We’ve seen all kinds of things cause crashes at bike races over the years – dogs and selfie-taking spectators being just two – and now drones can be added to that list following a spectacular crash at a criterium in California.
Footage of the crash was shot by cyclist Kaito Clark, who was taking part in the Golden State Race in Sacramento.
His bar-mounted camera captured the moment the drone shattered into pieces after hitting some tree branches, part of it apparently becoming lodged in the front wheel of a fellow competitor, with the unfortunate rider catapulted over the handlebars moments later.
According to a thread on Reddit, the cyclist escaped without serious injury – although his front wheel and helmet were both destroyed in the crash, with the drone operator offering to replace them.
15 thoughts on “Video: Drone causes spectacular crash at criterium in California”
That was dramatic, thank
That was dramatic, thank goodness the rider wasn’t seriously injured.
Didn’t take long for the Reddit thread to start talking about getting a lawyer and getting the drone operator reported.
And the stereotype about DJI
And the stereotype about DJI owners within RC community continues to flourish.
Someone was successfully prosecuted for personal injury with their drone in California (where this happened). It will be interesting to see what happens here in the future, and if FAA gets involved.
Jamminatrix wrote:
I googled DJI – they have one called the “mavic”!
what have the Roman Catholics got to do with it though?
If only he’d had disc brakes
If only he’d had disc brakes to slice that drone into pieces.
Replacement of helmet and
Replacement of helmet and wheel isn’t enough to compensate for that. He should offer a few grand on top.
Nothing against drones or their use, but owners need to fork out if they mess up.
Over here we have to abide by
Over here we have to abide by CAA regulations, so the drone should have been 50M away from the public road.
Two of my friends run an aerial filming company, and both have paid thousands to be fully qualified and insured, yet some rich teenager with a drone can cause a mess.
Same situation with regular cyclists versus teenager on a bike, breaking the Highway Code.
WillRod wrote:
FAA has similar verbiage. There’s really two things here: Was this pilot registered with FAA (either as civilian or as part of 107 for commercial use), and, why were they flying negligently. The FAA could really make an example of this person.
That said, this only further proves that having a national registry is useless. Whether the pilot was registered, or wasn’t, only shows it is an ineffective tool. And if the pilot had written a license number on the drone, would it have done any good? It shattered into dozens of little pieces.
Agreed, good analogy.
WillRod wrote:
Moreover, “Camera-equipped drones must not be flown within 150m of a congested area or large group of people, such as a sporting event or concert”.
UAS and paramotors are a nightmare, I’ve been flying in the circuit pattern at 1000ft, visual with drones and paramotors with the Air Traffic Zone.
A few idiots cause a lot of problems.
WillRod wrote:
your friends fly commercially so they get a commercial license. this has nothing to do with someone being stupid.
you can be stupid with a bike and it require no license.. i see stupid bikes that every single ride. stupid drones are just more of a fancy/rare thing. someone racing me a green light and hitting my wheel is just as dangerous if not more. or going through red when i’m perpendicular and green. all of them, just as stupid as the drone owner.
muffies wrote:
Perhaps my last line wasn’t clear. Basically I was suggesting that experienced cyclists know not to ride on pavements, jump red lights etc, but plenty of kids just buy a bike and ride without caring.
the same thing happens with drones. Some, like my friends, fly responsibly, and even when it was just a hobby for them, they followed the CAA rules and yet there are repeated incidents where people fly them inappropriately.
Poor bloke. Awesome strava
Poor bloke. Awesome strava photo though. Untold kudos
Blimey! I’ve always thought
Blimey! I’ve always thought that drone footage was the answer to dangerous camera motos. Apparently not!
You can clearly see the main
You can clearly see the main body of the drone in his front wheel as he flips, so what baffles me is how he carried on riding so far after hitting the drone?! Was it passing through his forks?!
DaveE128 wrote:
yeah, he seems to go quite far looking down – I guess it was clicking away in his spokes and then finally got itself wedged tight
GrahamD and dinsoaurJR:
GrahamD and dinsoaurJR: trying to work out if you think a lawyer is the wrong answer? Given the over the bars on the head nature of the incident, entirely possible for injury to have resulted in severe neck injury/paralysis. In those circumstances would suing operator have been justified? But same idiocy resulting in less damage = get to continue to be an idiot? Seems to me seeking legal advice perfectly in order, who else is going to stop this idiot?
There’s something of a cultural difference between US and UK approach to tort law in that former uses private actions as a tool of policy (e.g., punitive damages resulting in higher insurance, class actions, all of which impose a tax on particular sorts of behaviour) to a much greater extent than the UK where some damage still justified as an “accident” (i.e., no one’s fault).