12/12/2010

21 Comments

1. I blame algore and global warming.

   Comment by JD (eb5afc) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:16 pm

2. I look forward to the Modern Marvels (or whatever) episode on engineering failures that analyzes where the flaw in the design was.

   Comment by Miguelitosd (f443a7) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:31 pm

3. I just had to yank a post that was based on old posts. I have no idea why they looked new. The post was up for all of 30 seconds before I figured it out; it seems weird to yank a post but I suppose I should note it somewhere so here you go.

   Comment by Patterico (c218bd) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:33 pm

4. Oh, I figured it out. It was in my Google Reader and I thought it was new but I guess it was some old starred post instead.

   Whatever.

   Comment by Patterico (c218bd) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:34 pm

5. Time to get back to work. I’m not cut out for this blogging stuff.

   Comment by Patterico (c218bd) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:34 pm

6. That roof collapsed just like the Bears defense did today.

   Comment by BT (74cbec) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:39 pm

7. Did the snow cyrstalize the steel and make it brittle?
   I wonder what Rosie O’Donnell thinks?

   Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (6dbf61) — 12/12/2010 @ 3:50 pm

8. You mean it’s *not* a Rift in the Sports-Time Continuum ?

   Comment by Alasdair (205079) — 12/12/2010 @ 4:47 pm

9. 7…Yes, I know it’s a fabric roof.

   Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (6dbf61) — 12/12/2010 @ 4:49 pm

10. The irony, like a O’Henry tale, is that they spent money on it, and neglected the bridge which was the
    main path to it, and of course the global warming thing

    Comment by narciso (6075d0) — 12/12/2010 @ 4:51 pm

11. It collapsed in a way that would not have harmed any fans, no? I wonder if that was by design.

    Comment by JD (eb5afc) — 12/12/2010 @ 5:30 pm

12. Evidently, this fabric dome has collapsed before.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 12/12/2010 @ 5:33 pm

13. According to this New York Times’ article, it’s torn or collapsed several times.

    Comment by DRJ (d43dcd) — 12/12/2010 @ 6:09 pm

14. Oh, you younguns. In 1966, we climbed up on our roofs to shovel off the snow. And then again in 1979.

    Comment by nk (db4a41) — 12/12/2010 @ 6:19 pm

15. Oh, that was Michael Moore…

    Comment by The Emperor (4bc2e1) — 12/12/2010 @ 7:25 pm

16. It’s “deflated” several times; this usually takes a couple of hours to undo. This is being called a “collapse”, and will take days or weeks to repair before re-inflation. This is going to be cited as one of the “reasons” that the city and state should build the Vikings a new stadium.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 12/12/2010 @ 8:20 pm

17. I don’t want to appear ignorant, but I can’t help it.

    Down here in Texas, we build sports stadiums with real roofs that can be retracted for whatever dumb reason. Although we have snow in Dallas on occasion, it rarely happens in Houston.

    So, why do the northern climes(Minnesota and Michigan) build inflatable roofs which will collapse when it snows?

    I mean, seriously, wouldn’t it make more sense to build inflatable roofs in the south, while rigid roofs were the norm in the north?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    Comment by Ag80 (e828a4) — 12/12/2010 @ 9:19 pm

18. The fabric roof IIRC was an economy measure.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (6dbf61) — 12/12/2010 @ 9:57 pm

19. Had the same thought, though I suspect it’s just a fortunate aspect of a dome. The furthest point from supports would be near the focus of the dome, where the game is, instead of the spectators, who have to travel up stairs to get to their seats (which means structure around them).

    Still, I wouldn’t be afraid of the roof of one of these things killing fans, except if there was some crazy stampede panic.

    Comment by Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/12/2010 @ 10:03 pm

20. The roof was merely mirroring the team’s season, as well as the latest comeback by their grizzled quarterback.

    Comment by Icy Texan (66e366) — 12/13/2010 @ 1:30 am

21. I heard mention of the “Teflon” dome. I’m assuming the idea was if the structure was very efficient in shedding snow, it would not need to support the weight of snow. But the speed of snow accumulation the other day, and perhaps the properties of the snow itself (I think it was wet, sticky, and heavy as the storm moved in) may have caused this.

    In Texas who worries about snow, it’s that golf-ball sized hail and bigger that you don’t want to be hit by. We usually don’t get that up here.;

    Comment by MD in Philly (cac12c) — 12/13/2010 @ 4:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.