Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:09 am

lpickup wrote:It appears to me that you can go too far the other way: a Tesla owner that refuses to accept that there may in fact be a better way to accomplish something.

A recent example: I posted a query to a (different) forum about the "workflow" used for long distance trips. Basically my query was whether there was any way for the nav system to display "optional" Superchargers along route, with estimated ETA and SOC at each one, even if stopping at said Superchargers was not required per the trip plan. The reason being that even though the car may not need to stop, I may have passengers that need to and this information would quickly show me very relevant information and help me decide whether to stop at an alternate supercharger (and adjust navigation to guide me there with a single click), or just stop at a rest area or fast food joint.

The response I got was that I should have done my research before the trip and become familiar with all superchargers en route and know enough about them that I should click the charger icon on the map, scroll to the supercharger on the map, click it to get status and tentatively navigate to it so I could see what my SOC will be when I get there, what the ETA is, etc. And besides, showing "optional" information on the turn-by-turn list is going to be confusing, take up too much space, etc.

Never mind the fact that it could be an optional setting, and being a graphical UI could display the information in a non-obtrusive and differentiated fashion and even be switchable on the fly. But the attitude I received seemed to be saying: "No, it's perfect the way it is. You have no right to complain. No update required." Seems silly to me (and I'm sure most others) to have OTA software ability if that's the attitude. I would hope that people aren't so enamored with Tesla that they refuse to accept any feedback at all.


Agreed that some people are just as inflexible in the Tesla camp as well.

As for your question, yes, you can see the list of nearby superchargers by pressing the lightning-bolt icon on the map (even while in a trip navigation). You can get charge estimates by navigating to it. Once done "browsing", you can use the map-search to select the original destination that you were navigating to. All of this requires an LTE connection though, so a little pre-planning on long road trips is prudent until v9 is released (rumored to have pre-downloaded maps and waypoints).
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

SageBrush
Posts: 2841
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:49 am

lpickup wrote:I posted a query to a (different) forum about the "workflow" used for long distance trips. Basically my query was whether there was any way for the nav system to display "optional" Superchargers along route, with estimated ETA and SOC at each one, even if stopping at said Superchargers was not required per the trip plan. The reason being that even though the car may not need to stop, I may have passengers that need to

Then stop. The Nav will adjust
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:18 am

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:As for your question, yes, you can see the list of nearby superchargers by pressing the lightning-bolt icon on the map (even while in a trip navigation). You can get charge estimates by navigating to it. Once done "browsing", you can use the map-search to select the original destination that you were navigating to. All of this requires an LTE connection though, so a little pre-planning on long road trips is prudent until v9 is released (rumored to have pre-downloaded maps and waypoints).


Guys, I get it...that's the whole point I was making. Having planned (much shorter, but no less challenging) trips in my LEAF, I know very well that I can pre-research my route, get familiar with all the Superchargers on route so I am at least generally aware of them, then use the bolt icon to pan around the map and click on an upcoming Supercharger site and then do a few exploratory clicks and navigates to get the information I am looking for. Just not really the thing I am looking to do after someone says they are starting to have to go to the bathroom and meanwhile trying to keep my eyes on the road, when I can think of a highly unobtrusive--and to me at least--non-confusing way to present this data right on screen: imagine an icon similar to the BOLT icon (or possibly even just make the BOLT icon do this) that zooms out and not just highlight and list the closest 5 SC's, but show a few stats for each one including how many miles/minutes away the SC is; how many minutes a stop there would add to my trip (if in navigation mode); what the estimated battery SOC is upon arrival; and how many stalls are currently in use. Granted, that's possibly a lot of data to display in the simple list, so potentially require a click to get those stats, but when I click, don't immediately start navigating there (like it does today). Instead, show me the expanded stats and provide an "Add Waypoint" button. And if I do have to click to get more data, let's add in some more useful data such as nearby amenities so I can tell if there is even a bathroom to be had nearby.

But the whole point is not about that feature specifically, just the whole attitude of "Well here's how you have to do it in the Tesla, so thou shalt do it that way". Not, "Oh hey, that's not a bad idea", or "I see what you are saying, but here is the problem..." "or "Here's why that will never work".

But since I did elaborate on the UI for locating SC and getting good data on them, I might as well continue. I do like to be able to see the current utilization of the stalls at a Supercharger. Right now I think the display is something simple like "7/8 available", but it might be more helpful to convey even more information. Are there any stalls that are down? If there are only 2/8 available but the charge rate of some of the half pairs indicate that vehicles will either be done soon or are charging at a slow enough rate that if I got the other half pair my charge rate wouldn't be impacted. Obviously the trick is boiling down all that information into something easily digestible from a quick glance at the screen. Maybe something along the lines of a display of the expected charging time at the SC that takes those factors into account (knowing that it's not 100% accurate given the fact that I may still be 25 minutes out), or a "score" where 100% represents the effective charge rate I can assume if I showed up to a perfectly working SC, and going down based on the effective energy I can receive in a given amount of time taking into account broken stalls, having to wait for an open stall, and getting a reduced charging rate due to a busy SC site.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:25 am

SageBrush wrote:
lpickup wrote:I posted a query to a (different) forum about the "workflow" used for long distance trips. Basically my query was whether there was any way for the nav system to display "optional" Superchargers along route, with estimated ETA and SOC at each one, even if stopping at said Superchargers was not required per the trip plan. The reason being that even though the car may not need to stop, I may have passengers that need to

Then stop. The Nav will adjust


Of course it will. But If I see that a SC is 30 minutes away and the passenger in question can "hold it", I'll defer stopping until then. If it's 45 minutes away (too far), or if it's only 10 minutes away but my SOC is only going to be at 70% by that point and thus not worth skipping an easy off/easy on rest area to get a relatively slow charge, then I may just want to use the rest area instead.

At this point I just don't know why I even bother brainstorming different (and I think better) ways to do things.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:24 pm

lpickup wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
lpickup wrote:I posted a query to a (different) forum about the "workflow" used for long distance trips. Basically my query was whether there was any way for the nav system to display "optional" Superchargers along route, with estimated ETA and SOC at each one, even if stopping at said Superchargers was not required per the trip plan. The reason being that even though the car may not need to stop, I may have passengers that need to

Then stop. The Nav will adjust


Of course it will. But If I see that a SC is 30 minutes away and the passenger in question can "hold it", I'll defer stopping until then. If it's 45 minutes away (too far), or if it's only 10 minutes away but my SOC is only going to be at 70% by that point and thus not worth skipping an easy off/easy on rest area to get a relatively slow charge, then I may just want to use the rest area instead.

At this point I just don't know why I even bother brainstorming different (and I think better) ways to do things.


Oh. Then just zoom out in your map. Supercharger stops still show up as red waypoints to give you a rough idea of how far away they are without the other details. I did this when navigating to a mall near Tejon Ranch and there were 3 superchargers along the way.

Secondly, I have yet to reach a supercharger that does NOT have restrooms nearby, so that's a question you shouldn't need to ask.

thirdly, at 70%, the model 3 is still pulling down ~70kw (~4.5miles of charge per minute) most of the non-urban superchargers are near easy on/off ramps, so it's up to you on whether or not to stop at a rest area.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

GRA
Posts: 9390
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:52 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
GRA wrote:Yeah, you're right, these peer-reviewed studies, which essentially just confirm decades of research on similar systems in aviation, aren't relevant at all. :roll:

Absolutely. All your links boil down to the AAA study and an article by Connected Brain. Both of which was about driver distractions and NOT about automation complacency.

You don't see any link between automation bias/complacency and the willingness to be distracted? I refuse to make or receive a phone call while I'm driving, and have it turned off in the car (easier for me to disconnect than for many others; I lived for 9 years without a home phone when growing up), because I know that it requires me to divert a greater amount of cognitive cycles away from driving than I'm comfortable with, but others certainly are so willing (and I have to avoid being run over by them while walking/biking on a bi-monthly basis).

You have said that there's no relevance between aviation studies of such systems and behaviors and similar studies in cars. I've just provided you with examples showing there is in fact exactly similar behavior in the case of touchscreens. There is also the same evidence regarding automation bias/complacency in both aircraft, land systems and cars - I've provided numerous links in both this and the "Tesla's Autopilot, on the road" and "Automated vehicles, LEAF and others" threads, or anyone could just search the net for themselves. But if, as you claim, there's no evidence of automation bias/complacency in Teslas or any other so-called semi-automated cars, despite all the evidence (video and accident reconstruction) showing otherwise, and touchscreens and voice controls aren't far more of a distraction than single-purpose buttons and switches within easy reach when the operator has to keep their attention elsewhere for safety, then you should have no problem whatsoever finding peer-reviewed research that shows that, to counter all the research that says just the opposite. I await your cites.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:I'm not sure how the AAA study was done, but I'm guessing that one flaw has to do with drivers not being acclimated with their cars. Once a comfortable climate setting is found, I've NEVER had to change it regardless of the weather. Yes the ACC is always set to auto, but when you realize how much more electricity is spent just moving the vehicle, it becomes pointless to worry about how much is used to maintain a comfortable temperature in the car. That changes the entire use cases of the vehicle. So what seems to be more distracting, isn't the case, because the usage profile is weighted incorrectly. The common actions are handled by the scroll wheels and voice commands, while the less common actions are set once and never fiddled with again. Anyway, I won't explain further, as you'll never be convinced to "try it before you knock it".

And I won't bother providing any more research to you, as you've obviously entered "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" reasoning; Tesla is the Holy Grail, and if they say something it must be true, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. That you and others are comfortable with Auto Climate Control is terrific, but as I've pointed out others aren't. To quote Clement Attlee, "we would all be very unhappy living in other's paradises." Nor does either of these groups' personal preferences invalidate scientifically conducted research as to distraction and automation bias/complacency.
Last edited by GRA on Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
EVDRIVER
Moderator
Posts: 6472
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:51 am

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 2:56 pm

What Tesla drivers as a percentage or number that know how to use the system are not comfortable with auto climate? I know at least 30 owners and none of them have an issue. Since that's my sample please provide yours. Don't confuse reaching for a touch screen as a substitute for buttons. I rarely need to touch my screen for driving. In fact I don't need to take my eyes of the road and can use steering and voice controls for almost all driving needs. I would say ICE cars with small screens and terrible UI are worse. The LEAF is terrible compared to a Tesla. The majority of complaints come from people that seem to fiddle with things endlessly because the systems are poor in some regard. I bitched and complained about the Tesla climate control until I unlearned my bad habits.

GRA
Posts: 9390
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:35 pm

EVDRIVER wrote:What Tesla drivers as a percentage or number that know how to use the system are not comfortable with auto climate? I know at least 30 owners and none of them have an issue. Since that's my sample please provide yours. Don't confuse reaching for a touch screen as a substitute for buttons. I rarely need to touch my screen for driving. In fact I don't need to take my eyes of the road and can use steering and voice controls for almost all driving needs. I would say ICE cars with small screens and terrible UI are worse. The LEAF is terrible compared to a Tesla. The majority of complaints come from people that seem to fiddle with things endlessly because the systems are poor in some regard. I bitched and complained about the Tesla climate control until I unlearned my bad habits.

You are talking about a self-selected sample, 'people who like that sort of thing say that's the sort of thing they like'. A more valuable metric is what % of potential buyers as a whole will simply reject the car outright because they simply don't want to put up with ACC or touchscreen controls, or spend the time to learn how to use it. As for small screens and terrible UI, sure, they're bad; I'd reject them out of hand, because physical buttons controlling single-purpose functions are far superior as far as ease of use and safety; bigger screens and better UI make touchscreens easier to use, but never as easy/safe to use as physical controls, nor, due to cognitive loading, is voice a better option.

I have nothing against touchscreens or voice controls per se, I just reject them for use while driving, flying or for any other purpose when my attention must be elsewhere for safety. Until someone can show that performance and safety are improved under those conditions by the use of touchscreens/voice instead of (well-designed) physical controls, I'm simply unwilling to put my or, more importantly from a societal point of view, other people's lives at greater risk by using them. I also reject cars which have poorly-designed or laid-out, frequently-used (while driving) physical controls for the same reason.

Once autonomous cars have achieved acceptable reliability, my objections to (driver-operated) touchscreen and voice controls go away, because devoting most or all of your attention to operating them will no longer decrease safety.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 4:08 pm

GRA wrote:
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
GRA wrote:Yeah, you're right, these peer-reviewed studies, which essentially just confirm decades of research on similar systems in aviation, aren't relevant at all. :roll:

Absolutely. All your links boil down to the AAA study and an article by Connected Brain. Both of which was about driver distractions and NOT about automation complacency.

You don't see any link between automation complacency and the willingness to be distracted? I refuse to make or receive a phone call while I'm driving, because I know that it requires me to divert a greater amount of cognitive cycles away from driving than I'm comfortable with, but others certainly are so willing (and I have to avoid being run over by them while walking/biking on a bi-monthly basis)? You have said that there's no relevance between aviation studies of such systems and behaviors and similar studies in cars. I've just provided you with examples showing there is in fact exactly similar behavior in the case of touchscreens. There is also the same evidence regarding automation bias/complacency in both aircraft, land systems and cars - I've provided numerous links in both this and the "Tesla's autopilot, on the road" and "Automated vehicles, LEAF and others" threads, or anyone could just search for themselves. But if, as you claim, there's no evidence of automation bias/complacency in Teslas or any other so-called semi-automated cars, despite all the evidence (video and accident reconstruction) showing otherwise, and touchscreens and voice controls aren't far more of a distraction than single-purpose buttons and switch within easy reach when the operator has to keep their attention elsewhere for safety, then you should have no problem whatsoever finding peer-reviewed research that shows that, to counter all the research that says just the opposite. I await your cites.

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:I'm not sure how the AAA study was done, but I'm guessing that one flaw has to do with drivers not being acclimated with their cars. Once a comfortable climate setting is found, I've NEVER had to change it regardless of the weather. Yes the ACC is always set to auto, but when you realize how much more electricity is spent just moving the vehicle, it becomes pointless to worry about how much is used to maintain a comfortable temperature in the car. That changes the entire use cases of the vehicle. So what seems to be more distracting, isn't the case, because the usage profile is weighted incorrectly. The common actions are handled by the scroll wheels and voice commands, while the less common actions are set once and never fiddled with again. Anyway, I won't explain further, as you'll never be convinced to "try it before you knock it".

And I won't bother providing any more research to you, as you've obviously entered "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" reasoning; Tesla is the Holy Grail, and if they say something it must be true, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. That you and others are comfortable with Auto Climate Control is terrific, but as I've pointed out others aren't. To quote Clement Attlee, "we would all be very unhappy living in other's paradises." Nor does either of these groups personal opinions invalidate scientifically conducted research as to distraction and automation bias/complacency.


Since you love studies so much, here's an NHTSA report claiming a 40% reduction in airbag deployments with Autopilot v1 (the report is embedded in the article): https://electrek.co/2017/01/19/tesla-cr ... lot-nhtsa/

And it's directly about Tesla, not some side-effect study that you keep pulling up.

You've once asked why AEB didn't stop for the parked fire trucks, page9 of the report cites a BMW explanation showing why EVERY AEB system is diliberately defeated when the vehicle exceeds a certain speed. They don't want the cars automatically braking from full speed for false-positives. The more people understand this, the fewer crashes into parked firetrucks and center dividers there would be.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Sep 12, 2018 4:11 pm

GRA wrote:
EVDRIVER wrote:What Tesla drivers as a percentage or number that know how to use the system are not comfortable with auto climate? I know at least 30 owners and none of them have an issue. Since that's my sample please provide yours. Don't confuse reaching for a touch screen as a substitute for buttons. I rarely need to touch my screen for driving. In fact I don't need to take my eyes of the road and can use steering and voice controls for almost all driving needs. I would say ICE cars with small screens and terrible UI are worse. The LEAF is terrible compared to a Tesla. The majority of complaints come from people that seem to fiddle with things endlessly because the systems are poor in some regard. I bitched and complained about the Tesla climate control until I unlearned my bad habits.

You are talking about a self-selected sample, 'people who like that sort of thing say that's the sort of thing they like'. A more valuable metric is what % of potential buyers as a whole will simply reject the car outright because they simply don't want to put up with ACC or touchscreen controls, or spend the time to learn how to use it. As for small screens and terrible UI, sure, they're bad; I'd reject them out of hand, because physical buttons controlling single-purpose functions are far superior as far as ease of use and safety; bigger screens and better UI make touchscreens easier to use, but never as easy/safe to use as physical controls, nor, due to cognitive loading, is voice a better option.

I have nothing against touchscreens or voice controls per se, I just reject them for use while driving, flying or for any other purpose when my attention must be elsewhere for safety. Until someone can show that performance and safety are improved under those conditions by the use of touchscreens/voice instead of (well-designed) physical controls, I'm simply unwilling to put my or, more importantly from a societal point of view, other people's lives at greater risk by using them. I also reject cars which have poorly-designed or laid-out, frequently-used (while driving) physical controls for the same reason.

Once autonomous cars have achieved acceptable reliability, my objections to (driver-operated) touchscreen and voice controls go away, because devoting most or all of your attention to operating them will no longer decrease safety.


That group is also a self-selection bias.

At least with EVDriver's sample pool, those drivers started off with being used to buttons (since there weren't any other options) and have had to learn how to use the touchscreen settings.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”