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

  • Driverless vehicles will cause changes in society
    May 31, 2013
    Paul Godsmark gives his views on what the advent of autonomous vehicles would mean for the wider society. Further to your article ‘Driver not required…’ in the Jan/Feb edition of ITS International which gave some great background to autonomous road vehicle (ARVs), I feel that the bigger picture is needed to aid understanding. There is a ‘technology freight train’ heading our way that is going to transform our roadways but we don’t seem to be aware of it and, therefore, are in no hurry to react.
  • Autonomous vehicles, the pros and cons
    November 21, 2013
    Driver interface and human factors could provide the biggest obstacles to autonomous vehicles as Jon Masters discovers.
  • US DOT issues guidelines for automated vehicles
    September 21, 2016
    The US Department of Transportation is issuing Federal policy for automated vehicles, laying a path for the safe testing and deployment of new auto technologies that have enormous potential for improving safety and mobility for Americans on the road. “Automated vehicles have the potential to save thousands of lives, driving the single biggest leap in road safety that our country has ever taken,” said US Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “This policy is an unprecedented step by the federal government
  • Report highlights community impact of new mobility options
    March 29, 2018
    Local authorities and communities must understand the impacts of the new mobility options and regulate to get the transport systems they want, according to a new report. Colin Sowman takes a look. Outside of the big cities plagued with congestion, the existing transportation system(s) often cope adequately, and the ongoing workload (maintenance, safety…) is more than enough to keep local transport authorities busy. Is it, therefore, a good use of public service employees’ time to keep abreast of the raft