-22, case in point. And while we're off-thread, for my money, I'd cut 350 or so airframes from the -35 order and build 200 more -22's. They'd need new avionics, sensors, EW, etc... but it's still a preeminent A2A platform.
I think you said it right. Looking at images of the Vikings stadium, it looks like the roof is steeper on the steel covered North side, which makes sense since snow will be tougher to get rid of on that side because the sun won't be directly shining on it, helping to melt it.
Looks like what you are describing regarding where the roof starts on the North and South sides holds true; the South side is lower. This was surely done to promote good views of the area south of the stadium. It is unfortunate there isn't much to see in that direction. If this stadium was built in GoSU96's beloved Inner Harbor location, it would have provided nice views of the Downtown skyline. Oh well...
Me too.
Many people still do not understand it or its true intent and as such I see it misinterpreted or incorrectly implemented often. It can be confusing to really understand where to draw the line, but I for one do not think it right or wise for the school to look away with a stadium renovation when all they can lose by not doing it is fans and money in lawsuits, but all they can gain is more fans and a better, more inclusive image, and that is one of the things that make SU stand out as a great institution of higher learning. Whatever pain is perceived is just that, perception, and to be clear, there is no way ADA related upgrades will take the budget. If anything, it will create/take some space and convenience that we all want anyway and only use maybe 10%-15% of that budget.
so they are the 1%?
Looks like it with the 1% seating requirement. Too bad UM is playing games and resisting ... they're in a no-win situation, legally and socially, trying to buck ADA compliance. Good thing we're on top of it in the Dome reno project.
I'm glad the dome is doing something about it - ADA or not, it's pretty crazy to have one elevator in the whole place
It's good they are doing the ADA thing. Maybe they average less than 50 because the Dome is not very accessible. On the other hand, 1% seems a bit of a contrived number/percentage. Wonder if the figure is experience driven. Would unused seats be put on sale at game time?
Will they open up the ADA seating to the general public if we're only getting 50 wheelchairs? I can imagine the demand would be pretty insane -- the only place in the dome where you don't have to worry about the fans standing up and blocking your view!
In my experience with people going to the dome in a wheelchair/crutches i found it pretty easy.. park at skytop, take a special bus right to the dome. get wheeled in, take the special bus back. the seats were down above the endzone and they were less than half full most of the time.. a couple times close to full. I dont know many season tickets they have sold and how hard it is to get to the higher levels. getting to the dome is still real easy though. adding a better elevator or 2 or 3 probably solves much of that without much cost. Bball might be more of an issue since many of the same rules will apply in a much more congested area.
So one of the things about the ADA and the way its intended to be implemented (for the record I believe the applicable document in NYS is the ANSI 117.1) is to avoid making a person with special needs go through an a-typical or roundabout means to getting to the "same" or "equal" environment. This can mean that seats must be available in different price ranges (front row lower bowl and upper bowl cheap seats) and they can't be forced to be separated from the normal sequence or path of other patrons (can't be forced on a special bus in the back door half way around the stadium). While it may work just fine, it should not be a required course of action. This is often where some get upset about the effort required to make it work. Private institutions can get into some conversations about displacing or delaying implementation until the need arises as long as they have a plan in place to do so, but in the case of employment for example this can be seen as a deterrent to hiring a disabled person, so at least in a public venue or place of business, it is required to be addressed from day 1. I have been told when planning "I am not in a wheelchair" or "I just won't hire a wheelchair bound person". While there are legitimate cases where this can be applied, it is rare, and should not be the default position. As to the 1%, consider that the soccer field is also a "stadium" and 1% of that would be more in the 10 accessible seats range. The code does not differentiate by size of stadium if it falls into the criteria to designate it a stadium.
I took my dad to an SU game a few years back. He couldn't walk very far on level terrain, couldn't do more than a few steps and there was no way he was going to be able to see a game in the dome without a WC. The Dome staff couldn't have been nicer and it remains a fond memory that I had with him.
I want to see unbelievable LED presentations featuring visiting recruits. I mean blow your socks off sort of stuff. Identify any remotely applicable precedent and then drive a truck through it. I'm serious.
