Orangeyes
R.I.P Dan
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 16,265
- Like
- 21,713
existing teams with retractable roofs don't open them nearly as much as anyone would've thought when they were all being built or installed
since so much of the value of the dome is for hosting giant basketball crowds in the winter, paying a premium for the option of opening the roof for a september football game here or there is pretty hard to justify
devils advocate...spring/summer events. Concerts, events, lax, outdoor hockey in the winter, etc..That's a lot of money to spend so the players can get a suntan once or twice a year.
The fans are still sitting under the big top. Only a portion of the field sees any sunlight.
Lax and crunch aren't worth the electric bill
The fabric air-supported roof is outdated. That's why the dome is the only one left and no one is building stadiums like this anymore despite the lower cost. The builder of the dome even says its outdated. It's outdated.The Dome is awesome. This isn't the NFL/NBA where everyone constantly needs their new, generic, boring stadium/arena.
I'm not buying this "the Dome is outdated" line. Most of the best college hoop/football arenas and stadiums that people actually care about are much older than the Dome.
Is it your position that the only choices are air supported roof or retractable roof?xc84 said:The fabric air-supported roof is outdated. That's why the dome is the only one left and no one is building stadiums like this anymore despite the lower cost. The builder of the dome even says its outdated. It's outdated.
The fabric air-supported roof is outdated. That's why the dome is the only one left and no one is building stadiums like this anymore despite the lower cost. The builder of the dome even says its outdated. It's outdated.
A fixed roof is better. Cheaper than retractable. Obviously pricier than air supported but fixed roof has potential for big center hung scoreboard and easier concert set-up (can't utilize too much from roof currently).
I bet a fixed roof is in the $100 million range. Air-supported more expensive than you would think.
Actually, I would be fine with a new "regular" roof but that will cost $250-$300 million due to the support needed. No one uses the dome in the summer because there is no A/C and it's hot as hell in there.I prefer to think of it as vintage. Vintage is cool. Getting blown out of the Dome doors? Where else can you do that?
Really though...just get a new regular roof when this one is no longer functional. That's all we need is functional. It's just a roof! Don't leak or collapse, and everything's good.
Retractable roof in Syracuse, when nobody uses the Dome in the summer... is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.
Fixed roof is more like $250M ...make it retractable and you add another $80M. Lots of case studies on this by e.g. Minnesota, British Colombia.A fixed roof is better. Cheaper than retractable. Obviously pricier than air supported but fixed roof has potential for big center hung scoreboard and easier concert set-up (can't utilize too much from roof currently).
I bet a fixed roof is in the $100 million range. Air-supported more expensive than you would think.
No.Is it your position that the only choices are air supported roof or retractable roof?
The retractable roof portion of the BC renovation was over Half of the entire renovation. I think with the new materials and technology with fabric and polymers, a fixed roof is possible without the weight.Fixed roof is more like $250M ...make it retractable and you add another $80M. Lots of case studies on this by e.g. Minnesota, British Colombia.
I don't know what you mean by " a fixed roof is possible without the weight."The retractable roof portion of the BC renovation was over Half of the entire renovation. I think with the new materials and technology with fabric and polymers, a fixed roof is possible without the weight.
I don't know what you mean by " a fixed roof is possible without the weight."
BC is a textbook case of a fixed roof converted from one that was air supported. Yes, it's retractable but the retractable nature was not over half the entire renovation. They had to beef up support for the fixed roof...retractable or not. That is where they spent most of their money. The final renovation costs for BC were $563M and you are right, over half was for the roof which is in line with the numbers I have been stating here. Look at the before and after for BC Place and you will see a dome like ours (before) and to covert, it took massive amounts of trusses and cabling to add the fixed, cable supported roof. That's where the costs were. I will say this, BC Place had no template and so the costs were higher than expected. With the Carrier dome, I would hope the costs would be lower from lessons learned there.
Not disagreeing with you at all. The weight I am talking about is not only the weight of the structure, which has been reported that the Dome structure can't handle. I am also talking about the amount of snow that we get which is pretty unique to Syracuse. The roof on the BC arena would collapse under the weight of the first 6 inch snowfall and really wouldn't be feasible.
Syracuse gets more snow than Minnesota and the area where the BC arena is probably combined. A highly angled fixed pitched roof would be the best option IMO, translucent if possible similar to the MN new arena.
Sounds like an even larger undertaking than that of BC place. More pitch = larger roof = more supports, etc. Your argument, if accurate, is convincing me that a new fixed fabric roof would be a large amount of money... maybe more than necessary If that is the case, just build from scratch and use a proven design that would work rather than trying to retro-fit onto an existing structure with no precedent. I think that might be a better way to spend Millhouse's tax dollars but I would need to do a thorough study of the financials before making my final decision on that.Not disagreeing with you at all. The weight I am talking about is not only the weight of the structure, which has been reported that the Dome structure can't handle. I am also talking about the amount of snow that we get which is pretty unique to Syracuse. The roof on the BC arena would collapse under the weight of the first 6 inch snowfall and really wouldn't be feasible.
Syracuse gets more snow than Minnesota and the area where the BC arena is probably combined. A highly angled fixed pitched roof would be the best option IMO, translucent if possible similar to the MN new arena.