Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Why have motos not been replaced by drones? Just reading through the men's race and half the discussion is what the moto is doing and how it is changing the dynamic of the race. I would think a drone is cheaper to operate (don't have to pay a driver and camera guy, no vehicle/insurance costs etc) the picture would be better (close ups of riders, drone gains altitude to show pack behind, etc, the different perspectives are endless). Seems like this is a no brainer.
Long Chile was a silly place.
Easily solved by implementing even the most basic safety practices.
Long Chile was a silly place.
I think the wooded areas would be the drones downfall... you would need CIA level drone tech maybe
I'm sure there are a few limitations, but it seems like the upside (cheaper to operate, better angles, no race interference) far outweigh those limitations.
Long Chile was a silly place.
the batteries last like 30min
Well then, get 16 of them! ;)
I didn't realize the battery tech isn't there yet. Even still, I'm sure two drones, with backup batteries, could cover most IM bike courses?
Long Chile was a silly place.
I'd like to see drones in addition to the motos, but they aren't a great replacement. Limited battery life and the controls aren't infallible. The connection between the remote and drone relies on a good cell signal, which can be spotty. Plus, unless the drone stays at a high level, it isn't easy to fly a drone at 10 feet or lower and not run into anything.
In other words, drones are good for overhead, helicopter like coverage, but I don't think they're very practical for eye level footage, at least not currently. Good thought though, and hopefully we'll see drone footage in the future. It's a lot cheaper than paying for a helicopter.
Maybe footage from cameras on the bikes?