JFK-1 1,666 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 I'm no engineer but reading that it crossed my mind that constantly removing a roof support surely results in some degree of movement within the structure. Which may then produce the effect you see if you bend a piece of metal back and forth till it snaps? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 5,825 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 The OP highlights Dornan's claim to be concerned reference the welfare of supporters. I believe Hampden Park to be in Dornan's constituency? On Scottish Cup final day, there was considerable concerns about both supporters' and players' welfare. What did James say? I remember four days of radio silence from the Scottish Government, before Michael Matheson issued a statement. Stuart Cosgrove and Eamon O'Neill applauded the discipline on display. Their weekly media review on BBC Radio Scotland often reinforces the Scottish Government's control of their members participating in social media. Of course, there was the irony of Cosgrove's broadcast behaviour on the same means in the two hour aftermath of the final, "everyone is over reacting". I should acknowledge that Cosgrove has since apologised and now expresses a different view. I suppose nearly a hundred arrests(so far) constitutes enough empirical evidence for his change of mind? Thus, Dornan ignores welfare issues in his own constituency, where he has a legitimate voice. Similarly, he ignores fans' welfare at the ground where he has a season ticket, again a legitimate voice. However, based on the ramblings of a, "man tarred with the sectarian brush" and belief he is the leader-aff of Donegal Mountain Rescue; James is persuaded to broadcast his support for an independent engineer's report. I suspect the SNP might want to have a word with James, before he buys a bag of magic beans from Phil? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,395 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 One would hope that the electorate of Cathcart, etc, duly bring the roof down upon this deluded imbecile. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,372 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 I've never heard of this before? That's quite extraordinary. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,372 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 The Rangers board are handing these to Rangers fans for the match on the 31st 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 allegedly, they are required to stop the roof blowing off when it's windy. Obviously this doesn't apply to windy match days. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,395 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 Sellik's Main Stand was reconstructed during season 70/71, they played home matches at Hampden that season. There has been rounds of constant litigation akin to to Bleak House's notorious case, 'Jarndyce and Jarndyce' ever since. A civil Engineering report some twenty-odd years past, demanded two wind-in/wind-out steel pillars be placed at either end of the pedal bin roof, as necessary support for the structure. The supports are removed(wound out) an hour before kick-off, and replaced(wound in) an hour after. As for safety certificates, when McCann rebuilt the North Stand, the then Fire Officer would not issue said certificate because of the tunnel created by the stand's considerable over-hang, up and over the 10 foot high graveyard wall, at Janefield Street(one of three streets sold to ra Sellik by the then GDC, for a penny). Another Fire Officer was found, who saw the situation, 'the Sellik Way'. I have always assumed that the twin pillars were not some Masonic joke, but were windbracing, tying the cantilevered roof to substructure below the seating plinth, thus preventing the roof blowing off and taking the seating plinth, which is tied to it, with it. During a match, the dead weight of the dead eyed support provides the ballast. I am no structural engineer, so I could be wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,115 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 John, Had a message on social media passing on their good wishes to you and your family during you Mother's illness. I'm sure everyone on here would share in that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,252 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 I wouldn't sit in that stadium & certainly not in the main stand Why were those three stands allowed to be built? The old Shellik board(whytes& kellys) said CP couldn't be redeveloped. What changed? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 And of course there is absolutely no chance of the roof collapsing during a game when these supports are removed ???? But the biggest issue of all is how McCann got planning permission to build three new stands after their old board said you couldn't build on that site. Rumours of old mine shafts underneath meant redevelopment supposedly wasn't possible. no there isn't any chance of the roof collapsing if the supports are removed. The supports actually hold the structure down and are needed only when the stand isn't full. The weight of the crowd is important. That's my understanding of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.