| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/24/2005 04:35:34 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by rasdub:
Who is ready to bungee jump off that thing...LOL? |
I was thinking that instead of anchoring it in that crumbly-looking rock near the edge, that they could construct it in a bowed arch, simewhat like the traditional holder for a canary cage, or a fishing pole when reeling in a big one ... |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 04:46:12 PM · #52 |
That's amazing! o.o I've always wanted to visit the Grand Canyon, but now even moreso! :))
|
|
|
|
10/24/2005 05:12:01 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
...including some slot machines (it is in Nevada, right) to play with while waiting. This structure cannot stand on its own without a village being built around it.
I hope not, but we'll see. |
It's in Arizona, not Nevada. There's already a vcisitor's center and canyonside hotel in the National Park, been there for many decades, and a reasonable "village" development around it to cate to the tourists.
This new project is deep in the Indian lands, in an area where no tourists currently go as far as I know. Or maybe small groups go in with guides I donno. But the vast spaces of the Grand Canyon are currently virtually untouched by the hand of man. I don't think one more small tourist complex is gonna do any damage, and lawd knows the current destination point is grotesquely overcrowded...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2005 05:23:18 PM · #54 |
Um, I'll take pictures of ya'll while you walk across it. Okay?
I went ot Grandfather Mountain last week (Boone/Blowing Rock area of NC -- Southern Appalachian mountains). They have a "mile high swinging bridge" that goes across a ravine that is 80 feet deep (the mile high part comes from how high above sea level the bridge is, or something like that). I took about 5 steps out, turned around and went back.
Heights don't bother me. It's that dizzy/think-I'm-getting-ready-to-pass-oout feeling that I don't like. ;)
:) |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 05:27:40 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by rikki11:
150 people x 125 lbs/person ... |
Whoa, you better catch up on your reading from the Centers for Disease control and the Coast Guard and the FAA -- what with Americans pigging out while the world starves even 150 pounds/person is too low a figure (pun intended) these days. |
Wait. I thought that the reason America was getting so overweight was because poor people don't have any choice but to eat cheap, fattening fast food. But now you're blaming world hunger on the poor in America? That doesn't seem fair. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 05:36:08 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
Hmm, employment for all these indians... and a resort to be owned by someone from Vegas. Great, all these indians will be able to enjoy the view themselves and get $6.50/hr or thereabout. |
Non-gaming tribe per the attached article. Also, Indian casinos are owned by the tribes and only managed by Vegas casinos,if at all.
Message edited by author 2005-10-24 17:37:04. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 06:21:54 PM · #57 |
| Actually, when I planned my trip out to the Grand Canyon about 4 years ago, I was surprised at how much wasn't there in the way of typical touristy things. From what I've seen, it's remained pretty uncluttered. We went in early April, so it wasn't overly crowded, but there were still plenty of people around. I was particularly surprised by the lack of close hotels/motels. There must be some pretty strict regulations in effect. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 06:40:56 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by pekesty:
Originally posted by srdanz:
Hmm, employment for all these indians... and a resort to be owned by someone from Vegas. Great, all these indians will be able to enjoy the view themselves and get $6.50/hr or thereabout. |
Non-gaming tribe per the attached article. Also, Indian casinos are owned by the tribes and only managed by Vegas casinos,if at all. |
Yes, in fact, the tribe members make way beyond minimum wage. As tribal members they usually get a percentage of what the tribe brings in. An interesting side effect is that, while tribes used to liberally define what percentage of indian or tribal blood you needed to qualify for membership, now that there's money to be made, tribes are starting to fight within themselves over who's a "real" indian. (Sorry, Native American.) In at least one case, near Temecula, CA, one tribe was fighting to kick out the tribal leader, who had brought the casino to the reservation in the first place, because he wasn't "pure" enough.
Greed is a powerful force. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 06:46:47 PM · #59 |
I just got dizzy looking at it don't think I could venture out on it.
g
|
|
|
|
10/24/2005 06:50:50 PM · #60 |
you have to pay to go on it? that's insane! You'd have to pay me to go on it!
|
|
|
|
10/24/2005 06:59:34 PM · #61 |
I don't normally use this word, but...
No F*ing Way!!!!
About 10 years ago I went up the CN Tower in Toronto. They have glass sections in the floor. I kept watching these kids jump on it and I just wanted to yell at them to stop because it scared me to even watch! Then this little old French lady said, "Come!", grabbed my arm (I closed my eyes!) and pulled me onto it. I opened my eyes and was so freaked I could have cried. I was shaken for a good half hour, hour. NEVER again!
That thing you posted is a gazillion times worse than the CN Tower. It looks like it could just snap off and plummet to the ground.
Eek.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2005 07:00:51 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Greed is a powerful force. |
I'm greedy too. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 07:21:46 PM · #63 |
| Oh man.. I'd have to go on it, how could I not? But still.. I've come close to panicking just crossing a little bridge going over a river with a drop of maybe 5 feet if I fell. I can't imagine how I'd react to going on that thing. Good thing photography puts me in an entirely different mindset and I'm willing to do things I'd otherwise never be able to if it means I'll get the shot I want. |
|
|
|
10/24/2005 07:31:03 PM · #64 |
I'd love to go bungy jumping of that walkway, 4000 feet drop.. I could reach 200mph on the way down :)
Message edited by author 2005-10-24 19:31:37. |
|
|
|
10/25/2005 01:55:32 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by senoj:
Originally posted by ScottK:
Greed is a powerful force. |
I'm greedy too. |
Open a casino. :) |
|
|
|
10/25/2005 01:58:44 PM · #66 |
I'd love to see the structural drawings on that. Trust me, to even have this thing built, $25 is a pretty damn good asking price for a ticket.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:00:56 PM · #67 |
I'd be on that thing in a heartbeat!
And maybe will too.
Some things in life just have to be experienced.
Well here are limitations ya know, like using a Nikon.
(I just know I'm gonna' regret that one...) |
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:16:08 PM · #68 |
I'm going to Vegas again!!!!!
|
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:25:29 PM · #69 |
I'm concerned by how "hokey" the architects website is, and also by the engineering company's website, which is straight out of a Microsoft FrontPage template.
My concern with the architect's drawing is mainly the lack of any 'struts', I guess you'd call them. I think the architect's drawing, and the engineer's plans might look very different. In reality, I think something built like that drawing would snap off or bend where the walk meets the building.
Also, they're going to have to build support a long way back. Hey, I'm a geologist... put too much weight on the edge of a cliff & all you need is a little weak spot to form a "tip-line" for stress to concentrate along, then... whoops... it's all gone. I don't think rock-bolts will do it.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:33:50 PM · #70 |
Cantilevers of this length, and longer, are used all the time in stadium design. Large commercial airliners have wings that exceed this length of cantilever and they support themselves when on the ground. Large bridges routinely employ cantilevers far ihn excess of this int he construction phase. Structurally it's perfectly feasible. I see a very large building there in the drawing, and I imagine the beams running under th building, as it were, with the weight of the building's structure serving as a counterbalance. I wouldn't be in the least bothered by going ou ton this platform, except maybe by the 25 bucks I had to spend for the privilege...
R.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:39:09 PM · #71 |
| My structural engineer is curious about how they detailed this puppy. It might be shown as a wafer thin platform but maybe that never materialized (as it is common to value engineer). Anyway, I'll be keeping my "eye" on it :) |
|
|
|
10/25/2005 02:51:14 PM · #72 |
The architect's rendition shows that walkway as just too wafer-thin. To my eyes it's unrealistic. I don't think there is a material in existance with the strength to handle the shear stress. IMO, the engineer's version may look more like this:
|
|
|
|
10/25/2005 03:00:21 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Cantilevers of this length, and longer, are used all the time in stadium design. Large commercial airliners have wings that exceed this length of cantilever and they support themselves when on the ground. Large bridges routinely employ cantilevers far ihn excess of this int he construction phase. Structurally it's perfectly feasible. I see a very large building there in the drawing, and I imagine the beams running under th building, as it were, with the weight of the building's structure serving as a counterbalance. I wouldn't be in the least bothered by going ou ton this platform, except maybe by the 25 bucks I had to spend for the privilege...
R. |
Well, structurally, just about anything is feasible, if there's enough money involved. But you're talking about very large structures in which the structural members are large enough that you can easily employ a cantilever. Secondly, this is much larger than an airplane wing, and then you have the legal restrictions that people are actually going to be on this thing. So much smaller than many bridges and buildings (including those with a cantilver system), yet larger than an airplane wing with more legalities. Not only do the renderings represent this cantilever as razor thin, but in the text, they're on Native land, and they discuss minimizing the amount of structure involved including what's running through the building. And so, I'd kill to see those details.
|
|
|
|
10/26/2005 09:49:06 PM · #74 |
| That's nothing to a base jumper, or a skydiver :) |
|
|
|
10/26/2005 10:10:46 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by sestevens:
Well, structurally, just about anything is feasible, if there's enough money involved. But you're talking about very large structures in which the structural members are large enough that you can easily employ a cantilever. Secondly, this is much larger than an airplane wing, and then you have the legal restrictions that people are actually going to be on this thing. So much smaller than many bridges and buildings (including those with a cantilver system), yet larger than an airplane wing with more legalities. Not only do the renderings represent this cantilever as razor thin, but in the text, they're on Native land, and they discuss minimizing the amount of structure involved including what's running through the building. And so, I'd kill to see those details. |
Lord knows, I'm not an engineer. I was an architectural photographer, so I had to photograph a lot of structural work, but that doesn't qualify me for anything. Still, just for the sake of argument, the plane's wing is filled with fuel... And as for "wafer-thin", as near as I can guesstimate looking at the drawings and the scale of the humans, we're looking at what, 2-3 feet thickness; so we can have a girder of that thickness, pretty impressive...
Nobody's mentioned the part that sorta bugs me on re-examination; the danged thing has a glass WALL all around it; dirt on the glass wall, dirt on the floor, photo ops will suck big-time. pfffft....
Robt.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/23/2025 08:07:17 PM EDT.
