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

  • Just Zip it! Lindsay takes to the road
    October 10, 2018
    Greater vehicle connectivity is going to have huge implications for traffic management. David Arminas climbed aboard a Lindsay Road Zipper to see what this might mean in future As vice president of barrier specialist QMB Canada, Marc-Andre Seguin is sanguine about the future for moveable barriers. On the one hand, it looks good. The oft-stated advantage of moveable barriers is that the systems are cheaper to install than adding a lane or two to a highway or bridge. Directional changes to lanes can boost
  • Tesla uses Twitter to recruit software engineers
    November 23, 2015
    Tesla’s Elon Musk has taken to Twitter to recruit ‘hardcore software engineers’ to work on the company’s autopilot system. He issued a Tweet saying “Ramping up the Autopilot software team at Tesla to achieve generalised full autonomy” and followed it up with another saying that he will personally be handling interviews. The company released its Autopilot system for its Model S car at the end of October and claims it is the only fully integrated autopilot system involving four different feedback modules:
  • The future looks bright for ITS
    June 4, 2015
    Professor Eric Sampson talks about the past successes of ITS, its potential for the future and the challenges the industry faces. If anybody should know when Intelligent Transport Systems started that person is Professor Eric Sampson, a visiting professor at both Newcastle and London City Universities. Having spent 40 years working for the UK’s Department of Transport and other public administrations, Professor Sampson now supports the European Commission on ITS systems and advises ERTICO ITS-Europe and ITS
  • Road safety charity calls for ban on hands-free phones in vehicles
    June 8, 2016
    Following new research from psychologists at the University of Sussex, road safety charity Brake has renewed its calls for the UK government to look again at the laws around driving and mobile phone use. The study, published in the Transportation Research Journal, shows that drivers who are engaged in conversations that spark their visual imagination are much less able to spot and react to potential hazards. When the drivers involved in the study were asked about a subject that required them to visualis