not on the wheel then they are not responsible what what their "autopilot" does.

[ccostes]

The most advanced autopilot systems today can navigate and even land the aircraft, but the majority of systems (especially on general aviation aircraft, but even many commercial) are closer to what you describe, and can kill you if you're not paying attention.

[danaliv]

And those autopilots can only land under close supervision by specially trained aircrew.

[tedunangst]

Perhaps the Tesla autopilot should be subject to the same regulations and restrictions regarding use as airplane autopilot.

[Shivetya]

well one thing to note is that what the public thinks an aircraft autopilot can do is not exactly what it does do. hence the reason many object to Tesla's use of the name, they are exploiting the ignorance of the public with regards to the capability of the product.

[vkou]

Only in general aviation (Which has an appalling accident rate.)

Autopilots in commercial aircraft - the kind that you'd be flying from San Francisco to New York are capable of far more then just dumb cruise control, including navigation and landing.

If 'maintain pitch and direction' were enough to be 'autopilot', then my SO's '97 Toyota Avalon had 'autopilot'.

[cycrutchfield]

This is nonsensical. What kind of autopilots do you think airplane pilots and boat captains use? That's where the name comes from, and if people think otherwise maybe they shouldn't take their cues from science fiction.

If I name something warp drive, are you then entitled to believe that you will now be able to travel faster than light? Will you blame me for naming the product incorrectly if you travel at a speed less than c?

[BonesJustice]

It is irrelevant whether you think it is _reasonable_ for people to associate the word ‘autopilot’ with autonomy. Reasonable or not, people do, and that has safety consequences for everyone who shares the road with them.