Tesla FSD Railroad Crossing Failures: Critical Safety Analysis

Executive Summary

Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) software has a documented, potentially fatal flaw: it cannot safely handle railroad crossings. This represents a systematic failure affecting the latest hardware and software versions, with 47 documented incidents since 2023 and at least one actual train collision.

Critical Failure Modes

Primary Malfunction Patterns

• Ignoring active warning signals: Proceeds through crossings despite flashing lights
• Gate detection failure: Attempts to drive through or around lowered crossing gates
• Train detection failure: Cannot detect approaching trains despite visual/audio signals
• Track positioning errors: Stops on railroad tracks when traffic lights are red
• Navigation errors: Turns directly onto train tracks instead of following roads

Incident Frequency and Documentation

• 47 verified incidents since 2023 (NBC News investigation)
• Recent incidents through August 2025 on latest software versions
• One actual collision: Pennsylvania incident (June 2025) with train impact
• Zero fatalities to date due to human intervention or luck

Technical Root Cause Analysis

Training Data Deficiency

• Core problem: Insufficient railroad crossing examples in neural network training dataset
• Expert assessment: Carnegie Mellon's Phil Koopman confirms inadequate training data
• Non-standardized infrastructure: Varying crossing designs (gates, lights, signage) confuse AI recognition

Hardware/Software Scope

• Affects latest models: 2025 Model Y with HW4 hardware fails
• Current software versions: FSD v13.2.9 demonstrates same failures
• Systematic issue: Not limited to older vehicles or outdated software

Comparative Analysis: Tesla vs. Waymo

Waymo's Superior Approach

• Proactive avoidance: Route planning considers railroad crossings
• Multi-modal detection: Audio receivers detect train sounds
• Dedicated training: Model railroad crossing at test facility
• Result: Zero customer complaints about crossing failures

Tesla's Reactive Approach

• Inadequate preparation: Relies solely on camera-based detection
• No specialized training: Generic AI expected to handle edge cases
• Marketing contradiction: Claims "full self-driving" while requiring constant supervision

Regulatory and Industry Response

Government Awareness

• NHTSA involvement: Confirmed communication with Tesla about incidents
• Railroad industry warnings: Association of American Railroads warned about this risk in 2018
• No enforcement action: Despite documented safety failures

Railroad Crossing Fatality Context

• 267 deaths in 2024 at railroad crossings (Federal Railroad Administration)
• No tracking of AI involvement in existing fatality statistics
• Potential for increased risk with autonomous vehicle adoption

Business Impact and Timeline

Current Service Deployment

• Tesla robotaxis operating in Austin, Texas with same failure mode
• Expansion plans: Half of U.S. population coverage by year-end
• Employee intervention required: Tesla staff manually preventing crossing failures

Customer Trust Erosion

• User frustration: "Kind of crazy that it hasn't been addressed" (Oakland Tesla owner)
• False advertising concerns: "Borderline false advertising" assessment from customers
• Loyalty testing: Even Tesla supporters expressing safety concerns

Resource Requirements for Resolution

Technical Development Needs

• Training data collection: Comprehensive railroad crossing footage acquisition
• Multi-modal sensors: Audio detection capabilities for train sounds
• Infrastructure mapping: Database of crossing locations and characteristics
• Edge case testing: Systematic validation at various crossing types

Time Investment

• Unknown timeline: Tesla hasn't provided fix schedule
• "Major FSD update" promised for late September 2025 (no specific crossing improvements mentioned)
• 8-year development cycle: Tesla promising FSD "next year" since 2017

Critical Decision Points

For Tesla Owners

• Immediate action required: Manual intervention at all railroad crossings
• Risk assessment: Every crossing represents potential collision scenario
• Trust evaluation: Question manufacturer claims about autonomous capabilities

For Regulators

• Safety investigation: Systematic review of autonomous vehicle railroad crossing performance
• Approval criteria: Whether to allow robotaxi expansion with known fatal flaw
• Public disclosure: Transparency requirements for known safety limitations

Operational Warnings

What Will Fail

• Any reliance on FSD at railroad crossings
• Assumption of improvement without specific Tesla acknowledgment and fix
• Robotaxi safety in areas with frequent railroad crossings

Hidden Costs

• Constant vigilance required: Negates autonomous driving benefits
• Potential liability: Legal exposure for collision involvement
• Reputation damage: Customer trust erosion affecting brand value

Success Criteria for Resolution

• Zero crossing failures across all FSD-enabled vehicles
• Public transparency about fix implementation and testing
• Independent validation by safety regulators and railroad industry

Conclusion

Tesla's FSD railroad crossing failures represent a critical safety flaw that undermines autonomous driving claims. The systematic nature of failures across hardware generations, combined with actual collision incidents, creates an unacceptable risk profile for unsupervised operation. Until Tesla demonstrates comprehensive resolution with transparent safety validation, every FSD-enabled vehicle represents a potential tragedy at railroad crossings.