While watching the Steelers-Browns game last week, I noticed that despite heavy snowfall, there was no accumulation. Now I have heard that Gillette Stadium in Foxboro has some sort of heater cores beneath the field, and considering the Hienz Stadium is new also, it is possible that they have similar technology, and might explain the lack of accumulation. So for anyone who might know about this I have a few questions. First, are these heater cores designed to melt snow or just help in growing grass? How much does it cost to have such a system installed? Considering that MLS intends to extend their seasons a little ways into November, would it be wise for future SSS to include such systems in their plans? Does anyone know if Denver or Chicago have/will have such systems(I seem to remember a Denver game earlier this year with a bit of accumulation). Although heavy snowfall would only effect a very small number of games, I think future SSS for northern cities may want to consider this-depending on the cost, of course. I think everyone would agree that an MLS Cup or playoff game played in conditions like the "Tuck Bowl" in last years NFL playoffs would be awful. One more question while we're on the topic: Does it not snow in England? How do they avoid this problem when they play all through the winter?
How does it work? Kind of like the hot water hoses that you can have installed under ceramic tile floors to make them warmer? I can picture players taking even longer to miraculously recover from an "injury" as they enjoy a little bit of warmth on the ground...
I don't think they get that warm-just enough to keep the ground from freezing. Oh yeah-there's also the energy costs in using it. I would suspect that these could be very high. Do we have any experts out there? Or at least someone willing to do more research than I did?
The cost probably isn't as high as you might imagine. I think every premiership side has it, as do most in Div 1. It's not unheard of for Div 2 & 3 clubs either. If it was that expensive to install and run then they wouldn't bother installing it. Last week there was 2 inches of snow in London. It was London's heaviest snowfall for 12 years, so no, snow is not a huge problem. Frost is a problem, however, hence the undersoil heating.
the main purpose of those is not to melt snow. it's to keep the ground warm enough to extend the growing season for grass, so that it's tough enough to survive cold weather.
The idea behind under-surface heating is nothing new. Wealthy Romans used a system very similiar to what Segroves described...However, it probably wouldn't be beneficial for the cost, unless the league was really rolling in the bucks (like the NFL.) While snow may not fall much in London, it does in Scotland and Germany. I have seen winter matches from both countries. In each, snow was just piled onto the sides of the field (close to the stands) and I'm sure, if it was snowing, moved from the field again during the half. (Scottish fans were escorted for throwing snow-balls at Celtic players when they went to take corners.)
Wasn't just wealthy Romans. About the first century AD, the calderium system becme available for the public baths. The heat went under the floor and up through hollows in the walls.
I'm not sure which 'those' you mean, but undersoil heating is purely to prevent the field from freezing. It only heats the field to a few degrees above freezing, nowhere near enough to aid the growth of the grass. The big problem fields have in the winter is lack of sunlight, which is a much bigger problem when you have a roof or two.
Actually, I saw a feature on Sky Sports News last weekend about Chelsea's pitch. They attributed the problem to the undersoil heating system-I think they said the pumps weren't working. I'm sure sunlight is a major factor for many stadiums, but it seems the heating systems are crucial as well.