Collision avoidance system and Euro Ncap

When will it be avilable in the S?

All premium sedans on the market has something similar as standard or an optiion (Adaptive Cruise Control etc.)

Soon to be an standard in all cars sold in Europe .

I have been told that the S will have wiring prepared for this (?)

And when When the S be tested by Euro Ncap?

I didn't get the chance to ask Elon personaly when he came to Norway. (But he really answered a lot of questions from the invited audience - impressing)

And when will the S be tested by Euro Ncap?

That requirement is more than 2 years away. I suspect it will be a "future" model S (2.0) that has
it and the Model X.

The collision avoidance is so important to me it was almost a deal breaker. I had an Infiniti FX50 that had this and it worked wonderfully (as did the adaptive cruise control). I'm positive this reduces rear end collisions by an astronomical amount. I cannot believe the Model S does not have this almost essential item.

I can't believe the Infiniti still has a gasoline engine!

Bravo DouglasR. +1

I can't believe how much complaining there is about what the car can't do or doesn't have. (Just read the reaction to the charge timer feature in the 4.3 update. As soon as the roll out started, so did the complaining).

I can't believe Tesla is selling these amazing machines so cheap. I'm nowhere close to loaded and neither is my Model S, but I think they are a bargain, especially when you factor in the low operating and maintenance costs.

I can't believe Tesla can't make a car that is all thing to all people.

DouglasR - I sold my Infiniti to make room for the Tesla!

Lush1 - I'm not complaining about lack of map pockets or grab handles.(Although they would be nice). I'm talking about a major safety improvement. Kind of like selling a car with no seat belts.
The first time the system saves you from rear ending someone because you were looking at that big beautiful screen you'll realize its worth!

@Barryfinn - simple solution: pay attention to driving when you are driving.

Can Tesla just provide the full Google self-driving car experience on a reasonably aggressive schedule?

Google Driving : collision avoidance system :: Tesla : hybrid

@Joel - Elon is on record saying that he would love for Tesla to be the first commercial self-driving car. As for the readiness, Google has started letting employees on the team take cars home with them, so it is getting closer. There is still a lot of legal things that need to happen for it to be viable, and the cost of the system has to come down as well (though certainly it is easier to add $40k of hardware to a $80k+ car than a $20k car).

The hardware probably also needs some minimization, as it is pretty obtrusive right now (the laser rangefinder on top is pretty substantial, and would likely have a significant impact on range).

Google has been quoted as expecting them to be commercialized in 3-5 years, but there are a few hard technical problems that have to get solved:
- detecting lanes when covered by snow
- dealing with changes in the road, such as when under construction, that weren't expected
- dealing with hand signals from traffic cops

Currently, where they are legal, it is treated as an advanced cruise control, with the assumption that there is a driver who could take control (and is responsible for taking control) if needed.

Hardware minimization may be mostly a software problem. We know that humans can drive with little more input than two movable optical sensors. 5-10 cheap color visible light cameras, not able to be moved relative to the car, might well be enough information to control the car, but writing the software for that may be harder than writing software for the laser rangefinder.

A fancy cruise control that requires no manual steering or speed inputs except in snow / construction zones / with hand signals would still be a huge improvement over what we have now if it really works well in the cases where it's claimed to work.

And at least in some states, we have laws that say that you're suposed to call Dig Safe before you dig holes in the ground. If we have laws like that, why can't we have laws saying that if you're going to have a construction zone, you need to tell Google about it? Google can then try to redirect the self-driving cars away from the construction zone onto another road where that's practical, and reverting to manual driving may be an option where rerouting doesn't work.

As for the hand signals, teaching the computers to understand the existing hand signals might be good, but if you start asking police officers whether they'd rather learn to use a smartphone app to control self-driving cars that can't read hand signals, or whether they'd prefer to continue to occasionally respond to drunk driving fatalities, what answer are you going to get? Does MADD have any opinion about this?

Also, does it actually matter whether every single driver responds to the hand signals, especially if self-driving cars just ignoring hand signals is expected? If self-driving cars are only 10%, is it a problem if they follow the car in front of them against the hand signals in some cases? And if we get to 90% self-driving, does a smartphone app that lets the person directing traffic be better physically separated from the traffic end up being a useful safety improvement?

I think some of you are missing the point. The collision avoidance system is like a seat belt or insurance. You have it but hope never having to use it. No, I've never had a rear end collision (although I have been rear ended). I DO pay attention when I drive. If it didn't work other high end car makers wouldn't use it. It worked wonderfully on my Infiniti (although the lane departure system sucked). All it takes is a moments inattention (phone, radio, climate control etc.) on the freeway. You know how this works: the instant you take your eyes off the road the car in front of you slows rapidly. You look up and stomp on the brakes to avoid hitting them. The collision avoidance avoids all that. It's like having a 24/7 co-pilot.

I disagree with this statement, at least the part about seatbelts. I use them all the time because of things that may or may not be my fault - like being rear ended by someone. Insurance, yes we have it and hope to never need it.

I drive a lot of miles every year between personal and business vehicles, in excess of 50000 miles a year. Everything I drive has a collision avoidance system, its called the driver. It's my responsibility as the operator of the vehicle to pay attention to my surroundings and to drive in a manner to not have to slam on brakes or hit a car in front of or beside me.

Sure the high end companies do it, sure it works, but it is mostly a crutch for drivers not taking responsibility for actually driving.

Why the h...l you want this crap? Stay awake and watch what you are doing. Then nanny state is all encompassing it seems. Yikes!

@ GeirT

No need to get rude. It most certainly is not crap. If it was an option I would have gone for CAS in an eyeblink. For me it is not a dealbreaker, though. But I understand the concern. And so should you without being stupid about it.

Sounds like you need a more rudimentary safety device, like driver education. If you glance down and when you look up your about to read end the car ahead you were:
A) following to closely
B) not exercising good judgement
C) operating a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner
D) all of the above.

I have never rear ended another car. Never had a close call like the ones you describe in a manner that makes it sound like this is a common occurrence in your life. If that's the case, you are a bad driver who isn't driving defensively. If you're on the freeway and really NEED to look at your phone, radio, climate control, etc, you will not have to panic stop if you leave enough following distance to the car ahead to give you the time you need for these tasks. Keep your eyes on the road and your hands on the wheel or you are making dangerous gambles with your life and the lives of other people you share the roads with. Paying attention to driving is your responsibility if you want the privilege of operating a motor vehicle. You must always anticipate the possibility that other cars may alter their speed. It's all part of driving defensively. Consider this your first lesson. You are very defensive, but not about driving safely. You are defending driving recklessly and offering as a solution adding systems that can intervene and drive the car when you fail at your responsibility.

I agree that crash avoidance systems are a good idea and can prevent collisions when other drivers create dangerous conditions which you can't always anticipate, or when mechanical failures or acts of nature suddenly happen while you are looking at your radio, phone, etc. I've driven for 45 years without incident, and while I like the idea of such a system, I feel quite safe without it. Rather, I did until I contemplated the idea of you in my rear view mirror. But I wouldn't put it in the same category as seat belts which protect occupants when something goes horribly wrong. I think anti lock brakes are super because they can perform braking maneuvers beyond the capabilities of most drivers and cars that lack the equipment. Traction control is great for those times when you misjudge a turn or encounter unexpected slippery roads, though many enthusiasts prefer driving with it turned off and complain that it still isn't completely off in most cars, Tesla included. But an alert, competent driver largely obviates the need of such a system. Sure,I would like to have it as an added measure of safety for the situations where I can't anticipate every conceivable threat, but I have been doing fine these 4 and a half decades without it so I don't feel it's a necessity. It's relatively new technology. Most cars on the roads don't have it, yet somehow, we're not all rear ending people, just those of us who drive distracted or follow too closely.

The lane departure systems, not interested. I can stay in my lane and I don't want the car intervening in that way. The way they paint the lines on the streets around here is reason enough, but it's really just a baby step toward automated roads where cars drive themselves. Maybe when I'm 80 we will have them and I will be ready to let cars drive me.

I think I saw a thread from someone who was able to have their Tesla retrofitted with aftermarket collision avoidance radar. You might want to look for it (though I'm not positive I am correct, I only saw a headline that suggested it)

One more thing (as if I didn't say enough). I think collision avoidance radar has the potential of becoming a crutch that makes drivers less attentive and more comfortable tailgating. If you know the car will stop itself if you aren't paying attention, why not text, email, watch a video, read a paper, or just close your eyes.

I may eat my words if a tree falls into my path and I can't stop the car in time to avoid it, but that is likely to be the only situation where I need it.


I have no objection if TM wants to add this system to future models. I was reacting, however, to the sentiment that you "can't believe the Model S does not have this almost essential item." I've never had it on a car. In fact, until now I had never even heard of it. So I don't think it's essential and I can certainly believe that a good car might not have it.

I think it's a mistake to assume that the Model S should have each and every feature found on other $100k cars. It's like complaining about the first Duryea Motor Wagon because it lacks the isinglass curtains found on the best horse-drawn surreys. The Model S advances the boundaries of automobile transportation. It is a giant step forward in so many ways. That is why I'm willing to pay twice as much as I paid for my last car, and why I would never pay this much for a Mercedes or an Infiniti.


I am liking what you are saying lately. I couldn't agree with you more and echo your sentiments 100%. Coincidentally, my previous cars were a MB and an Infiniti but I would not choose either, or any other car on the market over my Tesla now. I've found myself agreeing with your comments several times this weekend while I've been very active on the forum. You have a gift for brevity I lack.

I'm in no way disagreeing with your last comment but I would like to add that the Model S in basic trim is a $50,000 car. I think it's an amazing bargain in stock trim or fully loaded, especially given the R&D costs and the remarkably short time they created the Roadster and Model S.

To paraphrase a comment I made following one of yours earlier: I can't believe how much people complain about what the car doesn't have. It has so much that no other car has, but some people seem to think it should have every feature that exists in the world. It's sad how selfish and unappreciative some people are. If the Model S doesn't have something a person finds essential, they should buy a different car. The Model S is fantastic and is better than I imagined it would be, and it's getting better with each FREE software update.

@DouglasR, Lush1 - +1

I love to have a Collision Avoidance System. This car is too powerful and it runs too fast. Nature is not always predictable: rain, fog, night time darkness, sun glares, deer crossing the road ... It is always good to have something to fall back to.

We are human so accidents happen every day. Accidents prevention system is one way to reduce it:

"According to the National Sleep Foundation’s 2005 Sleep in America poll, 60% of adult drivers – about 168 million people – say they have driven a vehicle while feeling drowsy in the past year, and more than one-third, (37% or 103 million people), have actually fallen asleep at the wheel!

In fact, of those who have nodded off, 13% say they have done so at least once a month. Four percent – approximately eleven million drivers – admit they have had an accident or near accident because they dozed off or were too tired to drive."

Tam- This car is too powerful and it runs too fast? Last time I checked the driver was in complete control of the car's speed. With the pedal. On the floor. To the right.

Last time I checked, Adaptive Cruise Control was a convencience, not a safety feature...

adaptive cruise control itself is not the point. Wasn't there this contract between Tesla and this company, with serves the content for the rear camera- augmented reality etc.?
I want this interactive thing- and a parking warner and the eletric folding mirrors.

European greetings

To me, it's just terminology which opens to marketing interpretation which is less helpful to safety information.

Adaptive Cruise Control is a generic term. Some can detect stationary objects, others can't. Some can stop your car automatically while others demand that the driver has to manually apply the brake in order to stop the car.

What counts is when a driver fails, can the system take over and prevent the accident!


Thank you so much for my lesson. You've brought a reasonable discussion down to the level of personal insults. I'm sure we'll all find this very useful. Well done.

@ you guys "voting" against radar based pre-crash system :
Did you feel this way about ABS when you first heard of it?

Radarbased pre-crash systems will soon be standard in all new cars.
No matter how you feel about it.

These kinds of accidents happens every day.
A dead customer do not buy a new car..
It should be an easy fix for TM to install the hardware and launch a new firmware

Do you really think Tesla Motors don't belive in this technolgy?
The only questions is - When do they launch it ? And will it be possible get it as a aftermarked solution
and installed by the local Tesla garage?

In my opinion, there is a few reasons why its not implemented in the S , yet:
- No extras at this time beacause of need for a quick launch
-Powerconsumtion - when batteries kWh encreases by 7% next year, problem solved
-Do not want to depend on patent pending products from existing suppliers to the car industry

Elon, any comment ? ; )

Facts : (Source: )

"IIHS researchers are monitoring real-world performance of driver assis- tance and crash avoidance technologies with the intention of promoting those that are shown to be effective at helping drivers avoid crashes."

Since 2010, Euro NCAP has been rewarding vehicle manufacturers
that make available new technologies that provide a scientifically proven safety benefit for consumers and society. Many of these technologies focus on avoiding crashes by informing, advising, and alerting drivers about dangerous situations. Some of them initiate autonomous braking as well. Recognizing these advances under Euro NCAP Advanced pro- vides an incentive to manufacturers to accelerate the availability of new safety equipment across their model ranges and helps vehicle buyers factor these features into their purchase decisions.
In 2012-15, Euro NCAP will be conducting extensive reviews of almost all its testing and assessment procedures. The objective is to make the 5-star rating system even more meaningful in terms of real-world per- formance and the advancement of safety technology. Work has com- menced on the development of an additional full-width frontal impact test using different-size dummies. There are also plans to implement a numberofnewtestproceduresfocusingonemergingcrashavoidance technologies and speed support systems.

I'd like the guy/gal behind me to have a Collision Avoidance System - seriously. I all too often look up at my rear view mirror to see an approaching car with the driver looking down at their phone......


Congratulations. You never rearended another car. Yet. Lets keep it that way. I just find it hard to understand why you are such an avid antagonist. It is just yet another safety measure like seatbelts, ABS, automatic seatbelt-tightener, airbags, collapsable steeringwheel, rain sensor, parking sensors, and so on and soforth. Or do you think all these are unnecessary? Well, I am not the only one on the road. There is no guarantee that there is not someone who will nail you in you car with his Surburban. Now, if this Surburban had CAS, you might live. The more widespread a technology, the better. Why not CAS in my MS?

It's NOT a safety feature though, it's a way for people to NOT PAY ATTENTION to what they're SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
When you're driving, you're in control of a multi-tonne kinetic missile. Why in the name of all things holy and sacred would you not pay attention to what is around you???????????? Seriously. The ONLY reason for this extra feature is so you can not pay attention to driving. If that's what you want, wait for a robot car to drive you around, get a chauffeur, ride a taxi or the bus.

Sorry if you find that offensive, but I find it offensive when people take the privilege of driving and assume its a god given right which they can then abuse with impunity. This is a serious responsibility, not something to be taken lightly.

I am so excited about the Model S and Tesla as a company. My P85 will arrive within the next 10 days, so I am obviously a believer. As Tesla's goal is to make the best car in the world (not just the best electric car), I think these are fair questions to ask. Active safety systems are becoming more commonplace, and should be on Tesla's product roadmap. I completely understand these features not being available at this stage, and I am stunned at all of the revolutionary advances incorporated in the Model S.
I have confidence that Tesla will incorporate these feateres in the future. We are a community of early adopters and enthusiasts, and I believe our discourse can help accelerate Tesla's success. Personally attacking someone that asks a question (even if you don't agree with how they phrase the question) doesn't help at all. This is the most remarkable car in the world, but as with everything, it can and will be better in the future.

X Deutschland Site Besuchen