Jump to content

BC Place Stadium - The roof WILL finally collapse


Recommended Posts

I think they liked bragging about being the first indoor opening ceremony. :)

The rain would have put a damper on things (mind the pun). The stadium also looks even more visually unappealing with the roof gone. Like a concrete wall at the end of Robson Street.

Having the waterfront cauldron was the best idea. The ugly chain link fence was a massive mistake, but by most accounts, I've heard this was one of, if not the most accessible Olympic flame ever. To snap it in other cities meant getting into the stadium area and behind the security zone, and that usually required a ticket. For Vancouver, you just had to show up at the foot of Thurlow Street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

today from live interior webcam....imagine if the 2010 ceremonies were in an open-air venue:

place.png

That looks so bizarre, and much smaller. Looking forward to seeing the next incarnation of this stadium. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Was there any reason why they chose not to remove the roof before the Olympic Winter Games?

Wouldn't it have saved them a lot of trouble when it came to the lighting of the flame, one cauldron high above the arena rather than the indoor/ outdoor arrangement that left quite a lot be be desired - plus fireworks could be used?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was there any reason why they chose not to remove the roof before the Olympic Winter Games?

Wouldn't it have saved them a lot of trouble when it came to the lighting of the flame, one cauldron high above the arena rather than the indoor/ outdoor arrangement that left quite a lot be be desired - plus fireworks could be used?

It has been discussed a thousand times. But essentially, the reason the renovations happened after the Olympics and not before were because the renovation plan didn't come about until a few years ago (it takes time to assess a structure, find a design, and engineer it). Then with all the Olympic construction and the tight deadline of February 12, 2010, the provincial government (owners of the stadium) didn't want to commit to a lower priority project that would compete for resources going into other higher priority Olympic related projects (sport venues, the villages, highway to Whistler, train to the airport). They feared that the half billion dollar price estimate would expand out of control in such a busy market place and that, worst of the worst, they would end up super rushed like Athens or worse still like Montreal with a not fully completed venue. A missing leg on a cauldron is unfortunate. A missing quarter of a stadium is down right embarrassing.

As it was, BC Place was only used for ceremonial events. Not sports. They spruced it up, covered some things up, and really, you probably would have even noticed the difference all that much on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for answering the question Kendegra. Apologies haven't been following the history of BC Place's roof and what was going on with that stadium.

I must say that the projections used during the ceremonies were very sharp and perhaps the best so far of any ceremony, and i'm sure in the indoor "complete darkness" contributed to that effectiveness as compared to an outdoor venue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the indoor environment made for great projections, there was one big issue that the new retractable roof would have resolved and eliminated. The previous roof was air inflated, meaning they had to be careful with the usage of the doors so that not too much air leaks outside at any one time. This was also troubling for the projections as it would mean the position of the projections onto the drapes were always changing due to a slightly sagging/inflating roof.

And of course, the air pressurized stadium also limited what they could do indoors...in terms of bringing in performers, big props, etc.

So really, they had two big limitations at BC Place: indoor environment (though great for projections) and air pressurized environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the indoor environment made for great projections, there was one big issue that the new retractable roof would have resolved and eliminated. The previous roof was air inflated, meaning they had to be careful with the usage of the doors so that not too much air leaks outside at any one time. This was also troubling for the projections as it would mean the position of the projections onto the drapes were always changing due to a slightly sagging/inflating roof.

I'm surprised Gretzky's torch didn't blow out when going thru the airlocks - there was always that little blast of breeze when you went thru.

And I'm going to sidetrack slightly...

How's the roof replacement at Canada Place going?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised Gretzky's torch didn't blow out when going thru the airlocks - there was always that little blast of breeze when you went thru.

And I'm going to sidetrack slightly...

How's the roof replacement at Canada Place going?

The flame on the torch is designed to withstand -40 degrees C and gusts in excess of 60 km/h...the airlocks weren't a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Super Bowl in Canada? Never. It has only ever made it out of the Sun Belt 3 times in its entire existence. And I can't see Vancouver bumping ahead of New York, Chicago or Boston (none of them have hosted either). Closest it would come might be Seattle. Actually, there's an idea! Quest Field can host up to 72,000 but of course Seattle's famous rains might be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard, though not sure if this is true, that with the new retractable roof the seating capacity will be reduced from its current 60,000 to 55,000.

There was "talk" about a year ago of offering the stadium free to the NFL to host the Superbowl and they would even receive some of the food concession revenues. Bleacher seats can also be added along the rim of the field as there's like a 15-foot drop between the first row of seats and the field. In addition, Canadian Football fields are a bit bigger than American ones....so that would maybe increase stadium capacity to 65,000?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's ugly.

I miss the old marshmallow

I see all those lights and I'm thinking Disneyland Electrical Parade. Cue the Baroque Hoedown music. :lol: Could be the new theme song for the Lions. :lol::P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Vancouver even have an NFL team? So why should the SuperBowl be played there? It only goes to cities which have a team and/or sunshine.

No. There's no NFL teams in Canada. It's just confusion. A lot of people think the Lions are in the NFL but they aren't. They are in the CFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the foreign superbowl was intensified last year when London was rumoured to be bidding to host them in 2014. i think some reporters said it will be likely the superbowl be held in canada first before london can stage them and only after 2016.

they're actually looking to bring super bowl 50 to LA since super bowl 1 was held in LA and so far LA doesn't have an NFL team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a small fraction of Vancouver's cost, the Singaporeans sure put on an amazing show that trumps ours in some ways...the arrival of the flame and lighting of the cauldron was especially amazing. Vancouver's show was just far too theatrical, and lacked that epicness that everyone could appreciate. Not everyone is a fan nor can they understand the artsy interpretation that Vancouver had, which I think is why Vancouver's Opening was something you either liked or didn't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was the only good thing about Singapore was the ligthing of the Cauldron everyhting else was copied from previous Olympic ceremonies. Vancouver was more original in their presentation.

For a small fraction of Vancouver's cost, the Singaporeans sure put on an amazing show that trumps ours in some ways...the arrival of the flame and lighting of the cauldron was especially amazing. Vancouver's show was just far too theatrical, and lacked that epicness that everyone could appreciate. Not everyone is a fan nor can they understand the artsy interpretation that Vancouver had, which I think is why Vancouver's Opening was something you either liked or didn't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...