Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nationals Park

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    This gives you a good idea of how far away the upper deck is will be here and at the new Yankee Stadium.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by nymdan9 View Post

      It's a shame that the Capitol dome will only be visible in the upper deck--those parking garages and new buildings block the view for people on the lower levels.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by nymdan9 View Post
        This gives you a good idea of how far away the upper deck is will be here and at the new Yankee Stadium.

        Actually it doesn't. Judging from the look of it, that pic was taken from atop the press box.. which is the second highest point in that part of the stadium. there are no seats where that picture is taken. Anyway, there was a "Build It Bigger" episode on the Discovery Channel about the new Nationals Ballpark, and they went to the upper deck. It didn't look that far.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by jp_nys View Post
          Actually it doesn't. Judging from the look of it, that pic was taken from atop the press box.. which is the second highest point in that part of the stadium. there are no seats where that picture is taken. Anyway, there was a "Build It Bigger" episode on the Discovery Channel about the new Nationals Ballpark, and they went to the upper deck. It didn't look that far.
          JD's site confirms that it was, indeed, taken from the press box at the top of the stadium. This should show what the worst view would look like. Our group's seats will hopefully be near the front of the deck down below where this shot was taken, and we are excited about the sight lines and proximity to the field (esp. for a modern ballpark).

          Also, remember that this photo was taken with a wide-angle lens, which means that distances (such as to the Capitol dome and to the field) are greatly exaggerated.

          Comment


          • #80
            The press box is the same height as the top upper deck.

            But I didn't just mean the view from where the photo was taken. I meant that you can see how far the upper deck is in relationship to the field level seats.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Knick9 View Post
              I've said it for while now, the exterior just looks like a post office-like building.
              I believe the original intent was for the facade to be covered in sandstone to reflect the appearance of the District's monuments and federal buildings, but budgetary constraints unsurprisingly kept this from happening. The pre-cast material being installed on the facade now is meant to mimic that appearance.

              Comment


              • #82
                I was checking out the recent photos and the webcam in the press box, and my opinions are slightly changing about the stadium. I'm not saying I love it, I just hate it less.

                I still don't understand why newer ballparks like The Nationals Ballpark or NYS aren't taking advantage of using cantilevers. It gives fans higher up a closer view of the field and allows owners more room to put concession stands, bathrooms, etc. so that they can make even more money. I am so glad that the seating decks at Busch III were designed using cantilevers.

                With owners wanting to build their new ballparks in the middle of the city, this kind of construction actually helps cut down the cost as far as land purchase. The new Twins Stadium falls in this category. They have a small footprint to work with as it is. Why didn't they cantilever the 2nd deck over the first one? Looking at a cross section that someone else has posted in the Twins ballpark thread, it shows that the 3rd deck is cantilevered over the 2nd. It makes no sense.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by stlfan View Post
                  I was checking out the recent photos and the webcam in the press box, and my opinions are slightly changing about the stadium. I'm not saying I love it, I just hate it less.

                  I still don't understand why newer ballparks like The Nationals Ballpark or NYS aren't taking advantage of using cantilevers. It gives fans higher up a closer view of the field and allows owners more room to put concession stands, bathrooms, etc. so that they can make even more money. I am so glad that the seating decks at Busch III were designed using cantilevers.

                  With owners wanting to build their new ballparks in the middle of the city, this kind of construction actually helps cut down the cost as far as land purchase. The new Twins Stadium falls in this category. They have a small footprint to work with as it is. Why didn't they cantilever the 2nd deck over the first one? Looking at a cross section that someone else has posted in the Twins ballpark thread, it shows that the 3rd deck is cantilevered over the 2nd. It makes no sense.
                  The Twins are having a cantilevered second deck over the first one.



                  Is this really different than what they did at Busch III?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    According to this:



                    The Twins park's second deck is a 100% cantilever, however, it looks to be set back a bit. It seems they theoretically could've moved it forward about 10 feet. Also, the upper deck's first row is pretty much in line with the last row of the lower deck, but, the lower bowl is not that deep, so it's excusable in order to keep the rake tolerable.

                    Busch III's second deck is also a 100% cantilever, as is the lower tier of the upper deck.



                    -

                    the Yankees new stadium and the Nat's feature second decks with virtually no cantilever at all, but, the "wing" sections are more cantilvered in Washington.

                    -
                    Last edited by Elvis; 10-23-2007, 12:32 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Elvis View Post
                      According to this:



                      The Twins park's second deck is a 100% cantilever, however, it looks to be set back a bit. It seems they theoretically could've moved it forward about 10 feet. Also, the upper deck's first row is pretty much in line with the last row of the lower deck, but, the lower bowl is not that deep, so it's excusable in order to keep the rake tolerable.

                      Busch III's second deck is also a 100% cantilever, as is the lower tier of the upper deck.



                      -

                      the Yankees new stadium and the Nat's feature second decks with virtually no cantilever at all, but, the "wing" sections are more cantilvered in Washington.

                      -

                      I believe this is the latest cross section for the Twins park.



                      As for the Nats park, apparently the construction workers, engineers, and architects met on a regular basis throughout the construction process to design the park on the fly. They had to complete the construction before a certain time period or the Nats would have to chip in more money. So instead of following the original blueprints, they tweaked major design & engineering elements as they went along. Even though most of us agree that the Nats park isn't very innovative, the process in which it got built was.
                      Last edited by Lafferty Daniel; 10-23-2007, 02:23 PM. Reason: typo

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Good grief, they completely flipped the design!

                        I actually like that new one better.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Lafferty Daniel View Post
                          I believe this is the latest cross section for the Twins park.



                          As for the Nats park, apparently the construction workers, engineers, and architects met on a regular basis throughout the construction process to design the park on the fly. They had to complete the construction before a certain time period or the Nats would have to chip in more money. So instead of following the original blueprints, they tweaked major design & engineering elements as they went along. Even thought most of us agree that the Nats park isn't very innovative, the process in which it got built was.
                          I like it. much better!:applaud:

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            This is starting to look worse than I thought. I don't think too many teams will be copying this facade in the future.



                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Lafferty Daniel View Post
                              This is starting to look worse than I thought. I don't think too many teams will be copying this facade in the future.



                              Well...let's wait until the park's facade is finished before we worry about if other teams will copy it. All the other places we like to "hold so dear" have a facade that almost looks like a carbon copy of each other. At least this place's facade is looking unique.

                              Besides...just about every other team in MLB has a new place, so I don't think there will be much new ballpark construction going on anytime soon.
                              Follow me on Facebook, or Twitter.

                              sigpic If you love your freedom, thank a vet...and this 10-year U.S. Army vet says, "You're welcome.".

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by hsnterprize View Post
                                Besides...just about every other team in MLB has a new place, so I don't think there will be much new ballpark construction going on anytime soon.[/COLOR][/FONT]
                                Interesting point. Once the Nats, Mets, Yankees, Twins, A's, and Marlins get new parks, it theoretically could be another 10 or 20 years before we see a new park.

                                Assuming there is no team movement, that leves Wrigley, Fenway, Dodger Stadium, Angel Stadium, and Kauffman as the only remaining pre-1989 ballparks. I wonder which will be the first to go.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X