daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


View Poll Results: Which bid should host the FIFA World Cup 2018 / 2022?
Australia - 2018 255 12.32%
Belgium / Netherlands - 2018 247 11.94%
England - 2018 538 26.00%
Indonesia - 2018 68 3.29%
Japan - 2018 35 1.69%
Mexico - 2018 105 5.07%
Qatar - 2018 78 3.77%
Russia - 2018 279 13.48%
South Korea - 2018 16 0.77%
Spain / Portugal - 2018 267 12.90%
USA - 2018 116 5.61%
Australia - 2022 378 18.27%
Belgium / Netherlands - 2022 111 5.36%
England - 2022 114 5.51%
Indonesia - 2022 122 5.90%
Japan - 2022 37 1.79%
Mexico - 2022 149 7.20%
Qatar - 2022 153 7.39%
Russia - 2022 148 7.15%
South Korea - 2022 23 1.11%
Spain / Portugal - 2022 184 8.89%
USA - 2022 249 12.03%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 2069. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old September 25th, 2010, 02:47 AM   #6901
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
isn't the Qatar score a tad over harsh Mo?
While Qatar will have no problem convincing Fifa it has the economic resources to build all that is required, persuading football’s governing body that it can deliver all of its plans within the next 12 years will be more difficult. For such a lightly populated country, delivering all of the required facilities and infrastructure for a major sporting event is a difficult task.

The summer heat is a major concern. In summer, temperatures in Qatar can rise above 50 degrees Celsius, and although Doha has invested a lot of time and money into designing cooling technology for the stadiums, this technology is unproven. It also does not solve the problem of what the estimated 400,000 travelling fans will do in between matches.

Another problem is the lack of sporting tradition. Doha has been able to use its vast wealth to attract high-profile international players to join its national league in recent years, but has made little progress in nurturing its own local talent.

Money can buy stadiums and infrastructure, but it is unlikely it can buy the World Cup.


http://www.meed.com/sectors/construc...072104.article
MysteryMike no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old September 25th, 2010, 02:54 AM   #6902
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
isn't the Qatar score a tad over harsh Mo?
The couple was first rebuked by authorities in Qatar for kissing in public along the beach. So the two Lebanese expats argued that they were married and were doing nothing wrong. But the plea, ironically, put them in even more trouble, as their union was judged unlawful by a court in this conservative Muslim Persian Gulf country.

The couple, who fled Qatar before the verdict was announced, was sentenced in absentia to a year of prison for having an illicit sexual relationship, according to recent media reports. The court argued that their marriage could not be recognized in Qatar because it was an interfaith union between a Muslim woman and a Christian man.

The trouble started in April when a Qatari family complained to police about the couple kissing in public, Gulf Times said.Police said the two, whose names were not released to the media, were caught in an "indecent position." The man, who works in Qatar, said he had done nothing more than place his hand on the shoulder of his wife, who had arrived to the country 10 days earlier.


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/baby...interfait.html

If anything that score is too generous
MysteryMike no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 02:56 AM   #6903
T74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 622
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryMike View Post
While Qatar will have no problem convincing Fifa it has the economic resources to build all that is required, persuading football’s governing body that it can deliver all of its plans within the next 12 years will be more difficult. For such a lightly populated country, delivering all of the required facilities and infrastructure for a major sporting event is a difficult task.

The summer heat is a major concern. In summer, temperatures in Qatar can rise above 50 degrees Celsius, and although Doha has invested a lot of time and money into designing cooling technology for the stadiums, this technology is unproven. It also does not solve the problem of what the estimated 400,000 travelling fans will do in between matches.

Another problem is the lack of sporting tradition. Doha has been able to use its vast wealth to attract high-profile international players to join its national league in recent years, but has made little progress in nurturing its own local talent.

Money can buy stadiums and infrastructure, but it is unlikely it can buy the World Cup.


http://www.meed.com/sectors/construc...072104.article
BUT they have plans to manage the heat, and since when did FIFA ex-co members vote on what was best

read my posts you know I think Qatar was better suited to a joint bid, but I reckon a rating in the 30's is too harsh
T74 no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:01 AM   #6904
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

You're joking right? Are you qatarson in disguise? There is also football development which the article clearly talks about. Qatar has not done anything for world football. Infact Qatar is a disgrace to International Football. Plus population issues, lack of tourist venues and the failure in meeting the technical requirements of the bid etc etc etc. The technologies are unproven. It's a capital F for Fail, as I have stated Qatar should withdraw their sham of a bid ASAP.
MysteryMike no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:12 AM   #6905
T74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 622
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryMike View Post
You're joking right? Are you qatarson in disguise? There is also football development which the article clearly talks about. Qatar has not done anything for world football. Infact Qatar is a disgrace to International Football. Plus population issues, lack of tourist venues and the failure in meeting the technical requirements of the bid etc etc etc. The technologies are unproven. It's a capital F for Fail, as I have stated Qatar should withdraw their sham of a bid ASAP.
yeah, I'm a dual who is an undercover troll

I try to look at things objectively, and not black and white. I don't think Qatar will get to host 2022, but I have been impressed with their effort, and their approach to overcome their issues.

If Qatar lose, I think the lessons learned, and a joint bid with the UAE will give them a really good shot in 2026 or 2034 (assuming Australia win )
T74 no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:18 AM   #6906
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
Also why USA rated so tough?
This english just reminds me of qatarson so much but anyway, the USA are marked at that score due to 3 reasons.

1) USA has already hosted a world cup in 1994, which is really not that long ago, compared with say England which is the home of football, which has had to wait since 1966 to again host the world cup.

2) USA has legacy issues with the legacy seeming to be USA only focused. I have been told this is incorrect but I nor anyone on this forum works for FIFA, so if FIFA has said there are issues with the legacy of the bid, then there are clearly issues with the international legacy of the bid.

3) USA's bid team have been saying that no public money will be spent on the bid as they thought they had all the infrastructure covered, however FIFA's technical committee disagreed. They want further transportation infrastructure and further stadium alterations, which will cost American tax payer dollars, which means the bid team is in a tough slot. They won't say it publicly but it is definitely an issue for the US bid.
MysteryMike no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:40 AM   #6907
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
isn't the Qatar score a tad over harsh Mo?

Also why USA rated so tough?
The Qatar bid is not possible in 2010 and its not possible in 2022 as highlighted by the major issues raised. Danny Jordaan has just organized an entire World Cup. You're not going to convince him, hosting so many matches within one metropolitan region is going to work.

FIFA aren't ready yet to head into the region.

Qatar doesn't have the weight of its competitors, not in sports, not in football, not in sporting culture in general. Australia, England, USA, Japan....thats hectic, even for South Africa.

There is always a better option. If FIFA wanted compact, they would go for Belgium-Netherlands or even Australia, while not compact, aren't the largest nation on earth, but even then Australia punches well above its weight. Over-achiever syndrome.
As indicated, removed the European bidders for the 2022 race and Australia look to be favourites.

FIFA want money, but 2010 toppled the 2006 revenues by what...35?%. If there concern was money , they would still have England as a major revenue-puller.


Russia are the big surprise. A major country willing to provide all the guarantees when and how FIFA wants them, and who are well into delivering successful Sochi Games, and work on other venues. Government support is perhaps one of the highest amongst the bidders. Both the perceived and actual risk of hosting the World Cup in Russia may see it drop further down in the list in the next update.

Belgium-Netherlands. Its really just unfortunate given the field its up against. You could see them hosting an event without any issues, perhaps even fewer than Russia, the USA or England. It just doesn't carry the weight of its rivals in FIFA circles.

Spain-Portugal, the dark horse, even with its vast infrastructure in terms of venues and other forms. Do FIFA really need a joint bid?
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:46 AM   #6908
slipperydog
Registered User
 
slipperydog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,851
Likes (Received): 2401

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryMike View Post
3) USA's bid team have been saying that no public money will be spent on the bid as they thought they had all the infrastructure covered, however FIFA's technical committee disagreed. They want further transportation infrastructure and further stadium alterations, which will cost American tax payer dollars, which means the bid team is in a tough slot. They won't say it publicly but it is definitely an issue for the US bid.
I have not heard of this, this appears to just be speculation on your part. When they talk about transportation infrastructure, the FIFA technical committee could only be talking about light rail in a few cities where stadiums are in more suburban areas. Rail transport was nonexistent in South Africa and will be in Brazil. So that's a minor issue and Australia has the same issue, if you even want to call it an issue. Airports and roads are superior in America.

The tough thing for Australia at this point is that there is some infighting going on between the A-League and FFA. Plus A-League attendances have been downright shocking. So Australia is far from being the favorite. That's still the USA. Australia could win, but it would be considered an upset, even by the Aussies themselves.
slipperydog no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 04:26 AM   #6909
T74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 622
Likes (Received): 1

Mystery, stop looking for fights. if you even bothered to read my posts you would know I am Australian, and have been pretty hard pushing the AU bid (even though I think the USA will beat us).

Mo, thanks for the reply. Don't disagree on Qatar, just think the score you did was a tad harsh. That being said, its all subjective so kudos to you for making the effort though

Out of interest, do you think the situation in Delhi will effect FIFA in its decision making (in terms of going to a "safe" set of hands over breaking new ground)?
T74 no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 04:36 AM   #6910
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
Mystery, stop looking for fights. if you even bothered to read my posts you would know I am Australian, and have been pretty hard pushing the AU bid (even though I think the USA will beat us).

Mo, thanks for the reply. Don't disagree on Qatar, just think the score you did was a tad harsh. That being said, its all subjective so kudos to you for making the effort though

Out of interest, do you think the situation in Delhi will effect FIFA in its decision making (in terms of going to a "safe" set of hands over breaking new ground)?

Well can you really give a bid over 50 if its not possible?
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 04:46 AM   #6911
T74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 622
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
Well can you really give a bid over 50 if its not possible?
I actually think its possible, but it will be significantly compromised

a score around the 50's would have been my go
T74 no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 04:54 AM   #6912
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by T74 View Post
I actually think its possible, but it will be significantly compromised

a score around the 50's would have been my go
We just had a WC in South Africa, its not possible, not logistically, not by FIFA.


Even in a city like London which arguably hosts a mini-WC if every team is playing a home Game over a weekend, 10 matches are a huge challenge just not possible given the requirements of a WC. London could surely devise a plan that would work, but its London, and at the end of the day, FIFA would still not allow it. London will host 2 venues, perhaps even 3 if FIFA have any common sense, but anything more than 2 is not headed to Sydney or even Melbourne, and FIFA have good reason for doing so.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 11:18 AM   #6913
rus
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 202
Likes (Received): 6

Russian World Cup Bid Promotes Football Legacy of Sochi Olympic Stadium
(WFI) A relaunched football club in the southern Russian city of Sochi is hoping to take the country's Premier League by storm and safeguard the legacy of one of the proposed 2018 World Cup stadiums.

FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi, currently playing their football in the first division, will move into the 40,000-seat venue being built as the main stadium for the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics after those Games.

The $250 million stadium, under construction on the site of a former cabbage field in the sub-tropical Black Sea resort, will host the opening and closing ceremonies of Russia's first ever Winter Olympics.

An upgrade would increase capacity for the World Cup to 46,000 to meet FIFA requirements if Russia secured the 2018 tournament. Post-World Cup plans call for a downsizing of the stadium, with the Sochi football club then playing in a reconfigured 25,000-capacity facility.

FIFA inspectors led by Chilean FA president Harold Mayne-Nicholls visited the site during their four-day evaluation trip to Russia last month.

The new owner and president of FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi, former ice hockey player Dmitry Yakushev, has grand ambitions for a club only founded in 1991 that has struggled to establish itself in the last decade.

The Sochi club played in the old Soviet Second Division before spending seven seasons in the top division and going bankrupt in 2003. It was relaunched in 2007 under the name FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi.

Yakushev has since pumped millions of dollars into the club, who currently play at Metreveli Stadium, which is proposed as a team base camp in Russia's 2018 bid.

But the 10,000-seat ground, located close to the centre of Sochi, is little more than a glorified athletics facility, and a world away from the Olympic Stadium the club plans to relocate to in a few years time.

The first division club currently attracts average gates of just 6,000 fans. Promotion to the Russian Premier League is seen as essential to growing the fanbase - and eventually drawing 20,000-plus crowds to the new stadium at the Olympic Park site.

The Russian government and 2018 World Cup bid are confident they will deliver the football legacy promised in the bid book.

Football club owner with big ideas
FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi is already making strides in the right direction, according to the club's communications chief who spoke to reporters on Wednesday during a media tour of the Metreveli Stadium.

"We are pretty young and innovative," he said.

Wednesday night's league game between FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi and Salut was the first ever live broadcast of a first division game on state television channel NTV.

"It is a breakthrough for Russian football," he said.

Aided by the government which wants to see a successful football team built in Sochi,
Yakushev is investing heavily to fulfil that dream. The club already boasts a Brazilian player.

He has invested about $30 million in the club - marketing, facilities, players - in 2010 alone, according to the club spokesman.

Yakushev is building a squad of players in a bid for promotion to the top-flight to boost the fanbase across Russia.

A big spend on national and local marketing is aimed at attracting commercial sponsors and lifting attendances in the coming years.

FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi recently became the first professional club in Russia to launch a TV campaign.

"The dream this year is we make it into the Premier League," the spokesman said, insisting that fans would flock to see the club once it had gained promotion to the top-flight..
He said the marketing push was aimed at widening the appeal of the club, which is from the Krasnodar region and beyond by underlining its ambition to become a force in the Russian Premier League. Showcasing the new stadium plans is part of the messaging.

Yakushev, who is also investing in multimillion dollar retail and hotel projects in Sochi, believes the club can one day compete on a level playing field with the big-spending giants of Russian football, Zenit Saint Petersburg and Spartak Moscow.

"We have to build our story and credibility," the club spokesman said.

FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi has a huge catchment area to draw crowds; the nearest first division club is in the city of Kuban, about 300km from Sochi.

Olympic stadium design for football legacy
There is little to see of the new stadium planned for FC Zhemchuzhina-Sochi. It has yet to rise from the ground at the 200-hectare Olympic Park in Sochi - one of the biggest construction sites in Europe.

INSIDER visited the site of the stadium on a media tour this week paid for by the Russian World Cup bid.

Foundation work on the stadium started earlier this year ahead of the construction phase. It is one of six competition venues being built on the coastal site for the 2014 Winter Games.

Alexandra Kosterina, a spokeswoman for Olympstroy, the state company overseeing the big build for the Winter Games, told INSIDER that construction of the stadium was on schedule for completion in 2013.

"The idea of building a large football stadium was to have a strong team playing here and also to use it for entertainment events," she said.

Designed by Populous, the international architecture firm, the stadium features a transparent roof, including some solar panels, that only partially covers the pitch. It will allow for optimum grass growth when the facility is converted to its football mode.

The openings at both ends will give football fans spectacular views of the sea and mountains.

With Sochi's international airport just down the road and the city centre 10 minutes away by train, Russian bid officials insisted the stadium would be easily accessible to football fans for World Cup games.

By INSIDER editor Mark Bisson
http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=33749
rus no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:28 PM   #6914
_X_
Registered User
 
_X_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Geelong,Australia
Posts: 1,387
Likes (Received): 510

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipperydog View Post
Rail transport was nonexistent in South Africa and will be in Brazil. So that's a minor issue and Australia has the same issue, if you even want to call it an issue. Airports and roads are superior in America.

The tough thing for Australia at this point is that there is some infighting going on between the A-League and FFA. Plus A-League attendances have been downright shocking. So Australia is far from being the favorite. That's still the USA. Australia could win, but it would be considered an upset, even by the Aussies themselves.
I think you'll find our rail system is already more than adequate,and extremely SAFE,and set for many improvements by 2022 anyway.
At this stage,by all accounts a EUFA bid WILL get '18.This leaves 5 of us bidding for the same prize.Straight away 2 bids look unrealistic because they co hosted only 8 years ago.
Qatar has made an ambitious bid that would require a change to FIFA law-its highly doubtful

This leaves 2.How anyone could be surprised to win when its a race of 2 I'll never know.
We are confident in our ability to host a safe World Cup for the many millions on our doorstep that may wish to come.We know we leave an incredible Asian legacy for FIFA with our broadcast times and we have the runs on the board.We have hosted big events to an exceptional standard time and time again over many decades.
Yes we have current problems domestically while the other codes are running but I note only 2 teams in the MLS made a profit last year.The MLS are basically a decade ahead in its development.We have similar ratios on player numbers .When Australians travel to the WC we by enlarge ,overwhelmingly follow Australia.The USA easily sold the most tickets after SA to the WC yet didn't sellout the group games(bar the England match),and thats because many went supporting other nations such as Mexico,England or Spain.Not a criticism,just an observation

It's far from a done deal.There are still surprises to be had but I still believe we are a great option for FIFA,as Exco observed.We were possibly the only nation with no negatives in the preliminary reports from Mayne-Nichols so we take some joy from this
__________________
Valcke-"Qatar bought World Cup",Platini-" We can't air condition the beaches and the streets in Qatar",Chuck Blazer-"you can't air condition a whole country",Phillip Lahm-"Qatar decision'madness' ",Wenger-" Winter World Cup Would Cause Problems Between Clubs, Countries And FIFA"
_X_ no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 03:40 PM   #6915
slipperydog
Registered User
 
slipperydog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,851
Likes (Received): 2401

Quote:
Originally Posted by _X_ View Post
When Australians travel to the WC we by enlarge ,overwhelmingly follow Australia.The USA easily sold the most tickets after SA to the WC yet didn't sellout the group games(bar the England match),and thats because many went supporting other nations such as Mexico,England or Spain.Not a criticism,just an observation
To me, your point above actually strengthens the US bid. It indicates you won't just have sell-outs for USA games, but every group match for every country will be sold out as well. And at 70,000 capacities to boot, none of this 45,000 mickey-mouse nonsense.

P.S. That Nichols guy unfortunately has a lot less pull than he would like people to think. Most voters won't even read the book.
slipperydog no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 05:12 PM   #6916
_X_
Registered User
 
_X_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Geelong,Australia
Posts: 1,387
Likes (Received): 510

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipperydog View Post
To me, your point above actually strengthens the US bid. It indicates you won't just have sell-outs for USA games, but every group match for every country will be sold out as well. And at 70,000 capacities to boot, none of this 45,000 mickey-mouse nonsense.
Slippery,I'm not particularly looking for a stoush but what you posted was dribble.You didn't have sellouts for the US games
As someone that was intimately involved in ticketing for SA2010 I know only too well how low US support was at the Slovenia and Algeria games.USA v Slovenia was easily the lowest crowd for all Joburg matches as was the USA v Algeria match in Pretoria

Having said that,I'll be very happy to go to the USA in '26 knowing that I already have a few folks to put me up for that World Cup which I'm sure will be an outstanding success,just like its predecessor in Australia
__________________
Valcke-"Qatar bought World Cup",Platini-" We can't air condition the beaches and the streets in Qatar",Chuck Blazer-"you can't air condition a whole country",Phillip Lahm-"Qatar decision'madness' ",Wenger-" Winter World Cup Would Cause Problems Between Clubs, Countries And FIFA"
_X_ no está en línea  
Old September 25th, 2010, 05:47 PM   #6917
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

51 aircrafts intercepted during 2010 World Cup

A taste of the behind the scenes that was not scene at the World Cup, and was fortunately not needed.

Obviously these were perhaps not terrorists in aircrafts trying to attack venues, but the exclusion zone of a World Cup stadium extends beyond the ground level and includes the airspace around the venue.

Gripens do half of 51 World Cup intercepts


PDF | Print | E-mail
Written by Leon Engelbrecht Saturday, 25 September 2010 16:19


The South African Air Force's (SAAF) growing fleet of SAAB Gripen fighters conducted about half the 51 aircraft intercepts conducted during the June/July soccer world cup. The SAAF deployed 11 of the available 15 Gripen during the month-long tournament as well as 12 of 24 BAE Systems Hawk lead-in fighter trainers.

Also deployed on interception duties were 12 unarmed Pilatus PC7 Mk II Astra trainers, 14 AgustaWestland A109M and some Eurocopter BK117 light utility helicopters. Air Force director fighters, Brigadier General John Bayne, told a Gripen briefing at the SAAB chalet at Africa Aerospace & Defence 2010 exhibition that ends today that some 347 combat air patrols (CAP) were flown to secure all 64 games.

In a similar briefing in August, Major General Les Lombard, the General Officer Commanding te Air Force Command Post said with “that grouping of aircraft we could cater for various threats, be it from paragliders right up to the possibility of hijacked airliners.”

Bayne says some 2214 SAAF personnel were deployed for Operation Kgwele as the endeavour was known. Lombard noted it was the “largest air defence operation the SAAF has ever conducted. It was over an extended period of time and all 64 games were secured by air defence assets.” He added that it “is a massive operation securing the airspace of an entire country and you need the close cooperation of all the roleplayers... the Airports Company SA, the Department of Transport's Air Traffic Navigation Service (ATNS) an the police.

Lombard noted command-and-control required the establishment of six sector control centres (SCC): South Africa normally only has two. The permanent installations at the Lowveld Airspace Control Sector at Hoedspruit in Mpumalanga and the Bushveld Airspace Control Centre in Pretoria were augmented by two mobile sector control stations from 140 Squadron, deployed to Bloemfontein and Cape Town. “And there our resources came to an end. So with a lot of initiative and hard work from within the SAAF, two temporary sector control stations were created at Port Elizabeth and Durban with great cooperation from ATNS who supported us with facilities and allowed integration into their systems at those venues.

“The development of the sectors in a very short time and the close cooperation with the ATNS was really a winner. Then in terms of the sector control centres from where all the military aircraft was controlled, we had very lose coordination with the ATNS with regard to deploying the necessary sensors such as radars to develop an integrated air picture.

“We deployed four Tellumat-supported Umlindi radars from 140 Squadron, three tactical mobile radars (TMR) from 142 Squadron and integrated these with our static radars, ATNS and SAAF long range, which allowed us a very good tactical integration...,” Lombard said.

“In terms of radar sensor information, the CAF (chief of the air force, Lieutenant General Carlo Gagiano, who spoke before Lombard) alluded to the effectiveness of the Gripen radar, it was really marvellous to see the effectiveness of that and many low flying aircraft were considerably surprised by our ability to detect them in areas where they thought they could fly under radar coverage. The Gripen could pass on the data – via Link ZA – to the SCC so that intercepts could be vectored onto them. This opens up a whole new concept of operations within the SAAF and is something we will pursue down the line.

“We also had the ability to integrate the radars of the navy frigates and the SA Army Thutlhwa... ...these obviously are force multipliers … the frigates were just off the coast, to give us the coverage we so badly needed for low flying aircraft [at coastal venues].” In addition, said Lombard, the SA Army deployed 29 observation posts (OP's) at various venues and these were in direct communication with the SCC “in order to supply us with visual input of very low flying aircraft or aircraft with very low radar cross section. The SA Navy supplied five further OP's in the Cape area.

Bayne noted that the air defence system recorded detected 65 non-compliant aircraft, including airliners, which led to the 51 intercepts.
Nine aircraft were diverted. Police waiting at airfields took unspecified action against 43 pilots. Bayne praised the availability of the SAAF's new fighter fleet, noting that seven Gripen and four Hawk were deployed to AFB Waterkloof to provide CAP over the northern matches (Polokwane, Pretoria, Nelspruit, Johannesburg, Rustenburg, Durban and Bloemfontein) and four of each to AFB Overberg to CAP Cape Town and Port Elizabeth.

For this purpose the Gripen were allocated 276 flying hours and the Hawks 279. Bayne says the five two-seat Gripen D were 98% reliable and the six single-seat Gripen C 89%. The Hawk was 98% reliable. At any given time 8.95 of the 11 Gripen were available and 11.6 of the Hawk. Maintainability was 89% for Gripen and 92% for Hawk. Bayne observed that the figures for Gripen would have been higher had it been an operation system. The platform, being acquired under Project Ukhozi, is still in the project phase.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old September 26th, 2010, 12:48 AM   #6918
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipperydog View Post
I have not heard of this, this appears to just be speculation on your part. When they talk about transportation infrastructure, the FIFA technical committee could only be talking about light rail in a few cities where stadiums are in more suburban areas. Rail transport was nonexistent in South Africa and will be in Brazil. So that's a minor issue and Australia has the same issue, if you even want to call it an issue. Airports and roads are superior in America.

The tough thing for Australia at this point is that there is some infighting going on between the A-League and FFA. Plus A-League attendances have been downright shocking. So Australia is far from being the favorite. That's still the USA. Australia could win, but it would be considered an upset, even by the Aussies themselves.
It's not speculation it's in the media reports and Mr Nicholls said that the transportation infrastructure should cater for foreign fans, he basically means that the US lacks the infrastructure by 2022 or 2018 to deal with the expected world cup crowd numbers at the designated venues. We have seen the US fail before it's not the first time at this exact same scenario mmm where did that happen? oh yeah the 1996 Atlanta Olympic games. Seems more than a decade on nothing has changed, but the population has increased. Which mean Mr Nicholls was not happy and which is completely bang on correct, I mean the worst thing we want to see is the football teams or fans missing their nations games thanks to transport. Brazil or South Africa are not in the calculations for this bid are they? Mr Nicholls is marking against the other bidders and obviously to him, they didn't have the same issues, aside from Qatar whom I have stated should withdraw their bid ASAP. The USA bid team however have tried to hide this fact, no doubt worried about outrage, anyway it's in the report and that's all that matters at the end of the day.

ATLANTA, July 22— Burt and Barbara Gordon of Beverly, Mass., knew they might be in for trouble when they asked their Olympic bus driver how long the trip would be to the equestrian events he was taking them to Sunday. "He said he didn't know; he'd never been there," Barbara Gordon said this morning. "Sure enough, he got lost, but he had a two-way radio, so we didn't go too far out of our way."

Across Atlanta, an overloaded transit system and neophyte bus drivers are making transportation the great unknown in the 1996 Olympics. Today, the first day that competition was combined with a workday rush hour, the system worked for the most part. But overloaded trains and mishaps that almost kept some athletes from getting to their events were a reminder of how close to the edge the transportation network is operating.


http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/23/sp...ing-there.html

I know people seem to make a big deal about infighting etc at the end of the day I think it's a positive for the game in Australia. It shows there are committed people to the sport who has achieved 60% growth in the sport year on year, and gotten the game to huge heights in terms of players and participation without a world cup such as in the US, with plenty of opposition from rival sports and the world cup will leave a lasting legacy in terms of assisting this league to reach it's desired heights. South Africa itself is a far worse league and a far lower ranked team, yet they've hosted the football world cup and the MLS was non existent pre world cup, Australia has managed to develop their league on their own. What's the average crowd for the MLS? 16k for a population of 300 million people? In 07/08 Australia had close to 15k average for the season. Due to a lack of funds available to the Australian Football Association obviously there has been a fall in terms of the average crowd figures. What can the US blame their crowd figures on? lack of funds? No . Never hosting a world cup? No mmm come to think of it, there is absolutely nothing.

Before the USA hosting announcement in 1988, the US team hadn't qualified for a world cup since 1950 and the US certainly did not have the level of football participation that Australia has. Football is the no 1 junior sport in Australia, coupled with that the fact that hosting a world cup would also benefit New Zealand which is right next door to Australia. The legacy for Australia, New Zealand and Oceania is clearly there and the world cup will be in the prime television zone for Asia. If they don't win this time, they won't be hosting a world cup for a 100 years and that's a long long time to wait whereas for the US 2026 is almost a given.
MysteryMike no está en línea  
Old September 26th, 2010, 12:57 AM   #6919
MysteryMike
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipperydog View Post
P.S. That Nichols guy unfortunately has a lot less pull than he would like people to think. Most voters won't even read the book.
Really? So FIFA send Mr Nicholls around the world for fun then? The FACT is the technical report is exactly what they will read, its far simpler than reading the billion page bid books from 9 bidders. Even in the past you'll generally find the bid with the best technical report which includes things such as legacy, infrastructure, development of the game etc etc has won the world cup bid, maybe not convincingly but they have won.
MysteryMike no está en línea  
Old September 26th, 2010, 10:44 AM   #6920
slipperydog
Registered User
 
slipperydog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,851
Likes (Received): 2401

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryMike View Post
Really? So FIFA send Mr Nicholls around the world for fun then?
Actually, yes. You really don't know how FIFA works, do you...

As for low attendances in MLS, of course attendances are low. It's the fifth/sixth most popular spectator sport in the country. But Australia is worse.

As for transport, Australia currently has the exact same problem as the US in terms of rail transport to a couple suburban stadiums. Both countries should be able to fix this by 2022, however.
slipperydog no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
australia, united states of america, world cup

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu