Skip to main content

Tesla Autopilot system ‘not at fault’ in fatal crash

A nine-month investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) into the fatal car crash involving a Tesla Model S in Florida last year has concluded that the car’s Autopilot system, which was in operation at the time, was not at fault. The decision noted that Autopilot is a Level 2 self-driving system and, therefore, requires the driver to always monitor the system and be at the ready to intervene – a stipulation that the driver failed to perform, the administration says.
January 24, 2017 Read time: 2 mins
A nine-month investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) into the fatal car crash involving a 8534 Tesla Model S in Florida last year has concluded that the car’s Autopilot system, which was in operation at the time, was not at fault.

The decision noted that Autopilot is a Level 2 self-driving system and, therefore, requires the driver to always monitor the system and be at the ready to intervene – a stipulation that the driver failed to perform, the administration says.

“A safety-related defect trend has not been identified at this time and further examination of this issue does not appear to be warranted,” says the NHTSA in its report and the investigation is closed. However, it warns that the closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that no safety-related defect exists. The agency will monitor the issue and reserves the right to take future action if circumstances warrant it.

Following this and other crashes in 2016, Tesla modified the Autopilot system, which it describes as semi-autonomous, to ensure drivers don't take their hands off the wheel for extended periods and reminding them of the need to remain aware of road conditions.

Tesla issued a statement following the investigation, saying, “At Tesla, the safety of our customers comes first, and we appreciate the thoroughness of NHTSA’s report and its conclusion.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • APA supports automated work zone speed enforcement
    July 17, 2015
    A trade association representing the highway construction industry strongly supports automated enforcement of speed limits in work zones and Maryland's experience with a similarly designed program has had very good results, the association head has told a joint Pennsylvania House and Senate committee. According to PennDOT, 24 people were killed in work-zone crashes in 2014, eight more than in 2013. Additionally, there were 1,841 crashes in work zones last year, a slight decrease from the 1,851 crashes
  • In-vehicle safety standard released for consultation
    July 24, 2012
    The new ISO 26262 standard for safety-related vehicle systems is now available for comment. MIRA's David Ward talks to ITS International about what the standard will mean for vehicle and road safety in the future. The publication on 8 July this year of ISO 26262 as a Draft International Standard (DIS) marks an important progression for the automotive - and, in time, the cooperative infrastructure - industries. A couple of years from now, automotive OEMs will be able to subscribe to a unifying standard for s
  • V2V technologies expected to offer safety benefits, but challenges exist
    November 4, 2013
    A new report by the US Government Accountability office (GAO) expects vehicle to vehicle (V2V) technologies to offer safety benefits, but says that a variety of deployment challenges exist. The report finds that development of V2V technologies has progressed to the point of real world testing, and if broadly deployed, they are anticipated to offer significant safety benefits.
  • Multi-tasking at the wheel a potentially fatal myth, finds IAM
    November 20, 2015
    Expert psychologists have concluded that multi-tasking whilst driving is a myth – and the most dangerous of those driving multi-tasks is texting and talking on a mobile phone, according to a new report produced by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) and the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL). The research focuses on the dangers involved when drivers try and engage in more than one task, indicating this can have a ‘detrimental’ effect on the quality and accuracy of driving performance. The find