hmm-To The Moon - Tiger Brokers Online Investing Community - To The Moon

2
Comment
Favorite

米米西谷
2021-04-25

hmm

Did Tesla lie?

马斯克真乃媒体的福音，但凡跟他相关的消息都能换来巨大的流量，并且，好坏消息都行。当美国那边集体为SpaceX成功发射第三次载人火箭Crew-2任务狂欢时，中国这边却都在疯狂品尝着特斯拉带来的流量红利

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

2

Report

Comment

Top
Latest

empty

No comments yet

Most Discussed

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":375359278,"tweetId":"375359278","gmtCreate":1619311192094,"gmtModify":1704722219230,"author":{"id":3569548060329512,"idStr":"3569548060329512","authorId":3569548060329512,"authorIdStr":"3569548060329512","name":"米米西谷","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd365b2bcfa2b18bab19f50df08c03b6","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.02.05","exceedPercentage":"93.95%","individualDisplayEnabled":0},"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":19,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>hmm</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>hmm</p></body></html>","text":"hmm","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/375359278","repostId":1156385647,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1156385647","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"有视角的商业资讯交流平台","home_visible":1,"media_name":"虎嗅APP","id":"101","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d"},"pubTimestamp":1619309875,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1156385647?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-25 08:17","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Did Tesla lie?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1156385647","media":"虎嗅APP","summary":"马斯克真乃媒体的福音，但凡跟他相关的消息都能换来巨大的流量，并且，好坏消息都行。\n当美国那边集体为SpaceX成功发射第三次载人火箭Crew-2任务狂欢时，中国这边却都在疯狂品尝着特斯拉带来的流量红利","content":"<p>Musk is really the gospel of the media, but any news related to him can be exchanged for huge traffic, and both good and bad news will do.</p><p>While the United States collectively rejoiced SpaceX's successful launch of its third manned rocket Crew-2 mission, the Chinese side was frantically tasting it<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla</a>The traffic dividend brought.</p><p>In addition to car owners and Teslas, people who eat melons, We Media, official media, black public relations, experts, pseudo-experts... everyone swarmed into this \"gold everywhere\" traffic pool, each with different knowledge bases, positions, interests and other starting points, which made the already doubtful \"brake failure\" incident even more chaotic.</p><p>However, as the event ferments longer, it seems that people lose the focus of the matter itself, and even there are basic technical errors and logical errors in many statements; As a result, people are not only getting farther and farther away from the truth, but also divided into two tit-for-tat groups based on wrong inferences. From preaching theoretical facts, they have changed to playing stalks, keyboard fighting, personal attacks and political disputes...</p><p>Such a discussion makes no sense.</p><p>Although the author has written two articles about \"brake failure\", because there have been some new developments in this incident recently, and the author has done some investigations, I want to use this article to try to solve some mysteries from the published public information, technical details, logical inferences, etc. based on the parties involved and Tesla. From opposite perspectives, we can solve some mysteries from the published public information, technical details, and logical inferences.</p><p>At least one of the two must have lied.</p><p><b>Before and after Ms. Li's accident</b></p><p>There are three people who wore \"brake failure\" at the Shanghai Auto Show and \"defended their rights\" at the Tesla booth. One of them is not clear what kind of accident was involved, and the other two are Model 3 car advocates from Anyang, Henan Province. Ms. Li, the owner of Model 3 in Xi'an, Shaanxi Province.</p><p>Let's talk about Ms. Li first. As she was not detained by the Shanghai police, she was interviewed by the media at the first time. In the interview, she described her accidents and demands as follows:</p><p><ul><li>At the end of February and early March, 2021, the vehicle experienced \"brake failure\" and could not step on the brakes hard;</p><p></li><li>On March 19, 2021, the car was hit and the airbag did not bounce off; After being hit, I asked Tesla for driving records, and found that there were no driving records in the USB flash drive, as if it had been formatted. Many Tesla driving records were gone after the accident;</p><p></li><li>Call 315 and ask me to do a third party appraisal; But the terrible thing about Tesla's \"brake failure\" is that the problem lies in the software, and there is no way to obtain evidence. Tesla doesn't know how to solve this problem, just like when the United States investigated the Toyota brake door incident, so it doesn't trust third-party identification;</p><p></li><li>After the accident, Tesla was found without any claims or compensation;</p><p></li><li>I went to the Shanghai Auto Show because I wanted to go to the Shanghai Auto Show to ask why the \"brake failure\" was caused, and I didn't want more victims to die.</p><p></li><li>\"I think it's time for Tesla to stand up and solve its own quality problems, instead of letting us endlessly struggle with data and three-party appraisal. I think everyone can solve the problem together. Tesla admits that there is a problem with its brakes. OK.\"</p><p></li></ul>Assuming that Ms. Li is telling all the truth, the following conclusions can be drawn:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Li's vehicle has experienced \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>After the vehicle collision, the airbag did not pop out;</p><p></li><li>Tesla erased the driving records of the parties in some way;</p><p></li><li>Because the \"brake failure\" comes from the software and cannot be identified, it is useless to do third-party identification;</p><p></li><li>Ms. Li didn't mention any appeals or compensation, but just wanted to find out why there was \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>Don't want to worry about data and three-party appraisal, either solve the problem together, or Tesla admits that there is a problem with the brakes.</p><p></li></ul>Then let's take a look at the video of Ms. Li's accident scene:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e075b645ba6c221a03ab22915bd15c5c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"750\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Ms. Li's vehicle after the collision)</p><p>Judging from the accident video, at least one thing can be determined,<b>That is, the accident has nothing to do with \"brake failure\"</b>, this was also confirmed in an interview with Ms. Li after the auto show, but the focus of her statement was that the airbag did not bounce, posing potential safety hazards.</p><p>With a rigorous attitude, the author went to check the deployment conditions of the side airbag; The side airbag and side air curtain are within ± 60 ° of the included angle between the side of the vehicle, and will be deployed in case of a serious collision; According to Chinese regulations, when an undeformable and immovable object collides below 20km/h, it will not expand; Regarding this regulation, IIHS stipulates that objects such as trees and telephone poles should not be expanded below 8mi/h (about 12.87 km/h), while collisions between vehicles should not be expanded below 18mi/h (about 28.97 km/h).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3adbad83dfbb4ac74b7803930c843c2d\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"679\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In fact, the airbag will not bounce if it crashes, and the airbag control system will decide whether to bounce according to comprehensive analysis of the data; The reason is very simple. The cost after the airbag is deployed is only a tiny part. The real reason why the vehicle does not \"willfully\" eject the airbag is that if the degree of collision is \"low\", the ejection of the airbag will not only fail to protect the occupants and reduce the injuries caused by the collision, but will make the occupants more hurt by the airbag than the collision itself because of the huge ejection force of the airbag.</p><p>As for Ms. Li's collision accident itself, due to the lack of relevant data, the author dare not make a conclusion whether the airbag should be deployed. However, the author tried to find the photos of the vehicle taken after the accident. From the following two pictures, the door and the outside of the car body were dented during the collision, while the amount of intrusion inside was very small. From this situation, it may be that the airbag was not deployed. Meet safety requirements.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0797bb5f8849f1b279d0fb0de2fa8c5f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"750\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44e9cbbc7071605e115d6ad679e416de\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"1333\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Interior of Ms. Li's accident vehicle)</p><p>As for the erasure of car driving records, in fact, there is no problem with Tesla at all.</p><p>Tesla's driving record is built-in, but it needs the owner to plug in a USB flash drive and format it according to regulations to create a \"TeslaCam\" folder before it can work normally; However, it is precisely because of the inconvenience inside that Tesla's vehicles shipped from the factory after December 28, 2020 are equipped with USB flash drives as standard and have set folders. In addition, Tesla's car does not store driving records, but must be stored in a USB flash drive, and all driving record data will only be stored in the local USB flash drive, and will not send data to the cloud.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b1114427af381e864085320b636ef52e\" tg-width=\"796\" tg-height=\"1208\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Therefore, Ms. Li's so-called fact that Tesla erased the driving record does not exist.</p><p>The next thing is about the third-party testing agency's inability to identify Tesla's \"brake failure\". Originally, this statement was vowed by many \"pseudo-experts\", but a forensic appraisal result of Tesla's \"brake failure\" buried in many news broke this \"conclusion\" (now searching for the word \"Tesla Wenzhou forensic appraisal\", there are few news reports in total).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ea5ef5573738a4248d3b3f0748d3f2b4\" tg-width=\"636\" tg-height=\"799\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>This is an accident that happened on August 12, 2020. The owner of the car, Mr. Chen, lost control of the vehicle and accelerated about 100 meters away from the parking lot. Stepping on the brakes didn't work, and it hit more than a dozen cars before stopping.</p><p>Then the police entrusted a more authoritative local judicial expertise<b>Wenzhou Automotive Engineering Society</b>, monitored the condition of its Model 3 and issued a test report.</p><p>And the author got Tesla's response on this matter, saying that Tesla cooperated with law enforcement agencies and the appraisal agency to obtain the accident recorded on the vehicle's \"black box\" by retrieving and decrypting the EDR data of the vehicle. driving data.</p><p>Director Chen of the judicial authentication institution affiliated to Wenzhou Automotive Engineering Society introduced the report:</p><p>During the whole detection process, there are two sets of data, one set is from the background of Tesla headquarters, and the other set is from the EDR of the Tesla vehicle concerned. These two sets of data can reflect the state of the vehicle before the collision and the driver's operation. \"Through Tesla, we extracted the data transmitted to the background before the incident of this car from the background of Tesla headquarters in the United States, and verified it with the EDR data.\" Director Chen said that in principle, the background data can be changed, but the EDR data cannot be changed. The vehicles in this accident in Wenzhou, the data of both parties reflect the same situation, which can be mutually confirmed. \"Through the data confirmation, what we see is that before the collision, the owner didn't step on the brake pedal, but stepped on the accelerator pedal.\" Director Chen said, \"The car is in a state of continuous acceleration, and the speed is relatively fast.\" By comparing Tesla's cloud background data and vehicle EDR data, the result of the appraisal is that the owner accidentally stepped on the pedal and caused the vehicle to have an accident.</p><p>That is to say, even if according to Ms. Li, no appraisal institution can find bugs in its software line by line, there are still judicial appraisal departments that can make certain appraisals of the accident itself based on EDR data.</p><p>Finally, regarding Ms. Li's \"no claim for compensation\", in the original video and audio evidence released by Tesla, Ms. Li showed inconsistencies.</p><p>In fact, after the incident, Ms. Li asked to return the car at the original price and did not accept the negotiation; And after the accident unrelated to \"brake failure\", a series of \"rights protection\" operations were continued based on the phenomenon of \"brake failure\" that occurred 11 months ago.</p><p>Based on the above facts, although there are still some doubts, the following points can be determined:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Li's accident has nothing to do with \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>It is a fact that the airbag has not bounced, and whether it should be deployed requires professional appraisal;</p><p></li><li>The driving recorder is not remotely deleted by Tesla;</p><p></li><li>There is a third-party appraisal agency that can appraise the data at the time of the incident, and the authenticity of EDR data can be guaranteed with the cooperation of law enforcement, appraisal agencies, and Tesla;</p><p></li><li>Ms. Li refused third-party testing;</p><p></li><li>When Ms. Li faced different people before and after, her appeal changed.</p><p></li></ul>However, although many of Ms. Li's statements and behaviors are different from the actual situation and objective facts, considering that she is not a professional herself and the panic caused by the accident, it cannot fully prove that Tesla's \"brake failure\" phenomenon does not exist.</p><p>After sorting out this matter, let's take a look at what happened to Ms. Zhang from Anyang, who was also the lady standing on the roof of the car at the Shanghai Auto Show.</p><p><b>Before and after Ms. Zhang's accident</b></p><p>Regarding Ms. Zhang's accident, Tesla released the following information:</p><p>At around 18: 00 on February 21st, the owner's father, Mr. Zhang, collided with other vehicles while driving along National Highway 341. On the evening of the same day, the traffic police issued an accident responsibility confirmation letter: it was determined that Mr. Zhang violated the relevant laws on safe driving and keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front, and should bear full responsibility for the accident. In response to this car owner's full responsibility accident caused by illegal driving, we expressed our willingness to assist Ms. Zhang in completing vehicle maintenance and insurance claims, but we were strongly rejected by Ms. Zhang. On March 6th, Ms. Zhang sealed the whole car to refuse any form of vehicle inspection, and asked for a return of the car, as well as compensation for mental damage compensation, medical expenses and lost time. On the morning of March 9, the Zhengzhou New District Market Supervision Administration invited Tesla and Ms. Zhang to mediate. Finally, Ms. Zhang agreed to choose a third-party testing technology agency to negotiate the appraisal matters and sign a mediation letter. On the afternoon of March 9, Ms. Zhang went back on her word and once again blocked the accident car with the seal back to the Tesla store, and made it clear to Tesla staff that she would not accept or recognize any third-party test results, and would not accept any mediation, and would continue to defend her rights by sitting on the roof of the car and playing the recording in a loop with the speaker. As for Ms. Zhang's question about the brake failure,<b>After viewing and analyzing the vehicle data and on-site photos, we (Tesla) found that the speed of the vehicle before stepping on the brake pedal was 118.5 km/h. During braking, the ABS worked normally, and the forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking functions were activated and functioned. No abnormality in the vehicle braking system was found.</b>Then Ms. Zhang gave different versions of the accident on Weibo:</p><p>At 18:17 on February 21, my father drove the Model 3 he purchased in the village section of the southern section of National Highway 341 in Anyang. In addition, a separate point of view is given separately: the dispute points between the two parties are very clear and can be divided into the following points:</p><p><ul><li>The two sides have different opinions on the speed at the time of the accident, and there is no mention of speeding in the police liability accident certificate;</p><p></li><li>Tesla's background data has informed the owner, and shows that there is no \"brake failure\" phenomenon, and the owner believes that there is brake failure;</p><p></li><li>Tesla said that the owner does not accept third-party appraisal, and the owner said that he accepts professional third-party appraisal;</p><p></li><li>Car owners consider taking legal channels.</p><p></li></ul>In addition, according to other public information and Tesla's response, it can be determined that:</p><p><ul><li>China Quality Certification Center is recommended by Zhengzhou Municipal Supervision Bureau, and there is no evidence whether it is called \"only one\";</p><p></li><li>Tesla accepts any professional and qualified third-party appraisal agency.</p><p></li><li>There is no speed camera on route 341, so the traffic police can't confirm it.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f28acfb560d489ba6a82e00914ceffc6\" tg-width=\"577\" tg-height=\"1088\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(\"Prism\" not only checked the information, but also walked on the actual road section, and did not find the speed camera)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/67d314115afaa40d71f2eba610cd1bde\" tg-width=\"660\" tg-height=\"203\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Since there are no speed cameras, there are often car accidents caused by speeding vehicles)</p><p>Assuming that the owner of the car tells the truth, Ms. Zhang is sitting in the passenger seat on the way out of the tourist attraction for a family of four (Ms. Zhang, her father, her mother and her niece). The following inferences are in line with the general situation:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Zhang can clearly see the speed of the vehicle;</p><p></li><li>For a family of four, the driving speed of 118.5 km/h is not in line with common sense;</p><p></li></ul>In the statement of Zhengzhou Municipal Supervision Bureau, it has been confirmed that Ms. Zhang does not accept third-party appraisal:</p><p><ul><li>On April 20, the relevant person in charge of the News and Publicity Department of the Zhengzhou Market Supervision Bureau responded that the Zhengdong New District Market Supervision Bureau organized complainants and Tesla vehicle sales services three times on March 15, March 18, and March 24 respectively. (Zhengzhou) Co., Ltd. conducted mediation. The complainant did not agree with the third party's technical appraisal, and asked to \"provide complete driving data half an hour before the vehicle accident\". Tesla Automobile Sales and Service (Zhengzhou) Co., Ltd. refused to provide relevant data because it was worried that the data would be used by the parties concerned to hype and cause adverse effects. Because of the big differences between the two sides, they failed to reach an agreement.</p><p></li></ul>Of course, judging from Ms. Zhang's \"professional appraisal institution\" and legal provisions, it is completely reasonable and legal for her not to accept the \"China Quality Certification Center\", so there is no contradiction between the statements before and after. But after that, as the author wrote in \"Why should Tesla be fearless?\", I don't quite understand why Ms. Zhang didn't subsequently look for the logic of a so-called \"professional appraisal agency\", but has been trying to \"defend her rights\" through other methods.</p><p>Leaving this aside for the time being, in fact, the focus of the debate is the speed.</p><p>Because when the dispute over \"driving data\" on the Internet became bigger and bigger, Tesla released the driving data that had already been informed to Ms. Zhang again, providing a new amount of information.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/666aba9d622610c964b3b7c5e3cb6db2\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"549\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>However, after this table came out, a lot of wrong judgments on basic physics knowledge and understanding of the brake system were posted on the Internet, so that many people still thought that this picture not only failed to prove that Tesla was fine, but instead showed that Tesla's \"brake failure\" was really hammered.</p><p>Their theories are roughly divided into the following:</p><p><ul><li>The unit of kilometers per hour is recognized as the unit of miles per hour, and then converted into kilometers per hour, so there are different statements about vehicle speed;</p><p></li><li>The data is not completely published in the middle, so there is something fishy;</p><p></li><li>It took about 2 seconds to slow down from 94km/h to 48.5/h, and the braking distance was about 40m, which was too long;</p><p></li></ul>First of all, not to mention whether such a stupid problem will happen. Even if it does, it will not affect the fact that the pressure of the master cylinder increases and the deceleration increases after the brake intervention, that is, the brake system is indeed working normally; Secondly, the incomplete data may be because the engineer thinks that the valid data of key nodes has an impact on the judgment of the result, so he does not add others to it, which does not affect the judgment of the event; Finally, the braking distance is too long. On the one hand, it doesn't mean the same thing as \"brake failure\"; on the other hand, the comparison object of the braking distance is \"the extreme braking situation on a good road surface\", but in reality, there are very few situations in which someone will step on it to death.</p><p>In \"Island Car Story\", Luo Xinyu \"filled\" the empty part in the middle with the average value according to the key node data, and made a picture as follows;</p><p>Note: Luo Xinyu, once engaged in Bosch ESP calibration work, calibrated and designed the ABS system in the ESP of eight cars.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afc8ef1f355b1f30abfabab969c53192\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"677\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Photo/\"Island Car Story\", Luo Xinyu)</p><p>Through this picture, we can see more intuitively that there are several basic facts that can be determined in the data published this time:</p><p><ul><li>The vehicle speed has been decreasing, and the maximum deceleration is about 0.7 g;</p><p></li><li>When the owner steps on the brakes at the beginning, the force is light, and then gradually increases, which is one of the reasons for the long braking distance;</p><p></li><li>The pressure of the brake master cylinder keeps rising until the pressure of 140.7 bar required by the brake is almost full. Regardless of whether the power assist fails or not, the physical brake part works normally;</p><p></li><li>ABS has been started, indicating that the friction limit between the tire and the ground has approached, that is, the ABS system is working normally;</p><p></li><li>AEB automatic emergency braking takes effect, and the side proves that both the iBooster and ESP systems are working properly;</p><p></li></ul>With the appearance of this data, the focus of controversy has changed to \"too long braking distance\", which can also be regarded as a real hammer of \"brake failure\" or brake problem.</p><p>Indeed, the maximum deceleration of 0.7 g is much lower than the emergency braking deceleration of about 1g (dry asphalt road) of normal vehicles. However, during this deceleration process, the trigger of ABS proves that there is a slip between the tire and the ground, that is, the torque transmitted by the braking system to the brake disc with or without power assistance has approached the maximum friction torque that the road surface can give, and slip will occur soon.</p><p>This means that the braking system is effective and the braking force produces a deceleration of 0.7 g. At this time, no matter how much force the braking system can provide to the brake disc, it is the road condition and tire condition that really affect the braking speed of the vehicle, not the quality of the braking system.</p><p>Of course, there are still several questions here. First, because there is no specific information about the displacement of the brake pedal, it is impossible to judge whether the driver steps hard or the power assist system helps; Second, there was no official caliber for the road surface conditions at that time, as well as the data of each wheel sensor, so it was impossible to judge whether the ABS trigger really reached the friction limit of the road surface and whether it really reached the edge where the tire was going to slip.</p><p>However, this does not prevent it from being concluded from this data that there is no problem with the physical structure of the braking system, which provides a certain amount of braking. In addition, the maximum deceleration of 0.7 g exceeds the maximum value of unassisted braking (0.4 g) calibrated by iBooster in the case of power failure, error, etc., so the power system is working.</p><p>However, whether there is a problem with the power assist system, or whether the driver didn't do his best at first when stepping on the brakes, this problem has not been proved yet.</p><p>In addition, at the same time as Tesla released the data, it also announced a passage: \"Regarding the condition of the vehicle 30 minutes before the accident, Tesla said that within 30 minutes before the accident, the driver drove the vehicle normally, and there were more than 40 records of stepping on the brake pedal, and at the same time, the vehicle had multiple times exceeding 100 kilometers per hour and stopping multiple times.\"</p><p>There are two interesting points here. One is that it exceeds 100km/h many times and stops. If it is true, on the one hand, it proves that the owner is racing, and on the other hand, the braking system is normal; Another supporting evidence is that Tesla's kinetic energy recovery power is very large. Basically, under normal driving conditions, it can't use the brakes 10 times a day, so stepping on the brake pedal more than 40 times is even more supporting evidence that it is driving fast.</p><p>Of course, some people will say that the above inferences are all based on the fact that the data given by Tesla is true, so if it is false, if Tesla lies, then all this is meaningless.</p><p>Indeed, if this is the case, then all the conclusions given by this data have to be overturned, and the question goes back to a stage of purely logical reasoning, that is, is there any meaning in Tesla's data fraud?</p><p><b>Tesla Lying?</b></p><p>First of all, we need to explain the EDR records and background records of Tesla driving data.</p><p>In multiple accidents suspected of \"brake failure\", the data provided by Tesla came from the background, that is, the data transmitted back to the background server while the vehicle was driving. This part of the data can theoretically be modified.</p><p>But just like a forensic authentication agency mentioned in Qianmen, they extract the driving data from the EDR (Event Data Recorder) in the vehicle. This thing is a device similar to the \"black box\" of an aircraft, which records a lot of information before and after the vehicle accident. The device only supports physical contact reading, that is, contacting the vehicle, plugging in the cable for download and reading, and can only read but not modify.</p><p>Of course, this is not completely absolute. If Tesla bribes the EDR supplier, and then has to let the supplier come into contact with the accident vehicle, and then quietly modify it, there is also such a possibility.</p><p>However, there are two reasons for not discussing this situation here. First, the above-mentioned accident vehicle has always been in the hands of consumers and rejects any monitoring agency, so this situation does not exist; Second, China's EDR standard is not mandatory for some vehicles until January 1, 2021, and the vehicles involved in these accidents are all earlier than that date, but the United States started as early as 2012, so Tesla's EDR standards and specifications basically come entirely from the United States, and there have been many cases in which EDR data is used as court evidence. There has never been a precedent for a car company to modify EDR data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8c9f52bf21f7b5301cebac4b47cd483\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"732\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Since the EDR data can be regarded as true, if Tesla modifies the background exported data for self-interest evidence, then once the judicial appraisal requires the extraction of EDR data, and both law enforcement and appraisal parties are present, Tesla will extract and decrypt it on the spot and submit it to the appraisal department. The discrepancy between the two data will bring much more horrible losses and impacts to Tesla than this \"brake failure\" incident.</p><p>Moreover, directly extracting EDR data is such hexadecimal data, how to modify it in front of law enforcement departments and appraisal agencies</p><p>This account is not cost-effective from any angle.</p><p>Then let's look at it from another angle. In NHTSA's \"brake failure, unexpected acceleration\" investigation report, the vehicle involved was the earliest Model S in 2013. Even though Tesla itself has never received complaints and rights protection from users, then when NHTSA began to prepare to launch an investigation in 2019, Tesla should have reacted that it needed to investigate whether there was really something wrong with its products.</p><p>Assuming that Tesla's vehicles do have a \"brake failure\" phenomenon, and now everyone is pointing the finger at the software level, then when Tesla is relatively \"chicken thief\", it could have been secretly repaired through OTA upgrades. This problem, why wait until now.</p><p>Then some people say that Tesla must not be able to repair it itself, so it has not conducted OTA for more than 2 years.</p><p>However, NHTSA has comprehensively cross-verified by retrieving EDR data, Tesla LOG data, surveillance video, etc., and found that \"brake failure\" and \"accidental acceleration\" in all cases were all misoperations by car owners without exception. That proves that these phenomena do not exist in Tesla.</p><p>Even in the most exaggerated case, that is, Tesla did have this problem before, but it was secretly repaired through OTA upgrade, and it happened that all the EDR data investigated by NHTSA happened to be generated due to the owner's misoperation after the repair. Then buying Tesla made in Shanghai should have solved this problem long ago.</p><p>From another perspective, if Tesla is bright and magnanimous, and discovers the problem very early, it will directly announce the problem with the vehicle, which can be solved through OTA upgrade, then compared with the cost of large-scale recalls of fuel vehicles in the past, Tesla will pay The money price is very not worth mentioning.</p><p>From this logic, there is an exception to the possibility, that is, Tesla itself doesn't know that there is a problem with the braking system, or it can't be repaired if it knows; At the same time, NHTSA was stupid. After investigating all the evidence for a year, no matter from the hardware and software system levels, or all the on-site restoration aspects at the time of the accident, all of them made mistakes and gave wrong conclusions.</p><p>However, this situation is not very realistic.</p><p>In the last case, Tesla's sensors, redundant sensors, proofreading and error correction sensors and related electronic systems all make mistakes at the same time, resulting in the recorded data itself being wrong, so whether it is EDR or background data, it is essentially wrong data input, so on the one hand, it may have caused the accident at that time, and on the other hand, wrong data was stored.</p><p>But in this case, a very paradoxical thing is that the wrong data are all mistakes that support Tesla without exception.</p><p><b>epilogue</b></p><p>In fact, Tesla's turmoil is no longer the meaning of car owners' \"rights protection\". It is mixed with the participation of too many groups such as positions first, interests involved, and traffic. I understand the meaning of this.</p><p>There have been more than a dozen cases of Tesla's \"brake failure\" in the Chinese market. To investigate these things clearly, it is necessary to cooperate with monitoring, law enforcement departments, appraisal agencies and relevant state departments to restore the true and credible truth.</p><p>For example, in the incident of Ms. Zhang in Anyang, if the traffic control department directly releases the surveillance video of her road, it can directly prove who is lying; But why it hasn't been released for a long time is really interesting.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Did Tesla lie?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nDid Tesla lie?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/101\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">虎嗅APP </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-04-25 08:17</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Musk is really the gospel of the media, but any news related to him can be exchanged for huge traffic, and both good and bad news will do.</p><p>While the United States collectively rejoiced SpaceX's successful launch of its third manned rocket Crew-2 mission, the Chinese side was frantically tasting it<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla</a>The traffic dividend brought.</p><p>In addition to car owners and Teslas, people who eat melons, We Media, official media, black public relations, experts, pseudo-experts... everyone swarmed into this \"gold everywhere\" traffic pool, each with different knowledge bases, positions, interests and other starting points, which made the already doubtful \"brake failure\" incident even more chaotic.</p><p>However, as the event ferments longer, it seems that people lose the focus of the matter itself, and even there are basic technical errors and logical errors in many statements; As a result, people are not only getting farther and farther away from the truth, but also divided into two tit-for-tat groups based on wrong inferences. From preaching theoretical facts, they have changed to playing stalks, keyboard fighting, personal attacks and political disputes...</p><p>Such a discussion makes no sense.</p><p>Although the author has written two articles about \"brake failure\", because there have been some new developments in this incident recently, and the author has done some investigations, I want to use this article to try to solve some mysteries from the published public information, technical details, logical inferences, etc. based on the parties involved and Tesla. From opposite perspectives, we can solve some mysteries from the published public information, technical details, and logical inferences.</p><p>At least one of the two must have lied.</p><p><b>Before and after Ms. Li's accident</b></p><p>There are three people who wore \"brake failure\" at the Shanghai Auto Show and \"defended their rights\" at the Tesla booth. One of them is not clear what kind of accident was involved, and the other two are Model 3 car advocates from Anyang, Henan Province. Ms. Li, the owner of Model 3 in Xi'an, Shaanxi Province.</p><p>Let's talk about Ms. Li first. As she was not detained by the Shanghai police, she was interviewed by the media at the first time. In the interview, she described her accidents and demands as follows:</p><p><ul><li>At the end of February and early March, 2021, the vehicle experienced \"brake failure\" and could not step on the brakes hard;</p><p></li><li>On March 19, 2021, the car was hit and the airbag did not bounce off; After being hit, I asked Tesla for driving records, and found that there were no driving records in the USB flash drive, as if it had been formatted. Many Tesla driving records were gone after the accident;</p><p></li><li>Call 315 and ask me to do a third party appraisal; But the terrible thing about Tesla's \"brake failure\" is that the problem lies in the software, and there is no way to obtain evidence. Tesla doesn't know how to solve this problem, just like when the United States investigated the Toyota brake door incident, so it doesn't trust third-party identification;</p><p></li><li>After the accident, Tesla was found without any claims or compensation;</p><p></li><li>I went to the Shanghai Auto Show because I wanted to go to the Shanghai Auto Show to ask why the \"brake failure\" was caused, and I didn't want more victims to die.</p><p></li><li>\"I think it's time for Tesla to stand up and solve its own quality problems, instead of letting us endlessly struggle with data and three-party appraisal. I think everyone can solve the problem together. Tesla admits that there is a problem with its brakes. OK.\"</p><p></li></ul>Assuming that Ms. Li is telling all the truth, the following conclusions can be drawn:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Li's vehicle has experienced \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>After the vehicle collision, the airbag did not pop out;</p><p></li><li>Tesla erased the driving records of the parties in some way;</p><p></li><li>Because the \"brake failure\" comes from the software and cannot be identified, it is useless to do third-party identification;</p><p></li><li>Ms. Li didn't mention any appeals or compensation, but just wanted to find out why there was \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>Don't want to worry about data and three-party appraisal, either solve the problem together, or Tesla admits that there is a problem with the brakes.</p><p></li></ul>Then let's take a look at the video of Ms. Li's accident scene:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e075b645ba6c221a03ab22915bd15c5c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"750\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Ms. Li's vehicle after the collision)</p><p>Judging from the accident video, at least one thing can be determined,<b>That is, the accident has nothing to do with \"brake failure\"</b>, this was also confirmed in an interview with Ms. Li after the auto show, but the focus of her statement was that the airbag did not bounce, posing potential safety hazards.</p><p>With a rigorous attitude, the author went to check the deployment conditions of the side airbag; The side airbag and side air curtain are within ± 60 ° of the included angle between the side of the vehicle, and will be deployed in case of a serious collision; According to Chinese regulations, when an undeformable and immovable object collides below 20km/h, it will not expand; Regarding this regulation, IIHS stipulates that objects such as trees and telephone poles should not be expanded below 8mi/h (about 12.87 km/h), while collisions between vehicles should not be expanded below 18mi/h (about 28.97 km/h).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3adbad83dfbb4ac74b7803930c843c2d\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"679\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In fact, the airbag will not bounce if it crashes, and the airbag control system will decide whether to bounce according to comprehensive analysis of the data; The reason is very simple. The cost after the airbag is deployed is only a tiny part. The real reason why the vehicle does not \"willfully\" eject the airbag is that if the degree of collision is \"low\", the ejection of the airbag will not only fail to protect the occupants and reduce the injuries caused by the collision, but will make the occupants more hurt by the airbag than the collision itself because of the huge ejection force of the airbag.</p><p>As for Ms. Li's collision accident itself, due to the lack of relevant data, the author dare not make a conclusion whether the airbag should be deployed. However, the author tried to find the photos of the vehicle taken after the accident. From the following two pictures, the door and the outside of the car body were dented during the collision, while the amount of intrusion inside was very small. From this situation, it may be that the airbag was not deployed. Meet safety requirements.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0797bb5f8849f1b279d0fb0de2fa8c5f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"750\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44e9cbbc7071605e115d6ad679e416de\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"1333\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Interior of Ms. Li's accident vehicle)</p><p>As for the erasure of car driving records, in fact, there is no problem with Tesla at all.</p><p>Tesla's driving record is built-in, but it needs the owner to plug in a USB flash drive and format it according to regulations to create a \"TeslaCam\" folder before it can work normally; However, it is precisely because of the inconvenience inside that Tesla's vehicles shipped from the factory after December 28, 2020 are equipped with USB flash drives as standard and have set folders. In addition, Tesla's car does not store driving records, but must be stored in a USB flash drive, and all driving record data will only be stored in the local USB flash drive, and will not send data to the cloud.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b1114427af381e864085320b636ef52e\" tg-width=\"796\" tg-height=\"1208\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Therefore, Ms. Li's so-called fact that Tesla erased the driving record does not exist.</p><p>The next thing is about the third-party testing agency's inability to identify Tesla's \"brake failure\". Originally, this statement was vowed by many \"pseudo-experts\", but a forensic appraisal result of Tesla's \"brake failure\" buried in many news broke this \"conclusion\" (now searching for the word \"Tesla Wenzhou forensic appraisal\", there are few news reports in total).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ea5ef5573738a4248d3b3f0748d3f2b4\" tg-width=\"636\" tg-height=\"799\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>This is an accident that happened on August 12, 2020. The owner of the car, Mr. Chen, lost control of the vehicle and accelerated about 100 meters away from the parking lot. Stepping on the brakes didn't work, and it hit more than a dozen cars before stopping.</p><p>Then the police entrusted a more authoritative local judicial expertise<b>Wenzhou Automotive Engineering Society</b>, monitored the condition of its Model 3 and issued a test report.</p><p>And the author got Tesla's response on this matter, saying that Tesla cooperated with law enforcement agencies and the appraisal agency to obtain the accident recorded on the vehicle's \"black box\" by retrieving and decrypting the EDR data of the vehicle. driving data.</p><p>Director Chen of the judicial authentication institution affiliated to Wenzhou Automotive Engineering Society introduced the report:</p><p>During the whole detection process, there are two sets of data, one set is from the background of Tesla headquarters, and the other set is from the EDR of the Tesla vehicle concerned. These two sets of data can reflect the state of the vehicle before the collision and the driver's operation. \"Through Tesla, we extracted the data transmitted to the background before the incident of this car from the background of Tesla headquarters in the United States, and verified it with the EDR data.\" Director Chen said that in principle, the background data can be changed, but the EDR data cannot be changed. The vehicles in this accident in Wenzhou, the data of both parties reflect the same situation, which can be mutually confirmed. \"Through the data confirmation, what we see is that before the collision, the owner didn't step on the brake pedal, but stepped on the accelerator pedal.\" Director Chen said, \"The car is in a state of continuous acceleration, and the speed is relatively fast.\" By comparing Tesla's cloud background data and vehicle EDR data, the result of the appraisal is that the owner accidentally stepped on the pedal and caused the vehicle to have an accident.</p><p>That is to say, even if according to Ms. Li, no appraisal institution can find bugs in its software line by line, there are still judicial appraisal departments that can make certain appraisals of the accident itself based on EDR data.</p><p>Finally, regarding Ms. Li's \"no claim for compensation\", in the original video and audio evidence released by Tesla, Ms. Li showed inconsistencies.</p><p>In fact, after the incident, Ms. Li asked to return the car at the original price and did not accept the negotiation; And after the accident unrelated to \"brake failure\", a series of \"rights protection\" operations were continued based on the phenomenon of \"brake failure\" that occurred 11 months ago.</p><p>Based on the above facts, although there are still some doubts, the following points can be determined:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Li's accident has nothing to do with \"brake failure\";</p><p></li><li>It is a fact that the airbag has not bounced, and whether it should be deployed requires professional appraisal;</p><p></li><li>The driving recorder is not remotely deleted by Tesla;</p><p></li><li>There is a third-party appraisal agency that can appraise the data at the time of the incident, and the authenticity of EDR data can be guaranteed with the cooperation of law enforcement, appraisal agencies, and Tesla;</p><p></li><li>Ms. Li refused third-party testing;</p><p></li><li>When Ms. Li faced different people before and after, her appeal changed.</p><p></li></ul>However, although many of Ms. Li's statements and behaviors are different from the actual situation and objective facts, considering that she is not a professional herself and the panic caused by the accident, it cannot fully prove that Tesla's \"brake failure\" phenomenon does not exist.</p><p>After sorting out this matter, let's take a look at what happened to Ms. Zhang from Anyang, who was also the lady standing on the roof of the car at the Shanghai Auto Show.</p><p><b>Before and after Ms. Zhang's accident</b></p><p>Regarding Ms. Zhang's accident, Tesla released the following information:</p><p>At around 18: 00 on February 21st, the owner's father, Mr. Zhang, collided with other vehicles while driving along National Highway 341. On the evening of the same day, the traffic police issued an accident responsibility confirmation letter: it was determined that Mr. Zhang violated the relevant laws on safe driving and keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front, and should bear full responsibility for the accident. In response to this car owner's full responsibility accident caused by illegal driving, we expressed our willingness to assist Ms. Zhang in completing vehicle maintenance and insurance claims, but we were strongly rejected by Ms. Zhang. On March 6th, Ms. Zhang sealed the whole car to refuse any form of vehicle inspection, and asked for a return of the car, as well as compensation for mental damage compensation, medical expenses and lost time. On the morning of March 9, the Zhengzhou New District Market Supervision Administration invited Tesla and Ms. Zhang to mediate. Finally, Ms. Zhang agreed to choose a third-party testing technology agency to negotiate the appraisal matters and sign a mediation letter. On the afternoon of March 9, Ms. Zhang went back on her word and once again blocked the accident car with the seal back to the Tesla store, and made it clear to Tesla staff that she would not accept or recognize any third-party test results, and would not accept any mediation, and would continue to defend her rights by sitting on the roof of the car and playing the recording in a loop with the speaker. As for Ms. Zhang's question about the brake failure,<b>After viewing and analyzing the vehicle data and on-site photos, we (Tesla) found that the speed of the vehicle before stepping on the brake pedal was 118.5 km/h. During braking, the ABS worked normally, and the forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking functions were activated and functioned. No abnormality in the vehicle braking system was found.</b>Then Ms. Zhang gave different versions of the accident on Weibo:</p><p>At 18:17 on February 21, my father drove the Model 3 he purchased in the village section of the southern section of National Highway 341 in Anyang. In addition, a separate point of view is given separately: the dispute points between the two parties are very clear and can be divided into the following points:</p><p><ul><li>The two sides have different opinions on the speed at the time of the accident, and there is no mention of speeding in the police liability accident certificate;</p><p></li><li>Tesla's background data has informed the owner, and shows that there is no \"brake failure\" phenomenon, and the owner believes that there is brake failure;</p><p></li><li>Tesla said that the owner does not accept third-party appraisal, and the owner said that he accepts professional third-party appraisal;</p><p></li><li>Car owners consider taking legal channels.</p><p></li></ul>In addition, according to other public information and Tesla's response, it can be determined that:</p><p><ul><li>China Quality Certification Center is recommended by Zhengzhou Municipal Supervision Bureau, and there is no evidence whether it is called \"only one\";</p><p></li><li>Tesla accepts any professional and qualified third-party appraisal agency.</p><p></li><li>There is no speed camera on route 341, so the traffic police can't confirm it.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f28acfb560d489ba6a82e00914ceffc6\" tg-width=\"577\" tg-height=\"1088\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(\"Prism\" not only checked the information, but also walked on the actual road section, and did not find the speed camera)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/67d314115afaa40d71f2eba610cd1bde\" tg-width=\"660\" tg-height=\"203\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Since there are no speed cameras, there are often car accidents caused by speeding vehicles)</p><p>Assuming that the owner of the car tells the truth, Ms. Zhang is sitting in the passenger seat on the way out of the tourist attraction for a family of four (Ms. Zhang, her father, her mother and her niece). The following inferences are in line with the general situation:</p><p><ul><li>Ms. Zhang can clearly see the speed of the vehicle;</p><p></li><li>For a family of four, the driving speed of 118.5 km/h is not in line with common sense;</p><p></li></ul>In the statement of Zhengzhou Municipal Supervision Bureau, it has been confirmed that Ms. Zhang does not accept third-party appraisal:</p><p><ul><li>On April 20, the relevant person in charge of the News and Publicity Department of the Zhengzhou Market Supervision Bureau responded that the Zhengdong New District Market Supervision Bureau organized complainants and Tesla vehicle sales services three times on March 15, March 18, and March 24 respectively. (Zhengzhou) Co., Ltd. conducted mediation. The complainant did not agree with the third party's technical appraisal, and asked to \"provide complete driving data half an hour before the vehicle accident\". Tesla Automobile Sales and Service (Zhengzhou) Co., Ltd. refused to provide relevant data because it was worried that the data would be used by the parties concerned to hype and cause adverse effects. Because of the big differences between the two sides, they failed to reach an agreement.</p><p></li></ul>Of course, judging from Ms. Zhang's \"professional appraisal institution\" and legal provisions, it is completely reasonable and legal for her not to accept the \"China Quality Certification Center\", so there is no contradiction between the statements before and after. But after that, as the author wrote in \"Why should Tesla be fearless?\", I don't quite understand why Ms. Zhang didn't subsequently look for the logic of a so-called \"professional appraisal agency\", but has been trying to \"defend her rights\" through other methods.</p><p>Leaving this aside for the time being, in fact, the focus of the debate is the speed.</p><p>Because when the dispute over \"driving data\" on the Internet became bigger and bigger, Tesla released the driving data that had already been informed to Ms. Zhang again, providing a new amount of information.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/666aba9d622610c964b3b7c5e3cb6db2\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"549\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>However, after this table came out, a lot of wrong judgments on basic physics knowledge and understanding of the brake system were posted on the Internet, so that many people still thought that this picture not only failed to prove that Tesla was fine, but instead showed that Tesla's \"brake failure\" was really hammered.</p><p>Their theories are roughly divided into the following:</p><p><ul><li>The unit of kilometers per hour is recognized as the unit of miles per hour, and then converted into kilometers per hour, so there are different statements about vehicle speed;</p><p></li><li>The data is not completely published in the middle, so there is something fishy;</p><p></li><li>It took about 2 seconds to slow down from 94km/h to 48.5/h, and the braking distance was about 40m, which was too long;</p><p></li></ul>First of all, not to mention whether such a stupid problem will happen. Even if it does, it will not affect the fact that the pressure of the master cylinder increases and the deceleration increases after the brake intervention, that is, the brake system is indeed working normally; Secondly, the incomplete data may be because the engineer thinks that the valid data of key nodes has an impact on the judgment of the result, so he does not add others to it, which does not affect the judgment of the event; Finally, the braking distance is too long. On the one hand, it doesn't mean the same thing as \"brake failure\"; on the other hand, the comparison object of the braking distance is \"the extreme braking situation on a good road surface\", but in reality, there are very few situations in which someone will step on it to death.</p><p>In \"Island Car Story\", Luo Xinyu \"filled\" the empty part in the middle with the average value according to the key node data, and made a picture as follows;</p><p>Note: Luo Xinyu, once engaged in Bosch ESP calibration work, calibrated and designed the ABS system in the ESP of eight cars.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afc8ef1f355b1f30abfabab969c53192\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"677\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>(Photo/\"Island Car Story\", Luo Xinyu)</p><p>Through this picture, we can see more intuitively that there are several basic facts that can be determined in the data published this time:</p><p><ul><li>The vehicle speed has been decreasing, and the maximum deceleration is about 0.7 g;</p><p></li><li>When the owner steps on the brakes at the beginning, the force is light, and then gradually increases, which is one of the reasons for the long braking distance;</p><p></li><li>The pressure of the brake master cylinder keeps rising until the pressure of 140.7 bar required by the brake is almost full. Regardless of whether the power assist fails or not, the physical brake part works normally;</p><p></li><li>ABS has been started, indicating that the friction limit between the tire and the ground has approached, that is, the ABS system is working normally;</p><p></li><li>AEB automatic emergency braking takes effect, and the side proves that both the iBooster and ESP systems are working properly;</p><p></li></ul>With the appearance of this data, the focus of controversy has changed to \"too long braking distance\", which can also be regarded as a real hammer of \"brake failure\" or brake problem.</p><p>Indeed, the maximum deceleration of 0.7 g is much lower than the emergency braking deceleration of about 1g (dry asphalt road) of normal vehicles. However, during this deceleration process, the trigger of ABS proves that there is a slip between the tire and the ground, that is, the torque transmitted by the braking system to the brake disc with or without power assistance has approached the maximum friction torque that the road surface can give, and slip will occur soon.</p><p>This means that the braking system is effective and the braking force produces a deceleration of 0.7 g. At this time, no matter how much force the braking system can provide to the brake disc, it is the road condition and tire condition that really affect the braking speed of the vehicle, not the quality of the braking system.</p><p>Of course, there are still several questions here. First, because there is no specific information about the displacement of the brake pedal, it is impossible to judge whether the driver steps hard or the power assist system helps; Second, there was no official caliber for the road surface conditions at that time, as well as the data of each wheel sensor, so it was impossible to judge whether the ABS trigger really reached the friction limit of the road surface and whether it really reached the edge where the tire was going to slip.</p><p>However, this does not prevent it from being concluded from this data that there is no problem with the physical structure of the braking system, which provides a certain amount of braking. In addition, the maximum deceleration of 0.7 g exceeds the maximum value of unassisted braking (0.4 g) calibrated by iBooster in the case of power failure, error, etc., so the power system is working.</p><p>However, whether there is a problem with the power assist system, or whether the driver didn't do his best at first when stepping on the brakes, this problem has not been proved yet.</p><p>In addition, at the same time as Tesla released the data, it also announced a passage: \"Regarding the condition of the vehicle 30 minutes before the accident, Tesla said that within 30 minutes before the accident, the driver drove the vehicle normally, and there were more than 40 records of stepping on the brake pedal, and at the same time, the vehicle had multiple times exceeding 100 kilometers per hour and stopping multiple times.\"</p><p>There are two interesting points here. One is that it exceeds 100km/h many times and stops. If it is true, on the one hand, it proves that the owner is racing, and on the other hand, the braking system is normal; Another supporting evidence is that Tesla's kinetic energy recovery power is very large. Basically, under normal driving conditions, it can't use the brakes 10 times a day, so stepping on the brake pedal more than 40 times is even more supporting evidence that it is driving fast.</p><p>Of course, some people will say that the above inferences are all based on the fact that the data given by Tesla is true, so if it is false, if Tesla lies, then all this is meaningless.</p><p>Indeed, if this is the case, then all the conclusions given by this data have to be overturned, and the question goes back to a stage of purely logical reasoning, that is, is there any meaning in Tesla's data fraud?</p><p><b>Tesla Lying?</b></p><p>First of all, we need to explain the EDR records and background records of Tesla driving data.</p><p>In multiple accidents suspected of \"brake failure\", the data provided by Tesla came from the background, that is, the data transmitted back to the background server while the vehicle was driving. This part of the data can theoretically be modified.</p><p>But just like a forensic authentication agency mentioned in Qianmen, they extract the driving data from the EDR (Event Data Recorder) in the vehicle. This thing is a device similar to the \"black box\" of an aircraft, which records a lot of information before and after the vehicle accident. The device only supports physical contact reading, that is, contacting the vehicle, plugging in the cable for download and reading, and can only read but not modify.</p><p>Of course, this is not completely absolute. If Tesla bribes the EDR supplier, and then has to let the supplier come into contact with the accident vehicle, and then quietly modify it, there is also such a possibility.</p><p>However, there are two reasons for not discussing this situation here. First, the above-mentioned accident vehicle has always been in the hands of consumers and rejects any monitoring agency, so this situation does not exist; Second, China's EDR standard is not mandatory for some vehicles until January 1, 2021, and the vehicles involved in these accidents are all earlier than that date, but the United States started as early as 2012, so Tesla's EDR standards and specifications basically come entirely from the United States, and there have been many cases in which EDR data is used as court evidence. There has never been a precedent for a car company to modify EDR data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8c9f52bf21f7b5301cebac4b47cd483\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"732\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Since the EDR data can be regarded as true, if Tesla modifies the background exported data for self-interest evidence, then once the judicial appraisal requires the extraction of EDR data, and both law enforcement and appraisal parties are present, Tesla will extract and decrypt it on the spot and submit it to the appraisal department. The discrepancy between the two data will bring much more horrible losses and impacts to Tesla than this \"brake failure\" incident.</p><p>Moreover, directly extracting EDR data is such hexadecimal data, how to modify it in front of law enforcement departments and appraisal agencies</p><p>This account is not cost-effective from any angle.</p><p>Then let's look at it from another angle. In NHTSA's \"brake failure, unexpected acceleration\" investigation report, the vehicle involved was the earliest Model S in 2013. Even though Tesla itself has never received complaints and rights protection from users, then when NHTSA began to prepare to launch an investigation in 2019, Tesla should have reacted that it needed to investigate whether there was really something wrong with its products.</p><p>Assuming that Tesla's vehicles do have a \"brake failure\" phenomenon, and now everyone is pointing the finger at the software level, then when Tesla is relatively \"chicken thief\", it could have been secretly repaired through OTA upgrades. This problem, why wait until now.</p><p>Then some people say that Tesla must not be able to repair it itself, so it has not conducted OTA for more than 2 years.</p><p>However, NHTSA has comprehensively cross-verified by retrieving EDR data, Tesla LOG data, surveillance video, etc., and found that \"brake failure\" and \"accidental acceleration\" in all cases were all misoperations by car owners without exception. That proves that these phenomena do not exist in Tesla.</p><p>Even in the most exaggerated case, that is, Tesla did have this problem before, but it was secretly repaired through OTA upgrade, and it happened that all the EDR data investigated by NHTSA happened to be generated due to the owner's misoperation after the repair. Then buying Tesla made in Shanghai should have solved this problem long ago.</p><p>From another perspective, if Tesla is bright and magnanimous, and discovers the problem very early, it will directly announce the problem with the vehicle, which can be solved through OTA upgrade, then compared with the cost of large-scale recalls of fuel vehicles in the past, Tesla will pay The money price is very not worth mentioning.</p><p>From this logic, there is an exception to the possibility, that is, Tesla itself doesn't know that there is a problem with the braking system, or it can't be repaired if it knows; At the same time, NHTSA was stupid. After investigating all the evidence for a year, no matter from the hardware and software system levels, or all the on-site restoration aspects at the time of the accident, all of them made mistakes and gave wrong conclusions.</p><p>However, this situation is not very realistic.</p><p>In the last case, Tesla's sensors, redundant sensors, proofreading and error correction sensors and related electronic systems all make mistakes at the same time, resulting in the recorded data itself being wrong, so whether it is EDR or background data, it is essentially wrong data input, so on the one hand, it may have caused the accident at that time, and on the other hand, wrong data was stored.</p><p>But in this case, a very paradoxical thing is that the wrong data are all mistakes that support Tesla without exception.</p><p><b>epilogue</b></p><p>In fact, Tesla's turmoil is no longer the meaning of car owners' \"rights protection\". It is mixed with the participation of too many groups such as positions first, interests involved, and traffic. I understand the meaning of this.</p><p>There have been more than a dozen cases of Tesla's \"brake failure\" in the Chinese market. To investigate these things clearly, it is necessary to cooperate with monitoring, law enforcement departments, appraisal agencies and relevant state departments to restore the true and credible truth.</p><p>For example, in the incident of Ms. Zhang in Anyang, if the traffic control department directly releases the surveillance video of her road, it can directly prove who is lying; But why it hasn't been released for a long time is really interesting.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a9643267ad37818da2c01285f2d6bb04","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1156385647","content_text":"马斯克真乃媒体的福音，但凡跟他相关的消息都能换来巨大的流量，并且，好坏消息都行。\n当美国那边集体为SpaceX成功发射第三次载人火箭Crew-2任务狂欢时，中国这边却都在疯狂品尝着特斯拉带来的流量红利。\n除了车主和特斯拉之外，吃瓜群众、自媒体、官媒、黑公关、专家、伪专家……大家一窝蜂钻入到这个“遍地黄金”的流量池中，各自拥有着不同的知识基础、立场、利益相关等出发点，把原本就疑点重重的“刹车失灵”事件，搅和的更加混乱。\n但是，随着事件发酵时间越长，似乎人们就越丢失了事情本身的重点，甚至众多说法中存在着基础的技术错误、逻辑错误；导致人们距离事实真相不但越来越远，而且还基于错误的推论分成了两派针锋相对的人群，从讲道理论事实，变成了的玩梗、键盘火拼、人身攻击、政治纷争……\n这样的讨论毫无意义。\n笔者虽然已经写过两篇关于“刹车失灵”的文章，但因为近期该事件有了一些新的进展，以及笔者又做了一些调查，所以想用这篇文章，尝试基于当事人、特斯拉两个对立角度，从已公布的公开信息、技术细节、逻辑推论等部分解开些许谜团。\n起码两者之间，肯定有一方说谎了。\n李女士事故前后\n在上海车展上身披“刹车失灵”并在特斯拉展台上“维权”的人，共有三人，其中有一人涉及怎样的事故不太清楚，另外两位分别是来自河南安阳的Model 3车主张女士、陕西西安的Model 3车主李女士。\n先来说李女士，由于她并没有被上海警方处以拘留处分，所以她在第一时间接受了媒体采访，在采访中她这样描述到她遇到的事故和诉求：\n\n\n2021年2月底、3月初，车辆出现“刹车失灵”情况，使劲踩刹车踩不下去；\n2021年3月19日，车被撞了，安全气囊没有弹开；被撞后问特斯拉要行车记录，发现U盘中无行车记录，像是被格式化了，很多特斯拉在发生事故后行车记录都没了；\n打315电话让我去做第三方鉴定；但是特斯拉“刹车失灵”可怕之处在于问题出在软件，是没有办法取证的，特斯拉想解决这个问题都不知道怎么下手，就像当年美国调查丰田刹车门事件，所以不信任第三方鉴定；\n出事后找到特斯拉，没有提任何诉求、赔偿；\n去上海车展，是因为想去上海车展上问一下“刹车失灵”是为什么，不想让更多的受害者因此丧命。\n“我觉得特斯拉是时候站出来解决自己的质量问题了，而不是让我们无休无止的纠结在数据、三方鉴定上，我觉得大家可以一起解决问题，特斯拉承认自己刹车有问题也可以。”\n\n\n假设李女士全部说的是实话，那么能够得出以下几个结论：\n\n李女士车辆曾出现过“刹车失灵”情况；\n车辆碰撞后，气囊未弹出；\n特斯拉利用某种方式抹掉了当事人的行车记录；\n由于“刹车失灵”来自软件，无法鉴定，所以做第三方鉴定无用；\n李女士没有提任何诉求、赔偿，只想弄清楚为何出现“刹车失灵”；\n不想纠结数据、三方鉴定，要么一起解决问题，要么特斯拉承认刹车有问题。\n\n那么先来看一下李女士发生事故现场的视频：\n\n（碰撞过后的李女士车辆）\n从事故视频来看，起码一件事情能够确定，就是该事故的发生与“刹车失灵”无关，这一点在车展后李女士的采访中也得到了印证，但她声明的重点在于气囊未弹开，带来了安全隐患。\n抱着严谨的态度，笔者又去查了关于侧气囊的展开条件；侧气囊和侧气帘在车辆侧面夹角±60°范围内，发生严重碰撞时会展开；在中国规定中，20km/h以下碰撞不可变形、不可移动物体时，则不会展开；关于这个规定，IIHS对其的规定是，像树木、电线杆类的物体，8mi/h（约12.87km/h）以下不展开，而车辆之间碰撞低于18mi/h（约28.97km/h）以下不展开。\n\n其实安全气囊不是撞车就会弹开，气囊控制系统会根据数据综合分析后决定是否弹开；原因很简单，气囊弹开后的成本仅仅是极小一部分考虑，真正让车辆不“任性”弹出气囊的理由是，如果发生的碰撞程度“较低”，气囊弹出不仅无法保护乘员减轻碰撞所造成的伤害，反而会因为气囊巨大的弹出力使得乘员受到气囊的伤害大过碰撞本身。\n就李女士碰撞事故本身，由于缺少相关数据，笔者不敢下定论是否气囊是否应该展开；但笔者想办法找来了事故发生后拍摄的车辆照片，通过以下两张图片来看，碰撞时车门和车身外部发生了凹陷，而内部的侵入量很小，就此情况来看，气囊未展开可能符合安全需求。\n\n（李女士事故车辆内部）\n而关于车载行车记录被抹去一事，其实这事完全没有特斯拉的问题。\n特斯拉的行车记录是内置的，但是需要车主插上U盘并按照规定格式化后建立“TeslaCam”文件夹后，才能正常工作；不过也正是里面存在不便，特斯拉在2020年12月28日之后出厂的车辆标配了U盘并设定好了文件夹。另外，特斯拉的车机并不会存储行车记录，必须存储于U盘当中，并且所有的行车记录数据仅会存在本地U盘，并不会向云端发送数据。\n\n所以李女士所谓的特斯拉抹去了行车记录一事并不存在。\n接下来是关于第三方检测机构无法鉴定特斯拉“刹车失灵”一事，原本这一说法在诸多“伪专家”嘴中信誓旦旦，然而一条被埋没在诸多新闻中的特斯拉“刹车失灵”的司法鉴定结果打破了这一“定论”（如今搜索“特斯拉温州司法鉴定”一词，一共没几条新闻报道）。\n\n这是一起发生在2020年8月12日的事故，车主陈先生成，在距离停车场100米左右的距离车辆失控加速，踩刹车没起作用，撞了十几辆车才停下来。\n随后警方委托了当地司法鉴定方面比较权威的温州市汽车工程学会，对其Model 3的情况做了监测，并且出具了一份检测报告。\n并且笔者得到了特斯拉关于此事的回应，称特斯拉配合执法部门以及该鉴定机构，通过对调取了车辆EDR数据并进行解密，获得了车辆“黑匣子”上记录的事故发生时的行车数据。\n温州市汽车工程学会下属的司法鉴定机构的陈主任介绍了报告：\n\n 在整个检测过程中，有两组数据，一组来自特斯拉总部后台的数据，另一组来自当事特斯拉车上EDR的数据，这两组数据可以反映碰撞发生之前车辆的状态以及驾驶员的操作情况。\n\n\n “我们通过特斯拉一方，从位于美国的特斯拉总部后台，提取了这辆车子事发之前传输到后台的数据，和EDR的数据进行了印证。”陈主任说，后台的数据从原理上说，是可以改动的，但EDR的数据是无法改动的。温州这次事故的车辆，两方的数据所反映的情况是一致的，能够得到相互印证。\n\n\n “通过数据印证，看到的情况是车主在发生碰撞前，脚没有踩制动踏板，而是踩在加速踏板。”陈主任说，“车子是处于持续加速的状态，而且速度还是比较快的。”\n\n通过对比特斯拉云端后台数据以及车辆EDR数据，鉴定给出的结果是车主误踩了踏板导致车辆发生事故。\n也就是说，即便按照李女士所说没有鉴定机构能对其软件逐行找BUG，但是仍然存在司法鉴定部门能够根据EDR数据对事故本身做出一定的鉴定。\n最后，关于李女士的“无诉求赔偿说法”，在特斯拉公布的原始视频音频证据中，李女士出现了前后不一致的情况。\n实际上，李女士在事发后，要求原价退车并且不接受谈判；并且在与“刹车失灵”无关的事故后，以11个月前发生的“刹车失灵”现象为依据，继续进行了一系列“维权”操作。\n基于上述诸多事实，虽然仍存在一些疑点，但是可以确定以下几点：\n\n李女士发生的事故与“刹车失灵”无关；\n气囊未弹开为事实，是否应该展开需要专业鉴定；\n行车记录仪并非特斯拉遥控删除；\n存在第三方鉴定机构可以鉴定事发时的数据，并且在执法、鉴定机构、特斯拉三方合作情况下可以保证EDR数据真实性；\n李女士拒绝第三方检测；\n李女士前后在面对不同人时，诉求说法有改变。\n\n但是，尽管李女士的很多说法、行为，与实际情况和客观事实有出入，但是考虑到她本身并非专业人士，加上遭遇事故所导致的惊恐心情，并不能完全证明特斯拉“刹车失灵”现象不存在。\n这件事梳理清楚后，接下来看一看安阳的张女士所遭遇的情况，也是在上海车展中站在车顶上的那位女士。\n张女士事故前后\n关于张女士的事故，特斯拉发布的情况为：\n\n 2月21日18时左右，车主父亲张先生沿341国道行驶时与其他车辆发生碰撞。当日晚，交警方面出具事故责任认定书∶ 认定张先生违反了相关法律关于安全驾驶和与前车保持安全距离的规定，对事故应承担全部责任。针对这起因违章驾驶导致的车主全责事故，我们表示愿意协助张女士完成车辆维修和保险理赔事宜，却遭到张女士的强烈拒绝。\n\n\n 3月6日，张女士将全车贴上封条拒绝任何形式的车辆检测，并提出要求退车、以及赔偿精神损失费、医疗费、误工费等诉求。\n\n\n 3月9日上午，郑州新区市场监督管理局邀约特斯拉和张女士双方进行调解，最终张女士同意选择第三方检测技术机构后协商鉴定事宜，并签署调解书。\n\n\n 3月9日下午，张女士反悔，并再次将贴着封条的事故车重新堵回特斯拉门店，并明确对特斯拉工作人员表示，不会接受、不会认可任何第三方检测结果，也不会接受任何调解，并继续通过坐在车顶用喇叭循环播放录音等方式维权。\n\n\n 而对于张女士质疑刹车存在失灵的情况，\n 经过对车辆数据和现场照片的查看与分析，我们（特斯拉）发现车辆在踩下制动踏板前的车速为118.5km/h，制动期间ABS正常工作，前撞预警及自动紧急制动功能启动并发挥了作用，未见车辆制动系统异常。\n\n随后张女士在微博上给了不同的事故版本：\n\n 2月21日18:17，家父驾驶本人购买的Model 3行驶在安阳341国道南段村段。另外单独给出了单独的观点：\n\n双方的争议点非常清楚，分为以下几点：\n\n双方对事故发生时的车速说法不同，警方责任事故认定书中没有提到超速；\n特斯拉后台数据已经告知车主，并显示无“刹车失灵”现象，车主认为存在刹车失灵；\n特斯拉称车主不接受第三方鉴定，车主称接受专业的第三方鉴定；\n车主考虑走法律途径。\n\n另外根据其他公开消息以及特斯拉回应可以确定的是：\n\n中国质量认证中心为郑州市监局推荐，是否称“只有一家”暂无证据；\n特斯拉接受任何专业有资质的第三方鉴定机构。\n341路线就没有超速摄像头，所以交警无从确认。\n\n\n（“棱镜”不但查了资料没有，且去实际路段行走，的确未发现超速摄像头）\n\n（由于没有超速摄像头，经常有超速车辆导致的车祸）\n假定车主所说为实话，在一家四口（张女士，其父亲，其母亲，其侄女）从旅游景区出来的路途上，张女士在副驾座上坐着，以下几个推论符合一般情况：\n\n张女士可以清楚看到车辆时速；\n一家四口，行驶速度为118.5km/h不太符合常理；\n\n在郑州市监局的声明中已经证实了张女士不接受第三方鉴定：\n\n\n4月20日，郑州市场监管局新闻宣传处相关负责人回应，郑东新区市场监管局分别于3月15日、3月18日、3月24日三次组织投诉人和特斯拉汽车销售服务(郑州)有限公司进行了调解。投诉人不同意第三方进行技术鉴定，要求“提供车辆发生事故前半小时完整行车数据”。特斯拉汽车销售服务(郑州)有限公司因担心数据被当事人用来炒作宣传造成不良影响，拒绝提供相关数据。因双方分歧较大，未能达成一致意见。\n\n\n当然，以张女士“专业的鉴定机构”来判定，以及法律规定来看，她不接受“中国质量认证中心”是完全合情合法的，所以前后说法并不矛盾。只不过之后就像笔者在《特斯拉凭什么有恃无恐？》一文中所讲，不是很明白张女士为何没有随后寻找所谓“专业的鉴定机构”的逻辑，反而一直在通过其他方式尝试“维权”。\n这点暂且不谈，其实争论的焦点在于车速。\n因为当网络上关于“行车数据”的纷争越闹越大后，原本已经告知张女士的行车数据，特斯拉再次发布了出来，提供了新的信息量。\n\n然而这张表格出来后，网上却发出大量基础物理常识、刹车系统理解的错误判断，以至于不少人还认为这张图不仅不能证明特斯拉没问题，反倒说明特斯拉“刹车失灵”实锤了。\n而他们的理论中大致分为以下几个：\n\n把公里/小时的单位，认成了英里/小时的单位，又换算为了公里/小时，所以才出现车速说法不同；\n数据中间公布不全，所以有猫腻；\n从94km/h减速到48.5/h花费了2秒左右的时间，刹车距离40m左右，过长；\n\n首先，且不说如此愚蠢的问题会不会发生，即便发生了，也不影响在刹车介入后，主缸压力提升、减速度增加的事实，也就是刹车系统的确在正常工作；其次，数据的不全，可能是工程师认为关键节点的有效数据对结果判断才有影响，所以就没把其他的加入其中，并不影响对该事件的判断；最后刹车距离过长，一方面与“刹车失灵”不是一个意思，另一方面，刹车距离过长的对比对象是“良好路面的极限刹车情况”，而现实中极少状况会有人一脚踩死。\n“孤岛车记”中罗新宇根据关键节点数据，均值“填充”了中间空余的部分，并做了一张图如下；\n注：罗新宇，曾经从事博世ESP标定工作，对八款车的ESP中的ABS系统进行过标定设计。\n\n（图/“孤岛车记”，罗新宇）\n透过这张图可以更加直观的看到这次公布的数据中，有几个基本事实可以确定：\n\n车速一直在降低，最大减速度大约在0.7g左右；\n车主在一开始踩刹车时，力度较轻，随后逐渐加重，为刹车距离较长的原因之一；\n刹车主缸的压力不断上升，直到几乎满刹车需求的140.7bar压力，无论助力失效与否，物理刹车部分工作正常；\nABS已经启动，说明轮胎与地面之间已经逼近摩擦极限，也就是ABS系统正常工作；\nAEB自动紧急制动生效，侧面证明了iBooster和ESP系统都正常工作；\n\n这个数据的出现，争议的焦点就变换成了“刹车距离过长”，也算是“刹车失灵”或者是刹车有问题的实锤。\n的确，0.7g的最大减速度，相较于正常车辆大概1g左右的紧急制动减速度（干燥的柏油路）来说低了很多。但是在这个减速过程中，ABS的触发，证明了轮胎与地面之间接近产生滑移情况，也就是无论有无助力情况下，刹车系统传递到刹车盘的力矩，已经逼近路面能给的最大摩擦力矩，马上就要产生滑移了。\n这就意味着，刹车系统有效且刹车力度产生了0.7g的减速，而此时无论刹车系统还能给刹车盘提供多大的力量，真正影响车辆刹车速度的其实是路面状况和轮胎状况，而非刹车系统的好坏。\n当然，这里面仍存在几个疑问，第一是由于没有刹车踏板位移具体信息，那么无从判断是驾驶员狠踩还是助力系统帮忙；第二是当时的路面情况没有官方口径的提供，以及各个轮子传感器的数据，所以无从判断ABS的触发是否真的到达了路面的摩擦极限，是否真的到了轮胎要产生滑移的边缘。\n但这并妨碍从这个数据中得出，刹车系统物理结构无问题，提供了一定刹车里，另外0.7g的最大减速度超过了iBooster标定的断电、错误等情况下的无助力刹车最大值（0.4g），所以助力系统有在工作。\n不过，是助力系统存在问题，还是驾驶员踩刹车一开始没有全力，这个问题暂得不到证明。\n此外，在特斯拉公布数据的同时，还公布了一段话：“对于事故发生前30分钟车辆的状况，特斯拉方面称，在车辆发生事故前的30分钟内，驾驶员正常驾驶车辆，有超过40次踩下制动踏板的记录，同时车辆有多次超过100千米每小时和多次刹停的情况发生。”\n这里面有两个有趣的点，一个是多次超过100km/h和刹停，如果真实，那么一方面证明这个车主是在飙车，另一方面刹车系统正常；另一个辅证是，特斯拉的动能回收功率很大，基本在正常驾驶情况下，一天也用不了10次刹车，那么40多次踩下制动踏板，更加辅证是在开快车。\n当然，也有人会说，上述这些推断都是基于特斯拉给的数据是真实的，那么如果是假的呢，特斯拉如果说谎，那么这一切都没意义了。\n的确，如果是这样，那么这个数据所给出的结论全部都得打翻，那问题回到一个纯逻辑推理的阶段，那就是特斯拉数据造假有没有意义？\n特斯拉说谎？\n首先需要解释一下关于特斯拉行车数据的EDR记录和后台记录。\n多个疑似“刹车失灵”的事故中，特斯拉提供的数据皆来自于后台，也就是车辆行驶过程中传回后台服务器的数据，这部分数据理论上说可以被修改。\n但就像前门提到的一家司法鉴定机构，他们是从车辆中EDR（Event Data Recorder，事故数据记录器）提取的行驶数据，这东西是一个类似飞机“黑匣子”的设备，记录车辆发生事故前后的诸多信息。该设备仅支持物理接触读取，也就是接触车辆，插线进行下载读取，且只能读取不能修改。\n当然这个也不是完全绝对，如果特斯拉买通了EDR供应商，然后还得让供应商接触到事故车辆，然后悄无声息进行修改，也是存在这么一种可能性。\n但这里不讨论这种情况，原因有二，其一是上述事故车辆一直在消费者手中，拒绝任何监测机构，所以不存在这种情况；其二，中国的EDR标准是到2021年1月1日才对一些车辆强制安装的，而这些事故涉及的车辆均早于该日期，但美国早在2012年就开始了，所以特斯拉EDR标准和规范基本完全来自于美国，而EDR数据作为法院取证的案件已经有很多，从未有过有车企修改EDR数据的先例。\n\n既然EDR数据可以认定为是真实的，那么如果特斯拉修改了后台导出数据，用于利己的证据，那么一旦司法鉴定要求提取EDR数据，且是执法、鉴定双方共同在场，特斯拉当场进行提取并解密，提交给鉴定部门，那么两者数据的不符，将给特斯拉带来的损失和影响，比这个“刹车失灵”事件恐怖的多。\n况且直接提取EDR数据是这样的十六进制数据，该如何当着执法部门、鉴定机构的面，进行修改\n这笔账无论从哪个角度来看，都不划算。\n然后咱们再换个角度来看，在NHTSA的“刹车失灵、意外加速”调查报告中，其中涉及的车辆最早为2013年的Model S，即便特斯拉自己从未收到过来自用户的投诉和维权，那么当2019年NHTSA开始准备启动调查时候，特斯拉总该是反应过来需要调查一下自家产品是否真的有问题吧。\n假设特斯拉的车辆的确有“刹车失灵”现象，并且现在所有人的矛头都指向软件层面，那么在特斯拉比较“鸡贼”情况下，早就可以完全通过OTA升级的形式，偷偷修复这个问题，何必等到现在。\n那么有人说肯定是特斯拉自己也修不好，所以2年多时间也没进行OTA。\n但NHTSA通过调取EDR数据、特斯拉LOG数据、监控录像等经过综合交叉证实，所有案例中出现“刹车失灵”、“意外加速”无一例外全是车主误操作。那也就证明特斯拉并不存在这些现象。\n哪怕最夸张的情况，也就是特斯拉之前的确存在该问题，但是偷偷通过OTA升级修复了，而恰巧所有NHTSA调查的EDR数据，刚好也是在修复之后由于车主误操作产生的。那么购买上海产的特斯拉，也理应早就解决了该问题。\n换个角度，如果特斯拉光明坦荡，很早发现了问题，就直接公布车辆出现问题，通过OTA升级即可解决，那么相比于过去燃油车大规模召回的花销，特斯拉付出的金钱代价十分不值得一提。\n从这个逻辑推论过去，存在一种可能性是个例外，那就是特斯拉自己也不知道刹车系统有问题，或者知道了也修不好；同时NHTSA比较蠢，调查了一年时间所有的证据，无论从硬件、软件系统层面，还是事故当时的所有现场还原方面，全部都犯错导致给出了错误结论。\n不过，这种情况，也不是很现实。\n最后一种情况，那就是特斯拉的传感器、冗余传感器、校对纠错传感器以及相关的电子系统，全部同时出错，导致记录下的数据本身就是错的，那么无论是EDR还是后台数据，本质上就是错误的数据传入，所以一方面可能导致了当时事故产生，另一方面存下了错误的数据。\n但是这种情况下，一个非常吊诡的事情就是，错误的数据无一例外全部是支持特斯拉的那种错误。\n结语\n特斯拉这场风波，其实早已不是车主“维权”的意味了，其中掺杂了太多各种立场先行、利益瓜葛、蹭流量等群体的参与，这其中的意味自己体会。\n中国市场中出现的特斯拉的“刹车失灵”案例已经有十几起，要想调查清楚这些事情，需要监控、执法部门、鉴定机构以及相关国家部门配合才可能还原出真实可信的真相。\n比如安阳那位张女士的事件，如果交管部门直接放出她途径道路的监控录像，即可直接证明谁在说谎；但是为何久久没放出来，的确令人玩味。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2353,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":3,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}