doghouse4x4 Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 lol at the ignorance. Yeah, people never get shot in PG... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Yeah, people never get shot in PG... they never get shot in DC either. Or in Tidewater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwich Hog Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Yeah, that's kind of what I mean. My idea is more like this...for instance...imagine steel support beams, for context that look simlar to the innermost beams of the two roofs on Century Link Field. These begin on the outside of the stadium positioned vertically right next to the stadium itself. Say there were six of them, one on each corner of the stadium and one in the middle on both sides. The beams are then attached to six additional beams which run horizontally just above the upper tier, extending into the stadium meeting at the 50 yard line. Elevating slightly as they extend into the stadium. Then you attach several other support beams to those and attach some kind of roofing material to that, but leaving the sides of the stadium open so you can still see outside from all angles inside the stadium. Basically, the stadium is covered from rain and snow etc, but not closed off completely from the outside. I like the idea. It's likely that the stadium is designed without enough loading error to incorporate any additional loading from a roof. So you would have to have a completely independent structure as mentioned. Consequently the sort of beams you're talking about would have to be pretty monstrous. A solution that could retain a bit of elegance would be a sort of bat-wing shaped roof structure with support beams at each "point" in the wing, terminating at points outside the stadium somewhere in the parking lot. In any case - with the size of Fedex, not easy at all. Retro-fits are always going to be more difficult than concept solutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichmondRedskin88 Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Hell no. Playing in a dome is barely football. Then why do teams dread playing in the Superdome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeluCopter29 Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 No, imagine a structure built with support beams around the stadium, that covers the stadium, but is not actually attached. I'd love to see an artist's concept with an idea like that. Imagine if the St. Louis arch was bigger, and there was a building built right underneath of it, but not attached. I understand what you're saying. So kinda like the beams on the Jerrydome? Except the roof doesn't actually attach to the stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Hell no. Playing in a dome is barely football. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Then why do teams dread playing in the Superdome? What does that have to do with the fact that playing football in a dome is for pansies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 What does that have to do with the fact that playing football in a dome is for pansies? I like the open stadium but I have to admit sometimes it would be great to play in a dome....never have to worry about wind screwing up a game winning fg...or worry about the rain causing the field to be extra slippery and resulting in turnovers or tearing an ACL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.