"Maybe tech should complement experience, not replace it...right?"
Yeah, that's spot-on. When I had my roof inspected last year, the drone footage was impressive, but I still climbed up afterward and found a couple loose shingles the drone missed. If you're comfortable with heights (and careful!), I'd recommend doing a quick visual check yourself after the drone inspection. Tech is great for spotting big issues, but nothing beats a hands-on look to catch those smaller details. Just my two cents...
Totally get your point, but honestly, drones can catch stuff we might overlook too. Had a friend who swore his roof was fine until drone footage showed hidden water pooling... Maybe combining both methods is the sweet spot?
"Had a friend who swore his roof was fine until drone footage showed hidden water pooling..."
Funny you mention that, because I had a similar experience—but flipped. A client once insisted their drone footage showed major damage, and when I climbed up there myself, turned out it was just shadows and some weird algae growth. Drones are handy, no doubt, but sometimes they can exaggerate or misinterpret things depending on lighting or angles.
I think you're onto something with combining both methods, though. Maybe drones for initial scans and then boots-on-the-roof to confirm? Curious if anyone's had issues with drone inspections missing subtle stuff like loose shingles or flashing problems...
- Had a drone inspection done when we bought our place—report looked super detailed and high-tech.
- But when the roofer actually got up there, he found loose flashing the drone totally missed.
- Guess drones are great for spotting big issues like pooling water, but smaller stuff still needs human eyes.
- Definitely agree about combining both methods...seems like the safest bet.
Had a similar experience, but honestly, drones saved me a ton upfront. Here's my super scientific method: drone first, spot obvious disasters, then bribe a buddy with pizza to climb up for the details...works every time.
