536
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
536 points (93.1% liked)
Technology
59381 readers
1000 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They really should disaggregate recalls fixed with OTA updates from recalls that need a physical intervention. Obviously Teslas almost always need an OTA update
No they shouldn't. since not every OTA update gets a recall. Only safety related issues cause recalls. What OTA recall means is software or algorhitm related to the drive train, driving or related systems had a safety related issue.
It is normal, that now that there is more software control, there is more software related recalls. The point isn't to track how many times the car went to shop to be worked on. The point is to track how many times and how severe safety related issues there is. Just because the solution was simple to end user OTA update doesn't mean the underlying safety issue wasn't severe.
Before you had to go to garage to fix sticking accelerator cable. Now you have to update the power delivery mapping algorhitm, since it had a bug qnd didn't properly cut the torque from the motor on accelerator lift. Both are uncommanded acceleration application issues. Equally severe and very serious safety issues. One just needs physical work, other software fixing.
That they have to update the software so often regarding safety says to me their safety verification procedure isn't robust.
Also not like Tesla is the only one. Others also have had to update their software for bugs or ill behavior. Just not as often. I would hazard due to more conservative software updating.
Bunch of the recalls for Tesla have been caused by them updating software, introducing a bug and then having to pretty soon after safety recall for the update fixing that bug. If they had scrutineered the software more closely, they would have avoided the safety recall. Since the deployed software would be bug free on the first deployment.
Remember on modern EV, single bug in control software can send front and rear tires spinning in opposite directions. On 4 motor torque vectoring the software can send the car into uncontrolled tank spin with one side pulling forward and other backward.
The simple truth is the driveline control software is safety critical component of modern car and thus should absolutely earn safety notices on having problems. Mind you recall is archaic name for safety notice, but that is the name in legislations and use. On many other fields also there is archaic legacy terms in use and people learn to deal with it.