I have two issues with it.

It's distracting in every sense of the word. When driving on track and seeing something unexpected off track (ever seen a copter or plane take off while on track at NJMP Thunderbolt). But also, as people have stated, we are not professionals getting paid, but amaturs in every sense of the word. So having a off track distraction when the purpose of being there to improve driving skill is counter intuitive in my mind.

The second is liability. I already intake a lot of personal liability exposure when attending a track event, that I know. Why should I take on more liability for my entire weekend, which comes at a small to incredibly small personal gain to my experience, for the sake of what is perceived as better photography. This is a somewhat of a subjective 'gain'. Once again, the focus is about being on track and performing on track. I don't see how this adds to it and am quite happy a stand against has come from PCA and tracks like Sebring and WGI that have sign's prohibiting their use.

 

Right on both accounts imo..

Bottom line: 'what is seen cannot be unseen'. We know how it works on the track. Some of it is definitely 'there but for by the grace of God..' An outsider however will see 'all manner of chaos'. Risk, ie premiums, will be adjusted in accord with each viewed event/situation.... Not worth it if you love the sport. Get the allure but please don't feed the Bear.

Less seriously - Love the Chinooks lifting off as one is apexing T2 T'bolt.. One does not appreciate how large they are until they are bobbing up and down at horizon level while trying to 'stay in it' from T1 to T3...

 

Interesting recent article I ran across..
http://blog.motorsportreg.com/regula...k#.VRyWfeErzFk

So if drone users need to have a signed FAA exemption, that puts my mind at ease a bit. At least the pilot is someone who takes this seriously. But that's only valid if its enforced...

My original concern though is still somewhat valid: Daddy (who is both a car nut and a drone nut) has a Exception and wants to see himself.. He asks Mommy (who is not a drone enthusiast) or Little Jonny to take some footage of him while he is out. They do their best to comply.. Those are the folks i don't want flying their crap toys around.

Legit question: How do you know who is at the helm if its controlled by a cell phone? Its not like the old days where it was easy to spot the guy holding a 10lb remote with a 4ft antennae sticking up.

 

Let's just bring our shotguns to the next DE! 😃😃

 

I love the idea of drones but think they are a bad mix with race cars except perhaps professional racers and experienced drone operators.
I do not need my student driving around thinking 'got to brake later I know that drone might be filming me.'
I do realize that track photographers and even other drivers (sometimes with in car video) present a similar concern.
But I'd rather not increase the risk.
It's a shame, because drones are really cool. I'd love to see drone footage of my car in action.

 

Why is it that we are trusting everyone out there on track to do the right thing but we automatically think someone with a $1,000 drone is just going to smash it into someone's car for fun?!

There is credibility to some of the anti-drone comments but I think there is also a lot of doublespeak going on with many of the other comments. We have rules, procedures, etc., to drive cars on the track. We can have rules for drones as well.

Look at all the comments asking about what would happen if a drone crashed, or someone didn't follow the rules with the drone, or acting like an idiot with a drone. Now replace "drone" with "car".

I would like to think that people in my region know me and trust me. They trust me when they drive close to me on the track. They know I am not going to do something stupid. That is probably why no one had a problem with me flying the drone at events until the ban took place.

Remember, even if PCA national allowed it, individual regions and tracks would be able to ban them. Why not give the regions a choice?

I realize that this is an uphill fight. Even if everyone wanted it I am not sure it would happen due to insurance liability.

Lastly, let me try to sell it to VC. I think obama and Bloomberg would agree with you because they love to ban everything they don't agree with. Its OK if you want to agree with them.

 

Search for "dji drone crash" on you tube.

And to motivate you, there is one crashing into *****.

 

I have a hard time grasping the concept of a GoPro hitting my windshield at 140mph doing very little damage.

Or how about the 356 speedster with a windscreen that's about 3" high?

 

When was the last time you saw a 356, let alone a Speedster at a DE?

I've watched lots of cars hit stuff worse than a Go Pro on the track without major damage.

 

What kind of BS rationalization is that?

Ok, how about replica Cobra's with cut down racing windscreens? I see those at DE events all the time....

 

I'd call BS on arguing about a car that isn't there.

Think about all the stuff on the track that weigh more than the drone that people don't worry about hitting. Bambi at Summit Point, the turtles at LRP, groundhogs at the Glen, Le Bambi at Tremblant, let alone rocks, debris, or cones. IMHO, this is a lot to do about nothing.

 

I would have no significant problem with a professional using a drone. I'd be uncomfortable for a while, but assume I would get used to it. Tracks allow professional photographers on track, I would think they could develop rules to allow professional drone photographers on track. I would assume that like photographers on track, only 1 or 2 drones would be allowed. I could get used to that, just like you get used to seeing a photographer. I assume rules could/would be developed to ensure the chance of one crashing on track is very, very small.

I am completely against anything that allows a hobbyist to fly at drone near a track while it is operational. I have no faith that all hobbyists are competent and/or will follow the rules. The last thing I want is 5 or 6 bubbas flying their drones around a track.

It is interesting to note that, as I write this, about 55% of us say no, 25% say yes and 20% are undecided.

And, yes, I have seen a drone at the track. One of the support crew guys brought one and flew it in the evening after the track was closed. Nice toy, not something I really want around when I'm out there.

 

No, I don't see the need or value of allowing them. Plus, my modeling contract prohibits my fat *** from appearing in unauthorized media outlets.

 

I've been at some PCA events with drones. They usually have a ///M on their car.

 

Wow.

+1

Good points. Like all things mechanical (including cars), **** happens, and stuff breaks. At least with cars operated by amateurs, or even pros, they generally are traveling in only two dimensions, and with decent sight lines and good flaggers, we can generally see trouble and breakdowns well in advance.

With a small device capable of travel in 3 dimensions, if there is a mechanical or electronic (or communication) failure, and suddently its trajectory is right over the track (presuming its operator follows the all-mighty guidelines), and it falls on cars or people, that is gonna be an ugly surprise for all involved. And anyone who claims a car hitting an UAV at speed would not be anything but damaging is sniffing glue.

I see nothing to be gained here. It is purely an exercise in vanity.