View Full Version : Skydance Bridge



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

mrktguy29
12-09-2011, 12:35 AM
preliminary thoughts on the 'feathers' not a fan. I hope my opinion changes once complete. Whats wrong with just a skeleton?

ljbab728
12-09-2011, 12:42 AM
preliminary thoughts on the 'feathers' not a fan. I hope my opinion changes once complete. Whats wrong with just a skeleton?

A skeleton would lead some to think that it was just a misshapened oil well.

mrktguy29
12-09-2011, 12:52 AM
Looking back at the drawings I can it differently now. Like I said, we'll see once its up.

Urban Pioneer
12-09-2011, 01:24 PM
Have pics from yesterday and today ready to load but working out the storage issues with Pete.

Double Edge
12-09-2011, 01:36 PM
Have pics from yesterday and today ready to load but working out the storage issues with Pete.

You could put them on Imageshack, photobucket or flickr.

Pete
12-09-2011, 01:57 PM
Here are Urban Pioneer's photos. The first four are from yesterday and the last is from today.

To see them full-size, right click then choose open in a new tab:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance10.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance11.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance12.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance13.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance14.jpg

Pete
12-09-2011, 02:03 PM
Two more great shots from today courtesy of Urban Pioneer:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance15.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/skydance16.jpg

SkyWestOKC
12-09-2011, 02:06 PM
Great shots! Looking good!

Bellaboo
12-09-2011, 02:10 PM
From the crosstown, it's massive ! and it really looks massive up close.

Pete
12-09-2011, 02:18 PM
Very, very cool and you really get a sense of scale in looking at the trucks in that second to last photo.

As great as this is going to be, we need to look for other opportunities for similar projects along this stretch of road, as so many people travel this way and it will be the main gateway to downtown.


Thanks for the photos, UP!

Double Edge
12-09-2011, 02:26 PM
You can see it pretty well from the Walker Ave bridge.

<comments on aesthetics or the lack thereof redacted>

G22
12-09-2011, 02:38 PM
I drove past the pedestrian bridge area and it's looking good. I wonder what will be developed on the south side of I-40? Right now there are houses etc but it looks like a great area for a few hotels and more residential areas.

jn1780
12-09-2011, 02:58 PM
It looks like it will be completely up by today. Thats if its not already up right now.

rcjunkie
12-09-2011, 04:12 PM
You can see it pretty well from the Walker Ave bridge.

<comments on aesthetics or the lack thereof redacted>

Easy DE, you almost slipped and posted something positive.

MikeLucky
12-09-2011, 04:19 PM
You can see it pretty well from the Walker Ave bridge.

<comments on aesthetics or the lack thereof redacted>

At this point, if you said you liked it, I would start to worry that it might just in fact be a piece of crap... thankfully you didn't do that.

Urbanized
12-09-2011, 04:20 PM
Reminds me a little of the twin Keeper of the Plains pedestrian bridges at the junction of the Arkansas and Little Arkansas rivers in downtown Wichita, KS (with the obvious exception that their suspension elements were fully realized):

http://www.wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/83FAF194-A7FC-4F02-8F36-DA2BF4590014/0/GrandFinalefireworks.jpg

MDot
12-09-2011, 04:21 PM
At this point, if you said you liked it, I would start to worry that it might just in fact be a piece of crap... thankfully you didn't do that.

That or it's a real piece of art that we should love and embrace with every ounce of our being. LOL

Thundercitizen
12-09-2011, 04:29 PM
Perfect timing, again:
http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9639/dsc0122zg.jpg
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/7559/dsc0121oh.jpg
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/913/dsc0118bn.jpg
http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/6156/dsc0116ai.jpg
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/6805/dsc0115lh.jpg
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/2395/dsc0114gm.jpg
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/1209/dsc0111mc.jpg
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/5041/dsc0106uk.jpg
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4121/dsc0105yx.jpg
http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/9939/dsc0104xh.jpg
http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/3457/dsc0103zdu.jpg

Decious
12-09-2011, 04:53 PM
Very COOL! Drove by today and I think it looks great! It's plenty large. The wing that has yet to be erected is higher than the one that is currently constructed so it'll be very impactful in terms of size. Good stuff!

KayneMo
12-09-2011, 05:11 PM
Wow! Looking awesome!

Just the facts
12-09-2011, 07:26 PM
Did anyone else notice that the road bridge in the background looks like the Santa Fe Super Chief going by at high speed? The bridge even bares a strong resemblance to a lot of Santa Fe stations.

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9639/dsc0122zg.jpg

Thunder
12-09-2011, 07:43 PM
Did they reduce the size? It looks a lot smaller now.

MDot
12-09-2011, 07:48 PM
Did they reduce the size? It looks a lot smaller now.

It's because it's a picture, it's a lot bigger in person.

Snowman
12-09-2011, 07:51 PM
Did they reduce the size? It looks a lot smaller now.

I think that comes from how tall & wide the bridge deck and truss was expanded too over the original design, mixed with how wide the interstate and tracks are, when you are their it will seem quite tall.

circuitboard
12-09-2011, 08:34 PM
Looks great! I also like the branding on the walls that says Oklahoma City....very cool!

Thunder
12-09-2011, 09:03 PM
I think that comes from how tall & wide the bridge deck and truss was expanded too over the original design, mixed with how wide the interstate and tracks are, when you are their it will seem quite tall.

I keep missing it or not seeing it when I drive by. Hope to see it next time.

dwellsokc
12-10-2011, 03:37 AM
Did they reduce the size? It looks a lot smaller now.

I went by for a look last night and thought the very same thing. Either the renderings were exaggerated, or size reduction was used as an additional way to shave money. The renderings show the tallest spire soaring over at least some of the west-bound lanes... The tallest spire has been erected, and there's very little soaring involved.

[disclaimer:] I am not complaining. I am making a statement of perception. The Skydance Sculpture At The "Pedestrian" Bridge will be a wonderful and awesome sight to behold. Shame on me in advance, for my lingering perceptions of the original world-class design...

Decious
12-10-2011, 06:54 AM
The tallest spire has been erected, and there's very little soaring involved.

No it hasn't. Compare the pics to the "new" rendering... not the old one. :-)

metro
12-10-2011, 08:14 AM
Did they reduce the size? It looks a lot smaller now.

Close one eye and then look at it, it will appear bigger.

dwellsokc
12-10-2011, 08:29 AM
No it hasn't. Compare the pics to the "new" rendering... not the old one. :-)

You're right. Hopefully we'll get some more soar factor... Although comparing the before & after renderings, it still appears less slender, and shorter than the original.

[disclaimer] My perceptions don't necessarily reflect reality. I wholeheartedly believe that the new Skydance Sculpture and associated Bridge will be beautiful and impressive. "soar" is in the eye of the beholder...

Larry OKC
12-10-2011, 08:38 AM
I agree that just going by the pics it looks smaller than what was in the renderings...but then again they were renderings and the pics arent shot from the same perspective so that may explain it...the question is, is it the 18 story height unchanged? The articles I have about the redesign still have it at that height???

o'casey booyah
12-10-2011, 09:07 AM
If you study the images carefully, the size of the Bird is exactly the same as the competition entry.

BrettM2
12-10-2011, 09:27 AM
I saw it while driving up I-35 yesterday afternoon. I only got a glimpse so I wouldn't start a multi-car pile up, but it looked great.

Bellaboo
12-10-2011, 09:38 AM
At this point, if you said you liked it, I would start to worry that it might just in fact be a piece of crap... thankfully you didn't do that.

I don't pay much attention to what he post anymore.

Bellaboo
12-10-2011, 09:41 AM
I agree that just going by the pics it looks smaller than what was in the renderings...but then again they were renderings and the pics arent shot from the same perspective so that may explain it...the question is, is it the 18 story height unchanged? The articles I have about the redesign still have it at that height???

They say it is still 192 feet. That is probably from the sub grade road bed though.

Bellaboo
12-10-2011, 09:45 AM
I have a feeling that the lighting effects will dominate with this design as opposed to the original. Just the way they can back light with the skeleton as opposed to flood lighting the smooth surface gives additional opportunity by design.

It may be a bit before we see it though.

dedndcrusr
12-10-2011, 10:17 AM
Sounds Gehryesk.

http://www.elisif.com/img/Elisif-D31-Gehry-Case-Western-Reserve.jpg

I was reeeally hoping the "architectural feathers" were going to be more like ones in this picture. I'm not convinced the current feathers actually do anything to enhance the appearance.

I'm going to hold off making any final judgements until I see it up close though.

Double Edge
12-10-2011, 10:57 AM
I was reeeally hoping the "architectural feathers" were going to be more like ones in this picture. I'm not convinced the current feathers actually do anything to enhance the appearance.

I'm going to hold off making any final judgements until I see it up close though.

Not remotely in the same league from what we've seen thus far.

Double Edge
12-10-2011, 11:12 AM
<snip>


<snip>


<snip>


<snip>

Like the sculpture and the bridge, at least your comments are pedestrian, if not on topic.

Urban Pioneer
12-10-2011, 11:44 AM
I'm going to go back out there later today. Anyone want a shot of anything specifically?

Pete
12-10-2011, 11:49 AM
If you have the chance to get shots of Devon at ground level (landscaping, auditorium, Colcord connection, etc.) that would be greeeaaaat. Also the MG skating rink.

Otherwise, just happy to see progress on the bridge!

Urban Pioneer
12-10-2011, 11:58 AM
Ok. I'll see what I can do.

dwellsokc
12-10-2011, 12:06 PM
I have a feeling that the lighting effects will dominate with this design as opposed to the original. Just the way they can back light with the skeleton as opposed to flood lighting the smooth surface gives additional opportunity by design...

The North faces of the original design were finished with a translucent ETFE skin that was going to be BACK lighted, in addition to front lighted... interconnected controls would have resulted in an ever-changing combination of unique scenes. It would have been a way-cool, one of a kind thing (instead of a just-cool sculpture sitting atop a ho-hum bridge).

[disclaimer] This is not a complaint... I love the new design, and I truly believe it will forever change the image of OKC. The photo-opps will be limitless. Just sayin...

MDot
12-10-2011, 12:40 PM
Like the sculpture and the bridge, at least your comments are pedestrian, if not on topic.

There's the DE we've known and loved for so long. Welcome back buddy. =)

Bellaboo
12-10-2011, 06:04 PM
There's the DE we've known and loved for so long. Welcome back buddy. =)

He's always complaining about something.........

Bellaboo
12-10-2011, 06:06 PM
The North faces of the original design were finished with a translucent ETFE skin that was going to be BACK lighted, in addition to front lighted... interconnected controls would have resulted in an ever-changing combination of unique scenes. It would have been a way-cool, one of a kind thing (instead of a just-cool sculpture sitting atop a ho-hum bridge).

[disclaimer] This is not a complaint... I love the new design, and I truly believe it will forever change the image of OKC. The photo-opps will be limitless. Just sayin...

I guess we should have taken up a collection so we could have gotten the original bridge.

rcjunkie
12-11-2011, 02:26 PM
He's always complaining about something.........

Untrue, he's always complaining about everything!!

jn1780
12-11-2011, 02:56 PM
I guess we should have taken up a collection so we could have gotten the original bridge.

It wouldn't matter the renderings always look better than reality. Especially the ones that are not built. Lol
This design is the same as the old just with different skin and no cables. Visually anyway.

Double Edge
12-11-2011, 04:03 PM
It wouldn't matter the renderings always look better than reality. Especially the ones that are not built. Lol
This design is the same as the old just with different skin and no cables. Visually anyway.

In other words it's completely different...conceptually, functionally and visually.

SkyWestOKC
12-11-2011, 04:26 PM
The function is the same. It provides an easy pedestrian access to cross the new interstate and railroad tracks. I am eager to see it in person

Double Edge
12-11-2011, 04:42 PM
I was referring to the flying structure, formally integral, it now serves no function in the structure of the bridge. The bridge itself is functionally different in that vehicle use was added.

SkyWestOKC
12-11-2011, 05:00 PM
Structurally different, it provides the same function.

rcjunkie
12-11-2011, 05:15 PM
Structurally different, it provides the same function.

Please, Please, I beg of you, don't confuse him with facts.

Double Edge
12-11-2011, 05:16 PM
The flying "bird" steel serves no function in the structure of the bridge. zero. ziltch. nada. It is not a functional part of the bridge. It serves no bridge like functions whatsoever. That was not the case in the original design.

rcjunkie
12-11-2011, 05:17 PM
The flying "bird" steel serves no function in the structure of the bridge. zero. ziltch. nada. It is not a functional part of the bridge.

And your point is ?

SkyWestOKC
12-11-2011, 05:21 PM
The function (purpose) of the bridge is to allow easy access for pedestrians across the bridge. That is the function of the bridge. They modified the structure to isolate the aesthetics of the bridge from the structural members. So instead of the aesthetic members also serving the role of providing structural support, they are now in two separate groups providing the same function.

Double Edge
12-11-2011, 05:28 PM
The function (purpose) of the bridge is to allow easy access for pedestrians across the bridge. That is the function of the bridge. They modified the structure to isolate the aesthetics of the bridge from the structural members. So instead of the aesthetic members also serving the role of providing structural support, they are now in two separate groups providing the same function.

In other words it's completely different... conceptually, functionally and visually.

SkyWestOKC
12-11-2011, 05:29 PM
In other words it's completely different... conceptually, functionally and visually.

Conceptually, structurally, and visually. Functionally it is the same.

rcjunkie
12-11-2011, 05:30 PM
In other words it's completely different... conceptually, functionally and visually.

Apparently you have never built a house from the ground up, changes are a given part of construction.

Double Edge
12-11-2011, 07:57 PM
Conceptually, structurally, and visually. Functionally it is the same.

See post 892.