FlaxholmeRam Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Sorry - completely missed the post above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Another angle on this - if they do eventually allow safe standing, what could the capacity increase to, say if they converted the South stand to standing? That must add another 5k? Crazy thought effectively doubling occupancy in a stand ?......you will be removing seats, standing as you currently do in South Stand ......and where every seat is you are going to allocate two persons to the one current space ?? Maybe people will shrink, but evolution takes time. Clue is in your opening line ......"safe"......... I can't imagine it adding much at all, just reduced width of seats to bench seats, so maybe at MOST another 20%, circa 1,000 seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RebelScum Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Would love to see The South Stand extended up - Just so it gave Pride Park a uniqueness and not a copy of 'Boros ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Honestly, the stadium is the right size for us. Where are these extra 5,000 or 10,0000 fans now? Or do we want 8,000 away fans in our ground? Build 10,000 extra seats that will be left empty if we ever have to go without playing Man United and Arsenal? Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Crazy thought effectively doubling occupancy in a stand ?......you will be removing seats, standing as you currently do in South Stand ......and where every seat is you are going to allocate two persons to the one current space ?? Maybe people will shrink, but evolution takes time. Clue is in your opening line ......"safe"......... I can't imagine it adding much at all, just reduced width of seats to bench seats, so maybe at MOST another 20%, circa 1,000 seats. The ratio is three standing to where two sat I think. So 6k in south stand becomes 9k standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroyDyer Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 The board opted to build a brand new 60,000 seater stadium, and name it after me. Given how many potential player signings are ran past football manager, I assume this is probably accurate too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoetheRam Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Re safe standing if it ever does come in, the governments green guide currently states a safe standing capacity to be up to 1.5 people stood to every 1 person seated. Obviously the logistics and configuration of the South Stand may decrease that ratio. Can't see it happening for another 5 years though, just wish that in the meantime if you are stood in the South lower the stewards wouldn't bug you to sit down, or worse still the people behind you. Anywhere else fine but not in the "noisy" bit. And no other than a safe standing conversion we shouldn't expand the ground. It's only absolutely full once or twice a season, and we shouldn't fall over ourselves trying to accomodate 10000 people who don't currently show up. That said, to be part of a crowd that would beat the BBG attendance record would be something special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroyDyer Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I think it depends on how we get on if we go up. We sold out every game in the season we shall not mention. If we can sell out the ground 19 times to watch 11 blokes dressed in footballers attire, we could expand with a decent side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philmycock Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 And also how would we expand the South stand with the velodrome near enough directly behind the stand? Directly? Is that an imaginary car park I imagined? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 is someone in an argumentative mood? Just for my amusement, remind me of what job I do and what jobs I have held previously Ramnut. Structural Engineer, or not I can see the construction of the supporting framework outside of the east and south stand are interchangeable, and if you've noticed or not, there are sections outside of the stadium where you are underneath the stand, this would just build back further as it went higher, and you'd have some NEW pillars (as I said in first post) further away from the concourse/pitch, but on the existing but currently redundant foundation! Fight fight fight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Wouldn't the expansion be a case of lifting the roof to the level of the West stand and corners and putting a steeper seating deck onto of the current one?. No need to extend the columns because the base if the seating deck stays the same as it is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Wouldn't the expansion be a case of lifting the roof to the level of the West stand and corners and putting a steeper seating deck onto of the current one?. No need to extend the columns because the base if the seating deck stays the same as it is now. Cut the tops off..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Cut the tops off..... Why?. Seating deck starts at the same level. The steelwork would need to change that wraps around the roof but that's all bolted together so wouldn't need to be cut off the columns either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Why?. Seating deck starts at the same level. The steelwork would need to change that wraps around the roof but that's all bolted together so wouldn't need to be cut off the columns either. If the columns aren't cut off they would have to build around them and the columns become internal (not great) - they would also have to exend them vertically to support the new roof at the higher level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 If you look at external pictures you cant really see how the steel work looks fir the West stand and coerners. However from the shape of the cladding and steel work coming out if the NW corner ot looks like the columns continue at the same height and the extra seating rows is supported by longer supports at the same angle as the existing ones. No need to change joining plates just bolt on longer versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Hopefully this image doesn't disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Hopefully this image doesn't disappear. But aren't the white vertical columns bolted onto the top of shorter black ones? Simply replace the long ones with shorter ones. And then use the longer ones on the new columns Mostyn mentioned being built on existing and currently unused foundations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 There appears to be a join in The columns above the offices in the SE corner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 But aren't the white vertical columns bolted onto the top of shorter black ones? Simply replace the long ones with shorter ones. And then use the longer ones on the new columns Mostyn mentioned being built on existing and currently unused foundationsAs far as i can see the columns at low level are painted black in some locations - but its the same structural member. The white upper part of the colum is carrying the existing upper tier. Take that away and.....well....disaster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 If the steel structure had been designed to be easily adaptable, there would be a joint in the column just above where the sloping beam meets the circular column. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.