Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 The lounge wasn't though since it doesn't have a pitch view. It's been well discussed that it's a screw up that it wasn't high enough to get the kind of view we were hoping for. Yes RJ looks like Hibs but let's not make stuff up It was never intended to have a pitch view? It was meant to be a view across to the castle, which it still is. Not sure why that other poster is mocking the castle view as if that isn?t what was intended for the Lounge. If anyone took a second to think about it it would be obvious that no matter how high the stand was, you?re still going to see Tynecastle High. It was another marketing decision, a poor one, to show renders of the Lounge with the High school out of sight. An impossibility that raised expectations and created disappointment. Punters high up in the wheatfield have enjoyed the view we expected to see but seem to have forgotten the school was blocked out by the old main stand. It?s a screw up by no one other than the marketing team. maybe im na?ve but I don't really see what red Jamie has done to make people think he's hibs.Told them Santa isn?t real. I?m glad we ?didn?t get away? with larger lettering. I think the size being installed will be just dandy! Agreed. As per my mock-up I think it will look great. Looks tiny when looking at the entire stand but that?s a view that?s almost impossible to get. As Bill said most punters will be seeing it from ground level from that entrance between the trees and from there it makes sense to be the size that it is. I seen this on Twitter. Sent from my VFD 600 using Tapatalk Did ye aye? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I actually think that the most recent mock up near the top of this page post (#23556) woulda been about the right size of lettering. Personal opinion, i'll reserve judgement till its up. That wasn't really my question though. Murrayfield, Easter Road and heck even Meadowbank all have significantly larger lettering on the outsides of them - so I'm not sure where that fits in with the regulations and the suggestion we weren't allowed anything any bigger. Then you?re in luck Erik. That mock-up shows the exact size of how the lettering will look when up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Then you?re in luck Erik. That mock-up shows the exact size of how the lettering will look when up. Which is why I'm going to reserve judgement - that lettering to me looks bigger than the old sign did...... Would be happy enough if it ends up like that though aye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 It was never intended to have a pitch view? It was meant to be a view across to the castle, which it still is. Not sure why that other poster is mocking the castle view as if that isn?t what was intended for the Lounge. If anyone took a second to think about it it would be obvious that no matter how high the stand was, you?re still going to see Tynecastle High. It was another marketing decision, a poor one, to show renders of the Lounge with the High school out of sight. An impossibility that raised expectations and created disappointment. Punters high up in the wheatfield have enjoyed the view we expected to see but seem to have forgotten the school was blocked out by the old main stand. It?s a screw up by no one other than the marketing team. Told them Santa isn?t real. Agreed. As per my mock-up I think it will look great. Looks tiny when looking at the entire stand but that?s a view that?s almost impossible to get. As Bill said most punters will be seeing it from ground level from that entrance between the trees and from there it makes sense to be the size that it is. Did ye aye? I could be wrong but I seem to remember Thomaso posting that Ann Budge herself was disappointed when it became apparent that the lounge wouldn't have had a higher/better skyline view. So more a architect/visualisation issue up front. Either way it's a screw up as I was agreeing with you when the other poster mentioned it's purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Which is why I'm going to reserve judgement - that lettering to me looks bigger than the old sign did...... Would be happy enough if it ends up like that though aye. Fair to reserve judgement, but this is the size based on the official and final elevation drawings that Thomaso has repeatedly said are the accurate ones. They may be a bit bigger than the original stand but I doubt by much. Certainly looks like taller letters anyway. Which makes sense due to the shift from Stadium to Park. I could be wrong but I seem to remember Thomaso posting that Ann Budge herself was disappointed when it became apparent that the lounge wouldn't have had a higher/better skyline view. So more a architect/visualisation issue up front. Either way it's a screw up as I was agreeing with you when the other poster mentioned it's purpose. I wasn't on the panel but I imagine the board are probably shown the same visualisations that have been released to the fans? I doubt they get a separate more accurate rendering to what's released. If they've been shown the same stuff that we were initially, before the limitations came to light, then she'd have seen this image too and I can see why she'd then be disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgie rd eh11 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 The lettering is to big/small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Obua, is there any chance of getting a pic update from this angle? Thanks in advance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Go back a hundred pages or so for a full explanation of how the current facade was arrived at. To summarise, the first details released were an early computer generated concept design which was totally impractical when budget, programme and technical requirements were fully considered. Is the image in for example post #23515 the "computer generated concept design" you refer to? If so, allowing for the usual architect impression enhancement I am not clear how it is different from what is being delivered. If not, what did it look like? Incidentally the size of the lettering looks fine to me. Personally (and it is just my opinion not a moan) I'd rather it said "Heart of Midlothian FC", rather than reinforce the tendency of some fans to seem to support the ground more than the club, going back to "Save our Hearts" and reinforced by this mega-thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Hearts Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 The lounge wasn't though since it doesn't have a pitch view. It's been well discussed that it's a screw up that it wasn't high enough to get the kind of view we were hoping for. Yes RJ looks like Hibs but let's not make stuff up I never mentioned anything at all about RJ allegiance so let's stop making things up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Is the image in for example post #23515 the "computer generated concept design" you refer to? If so, allowing for the usual architect impression enhancement I am not clear how it is different from what is being delivered. If not, what did it look like? Incidentally the size of the lettering looks fine to me. Personally (and it is just my opinion not a moan) I'd rather it said "Heart of Midlothian FC", rather than reinforce the tendency of some fans to seem to support the ground more than the club, going back to "Save our Hearts" and reinforced by this mega-thread. The image in #23515 is the up to date version of the design. It was released in April this year along with the announcement that we'd be switching back to Tynecastle Park. http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/5898 This is not the early CGI concept that Thomaso refers to. The early CGI concept which he mentions is what the architect intended it to look like from his original plans. It's what the board would have been shown when they signed off on the design. What they would have seen when they told us we were getting a feature glass curtain, and was the first images the fans would have been shown. These are the images that Thomaso referred to. Pretty similar in all aspects of the current and final design. The big difference being the removal of the glass curtain. The glazed curtain-walling, which is our new "glass curtain" can clearly be seen behind the original glass curtain "baffle" as Thomaso put it. We couldn't do it due to budget and technical requirements, which looking at it is completely understandable. I just don't see why we're still pretending it's there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 The image in #23515 is the up to date version of the design. It was released in April this year along with the announcement that we'd be switching back to Tynecastle Park. http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/5898 This is not the early CGI concept that Thomaso refers to. The early CGI concept which he mentions is what the architect intended it to look like from his original plans. It's what the board would have been shown when they signed off on the design. What they would have seen when they told us we were getting a feature glass curtain, and was the first images the fans would have been shown. These are the images that Thomaso referred to. Pretty similar in all aspects of the current and final design. The big difference being the removal of the glass curtain. The glazed curtain-walling, which is our new "glass curtain" can clearly be seen behind the original glass curtain "baffle" as Thomaso put it. We couldn't do it due to budget and technical requirements, which looking at it is completely understandable. I just don't see why we're still pretending it's there. Thanks for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pans Jambo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Never mind aw that crap. Photos! Where is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Not long now Fantastic progress Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Thanks for that. Wait, you're saying that we were going to have a glass curtain in front of what we've got now? Why on earth would we do two facades? What we've got now is just a cheaper alternative isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) Wait, you're saying that we were going to have a glass curtain in front of what we've got now? Why on earth would we do two facades? What we've got now is just a cheaper alternative isn't it? I am not saying that but it seems to have been the case. I agree it would have been a bit OTT just to have slightly better "kerb appeal". Edited October 9, 2017 by Francis Albert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I am not saying that but it seems to have been the case. I agree it would have been a bit OTT just to have slightly better "kerb appeal". Ok I suddenly realise there have been groups of us talking about different things - it never even crossed my mind that we'd planned one in front of the other! When you say you can see the current facade behind the big one on the artists impression, aren't you just seeing flooring and glass panels joining together? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Ok I suddenly realise there have been groups of us talking about different things - it never even crossed my mind that we'd planned one in front of the other! When you say you can see the current facade behind the big one on the artists impression, aren't you just seeing flooring and glass panels joining together? It was Red Jamie's post. I just quoted it. I was also confused about what people were talking about which is why I asked a question and thanked RJ for seeming to clarify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Brightside Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 The image in #23515 is the up to date version of the design. It was released in April this year along with the announcement that we'd be switching back to Tynecastle Park. http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/5898 This is not the early CGI concept that Thomaso refers to. The early CGI concept which he mentions is what the architect intended it to look like from his original plans. It's what the board would have been shown when they signed off on the design. What they would have seen when they told us we were getting a feature glass curtain, and was the first images the fans would have been shown. These are the images that Thomaso referred to. Pretty similar in all aspects of the current and final design. The big difference being the removal of the glass curtain. The glazed curtain-walling, which is our new "glass curtain" can clearly be seen behind the original glass curtain "baffle" as Thomaso put it. We couldn't do it due to budget and technical requirements, which looking at it is completely understandable. I just don't see why we're still pretending it's there. The glass curtain is still there just a different design. I don think it was ever intended to have 2 layers of glass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Wait, you're saying that we were going to have a glass curtain in front of what we've got now? Why on earth would we do two facades? What we've got now is just a cheaper alternative isn't it? Yes, we were going to have a glass curtain in front of what we have now. It was meant to be a "feature" wall in front of the building rather than the facade itself. The actual frontage of the building was always intended to be the way it is, constructed with a curtain-wall system, but it was to have this sweeping layer of glass over the front with the badge in the middle of it. It's why there's been so much talk of the "grey panelling" not really counting as an entirely glass front. Even though those panels are grey glazed windows, the original intention was to have a large glass wall in front of those. Ok I suddenly realise there have been groups of us talking about different things - it never even crossed my mind that we'd planned one in front of the other! When you say you can see the current facade behind the big one on the artists impression, aren't you just seeing flooring and glass panels joining together? I think you're mixing up Francis and I. No I'm seeing the current stand as we see it now with the glass curtain sitting in front of it. It's how it was shown in the original planning drawings and isn't part of the curtain-walling construction of the building. I'll look that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Religion Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Yes, we were going to have a glass curtain in front of what we have now. It was meant to be a "feature" wall in front of the building rather than the facade itself. The actual frontage of the building was always intended to be the way it is, constructed with a curtain-wall system, but it was to have this sweeping layer of glass over the front with the badge in the middle of it. It's why there's been so much talk of the "grey panelling" not really counting as an entirely glass front. Even though those panels are grey glazed windows, the original intention was to have a large glass wall in front of those. I think you're mixing up Francis and I. No I'm seeing the current stand as we see it now with the glass curtain sitting in front of it. It's how it was shown in the original planning drawings and isn't part of the curtain-walling construction of the building. I'll look that up. That is all completely incorrect. The curtain wall was designed as shown on the plan below. There was never going to be a "sweeping layer of glass over the front" as you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 layers of glass......how much will that cost to clean :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 layers of glass......how much will that cost to clean :-) Double the cost of one cleaning + 10% extra for the second mobilization. This will be all you if the window cleaning posts come back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Bit of confusion on the terms he uses - the glass curtainwall is installed - the ?glass curtain? is the big sweeping glass baffle shown on the very early computer generated images. It's described as a sweeping glass baffle here. That was also my understanding. That is all completely incorrect. The curtain wall was designed as shown on the plan below. There was never going to be a "sweeping layer of glass over the front" as you say. I'm not an architect but why is the glass shown in blue there? All the original plans show this blue section as sitting in front of the main structure of the building. Your red circles show that it was one continuous piece of concaved glass, with no grey glazed panels. Here it is from the side. Black lines being the building structure. Blue line being the glass curtain. Actually here's a better one showing the glass in blue with the brackets behind showing it sits in front of and way from the main building. Apologies if I'm wrong here but I don't believe I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I'm pretty baffled myself now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I never mentioned anything at all about RJ allegiance so let's stop making things up I never said you did. I said you're making stuff up about the lounge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 This is a just saying situ A mate of mine works for the company who are putting in the bogs, he was telling me as far as he knew they didn?t have a date to start this work. This conversation took place last weekend. He?s not the type to hype. We could be hiring 200 turdeses for all I know? I was on site today. The plumbing works to the toilets started weeks ago, with many of the urinals and cisterns are fitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Gin Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I was on site today. The plumbing works to the toilets started weeks ago, with many of the urinals and cisterns are fitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Photo Credit: FB Group Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb8 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Buffalo Bill said: The new forum software/user interface, and that pic.. what a time to be alive! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JALBO Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, Buffalo Bill said: Photo Credit: FB Group Really brilliant. We're about to have a wonderful arena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1994 January 2017 October 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyjam Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 4 minutes ago, bb8 said: The new forum software/user interface, and that pic.. what a time to be alive! 6 minutes ago, Buffalo Bill said: Photo Credit: FB Group The Heart of Midlothian in the Plaza is huge. Never realised it was that big from the other photos that have been taken at ground level. Will be an incredible piece of art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Mobile version fecks up that pic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoltan socrates Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) Aerial shot is superb, anyone who says that doesnt look impressive has a very small gentlemans sausage Edited October 9, 2017 by zoltan socrates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worthing Jambo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Just now, zoltan socrates said: Ariel shot is superb, anyone who says that doesnt look impressive has a very small gentlemans sausage I think the mobile pic would make it look longer and thinner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 44 minutes ago, Dunks said: Mobile version fecks up that pic It seems to configure if you turn your phone on its side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Buffalo Bill said: Photo Credit: FB Group Test ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) From the Main Stand FB page. Should be 180 seats. Edited October 9, 2017 by Footballfirst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Jamie Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealMaroonCF Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Oh My Days Im anbsolutely unashamed to say that my smile was wide and a tear grew in my eye seeing that aerial shot What a statement. What an achievement by Oursrlves, all of us, united to the point we wouldn't give it up There she is. Our new main stand. Absolutely incredible. Look it at it! Look at it ! For the sake of you vermin infiltrators .... does that look like a bus shelter to you ? Away and FO back to yer sewer, tell your kind you aren't wanted here This forum is for those 'with' the heart to follow deep in the trenches. Our Park is for those who wears its colours with pride and bleed it a colour you can't see. If those pictures don't raise your heart, your pulse, and the hairs on your neck , maybe you can be forgiven for being " too old " or maybe even unfortunately unwell. For everyone else this is your and our legacy My fellow jambos. I apologise to those who ire I've raised in conversation on this forum. And now I thank you all. This is what WE have achirved Beam with pride. Wear your colours. Tell your kids and all before them to pick up the baton and carry it forward Amazing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) Re the size of the "Tynecastle Park" sign, I noticed that there are five brackets across the width of four windows, immediately above the space allocated for the crest. The crest is two windows wide, so it looks as if the lettering will be between four and five windows wide. Understated, but fine by me, although I agree with FA that it might have been better with "Heart of Midlothian FC" above the crest. Edited October 10, 2017 by Footballfirst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) That aerial shot is a cracker although can i just say that it looks like we still have feckin loads to do pitch side. looking at the pics it looks like they are putting in all the rails first as opposed to section by section so i hope that will mean seats going in pronto when its done. Edited October 10, 2017 by Jamboelite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Green Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Oh my. That aerial photo is a thing of beauty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 That aerial picture is a cracker! Really get a much better scale for the sheer enormity of the thing when you see it from that perspective. What a transformation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Looking terrific from the high picture. Also I think the photo of the seats may contain ours (although hard to confirm from that angle). And my first post since the system update! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah O Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 those seats don't look padded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highlandjambo3 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Just having breakfast on the balcony of a hired villa in goa....................... that aerial picture, oh my few cocktails tonight me thinks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obua Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 23 minutes ago, Sarah O said: those seats don't look padded The two outside blocks are plastic,the rest are padded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 6 hours ago, Footballfirst said: Re the size of the "Tynecastle Park" sign, I noticed that there are five brackets across the width of four windows, immediately above the space allocated for the crest. The crest is two windows wide, so it looks as if the lettering will be between four and five windows wide. Understated, but fine by me, although I agree with FA that it might have been better with "Heart of Midlothian FC" above the crest. Agree. Don't get me wrong, I'll love it when it's all done but we have the greatest name in football so what not state it? Just my personal preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 I really hope that pilot Jim Crosby can get another aerial picture once it's all finished and the trees are in place because that one he took was an absolute beauty. Quote Link to comment 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.