Comment by jo6gwb | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jo6gwb | Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure why they don't explicitly write in the report that the driver may have been trapped in the back seat, and was unable to locate or use the mechanical release to escape. While that wouldn't be a contributing factor to the wreck, it would be a contributing factor the the driver's death, and important for Tesla and their passengers to know about.

The report states:

The frontal impact with the tree resulted in a power loss of the car’s 12-volt system, which runs the non-traction power systems. During normal operation, the front door latches operate electronically with the pull of the interior lever. In the event of a 12-volt system power loss, the interior front doors open as usual using the interior door handles. The rear doors also have both electronic and mechanical latches; however, mechanically opening the rear door during a power loss requires additional steps. According to the owner’s manual, during a loss of 12-volt system power, a rear-seated occupant must locate a small cutout in the carpet beneath the seat cushions and pull the mechanical release cable tab toward the center of the vehicle to manually open the rear door. Inspection of the door latches and locking hardware was limited by postcrash fire damage.

Edit: Must add that this assumes the front door was jammed and couldn't be opened mechanically.

Not saying this as a remark to you specifically, just a fun anecdote.

Someone totaled my Model 3 on my birthday a few years ago and my front door was smashed. I smelled smoke and thought I had a battery fire (turns out it was smoke from the airbags). I crawled to the back seat and tried to open my door but it wouldn't open due to power loss. I ended up breaking the window because in my state of mind, I couldn't remember that the manual door override was available. People always say there is a manual backup, but even if it works, it's really hard to remember that during a terrible accident where time is an issue. Luckily I carry a knife in my car with one of those window breaking points.

I can't imagine trying to do that drunk.

Why "luckily"?

Do you mean it would have been lucky in a different situation?

> I'm not sure why they don't explicitly write in the report that the driver may have been trapped in the back seat, and was unable to locate or use the mechanical release to escape.

Because the NTSB cannot establish that conclusively given the almost total lack of physical evidence remaining after the vehicle fire.

It does not mean that a vehicle defect does not actually exist from the NTSB's point-of-view. It just means that the NTSB lacks the physical evidence to conclude anything there.

(I personally find the necessary "additional steps" required for exiting the vehicle from the rear seats in the event of a power loss troubling.)

More broadly, this NTSB report is being misinterpreted by many here.

The "probable causes" (not "causes") and "lessons learned" (tellingly distinct from the NTSB's more traditional "safety recommendations") established in the final report are exactly tailored to the physical evidence and physical facts that did remain independently of Tesla (the company) - and no more.

The actual title of the HN submission is, in my view, inappropriately written by excluding the word "probable".

That sounds pretty terrifying in an emergency situation. What is the reason for the rear doors working differently? I can't picture someone referring to their user manual or looking under the seat to open the door when the car is on fire.

This reads like a terrible design.

I was in a car crash and resulting fire when I was a child. The ambulance staff (and later my dad) praised me for helping my younger brother out of the car, since the door needed kicking from inside to open it.

If you have a Tesla with these stupid rear door locks, make sure your children know how to open them.

Child safety locks will prevent the rear doors from being opened from the inside, even when unlocked. Perhaps they were engaged either intentionally or by default?

This isn't the child lock. The rear doors have some sort of electronic lock, so if the power fails you have to use the mechanical release which is hidden under the carpet or something.

In this case, failing safe should probably be to just release the locking latches shortly after the loss of power.

I don't think they have sufficient evidence one way or the other to draw that conclusion. The driver's cause of death was BFT with thermal damage and smoke inhalation; I don't know they have reason to believe he was conscious and trying to escape the vehicle.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com