Once they started building the office floors, it was physically impossible for them to shorten the height, due to the design.

that official height measurement is just an imaginary number which has got nothing to do with the real height of the building :cheers:
Dude, what you say is irrelevant in many ways! Antenna is an antenna, and spire is a spire. Definitely there is a big difference between the two when inserted in a building. In regards to that, I would put a tall antenna on the top of any building I want and that would drastically change the final height, but of course that would never be counted. Don't be too much optimistic about the height of WTC 1, it's just a mere 419 meters tall building now and you have to live with it.

That is the reason that highest floor is another good measurement. It is 621 meters at the highest floor. But considering that the rest of the building is actual structure, that they actually constructed,the roof is 828 meters.

Burj Khalifa was actually a contributing factor that lead the Council to get rid or the roof height measurement.

The upcoming Kingdom Tower in Jeddah is even more of a challenge. I'd like to see what Kanto has to say about the "roof height" of that! :lol:

Dude, what you say is irrelevant in many ways! Antenna is an antenna, and spire is a spire. Definitely there is a big difference between the two when inserted in a building. In regards to that, I would put a tall antenna on the top of any building I want and that would drastically change the final height, but of course that would never be counted. Don't be too much optimistic about the height of WTC 1, it's just a mere 419 meters tall building now and you have to live with it.

An antenna and a spire are for 98% the same, so it indeed is relevant :ohno:

As to Burj Khalifa, I have thought quite a bit about it. I will post my thoughts later today or tomorow in the architecture section :cheers:

If its not built in the US, it's not good!!!!

Comments and discussions like these indicate insecurity.

How do you get 'too used to them'?



If anything, I find structures like ESB and Eiffel Tower overrated. They are used to represent present/past national glory more than anything else in today's world. would you agree?

Yes ESB was built earlier than the rest, but Petronas is something distinct as well, is it not?

I wouldn't find ESB boring to be honest.

Oh btw, anything built in China is just super not good !!!!


No I do not agree with you, the Empire State Building is gorgeous and the Petronas Towers get old quickly after you see numerous pictures of them, I just don't find them inspiring whereas the ESB was built so long ago yet it is still famous as hell

^^ I agree with you. The ESB is a far superior design compared to Petronas :cheers:

Burj Khalifa was actually a contributing factor that lead the Council to get rid or the roof height measurement.

The upcoming Kingdom Tower in Jeddah is even more of a challenge. I'd like to see what Kanto has to say about the "roof height" of that! :lol:

^^ I remember when it was rumored that there will be livable floors in the spire making in Kanto's mind roof height almost at the top of the building. Man how excited he was :lol: And then it has been cleared out that livable floors won't go much higher than to half of the height. I bet that made him upset. And who now cares about imaginary numbers :lol: And kingdom towers design didn't even change.

Roof height is obsolete in these days. Anybody who disagree is living the past. The only thing in my mind that is questionable is whether we should count antennas as well, because different in function and sometimes not included in the design, they still describes in the same degree as spires engineering achievement.

^^
Yeah, you are right. The CTBUH doesn't even list roof heights anymore on their building pages.

First off, please don't bite my head off if I am repeating what's already been discussed. I have been following this project for a long time on this site, but not nearly as closely as you all and this is the first time I've felt compelled to post, mainly because I have nothing to offer :)

I know you all have been discussing the new antenna, and I have looked back at many a post. But I am still confused as to what the actual roof will look like at this point? Mainly because when you go to www.wtc.com they have a new video on the first page with the older roof render (which is the one I love). Yet I thought the (in my opinion hideous-) ring was the current choice?

Any help would be appreciated. I really wish they'd go with the one in the new video - it looks fantastic.

Thanks.

The height of 1WTC didn't change, it still is 419 meters to the roof, as it was before and 541 meters to the pinnacle, as it was before. The only thing that changed is the design of the antenna. The cover of it was removed. Because of that the CTBUH now categorizes it as an antenna, not as a spire and therefore it doesn't count it into its official height measurement, however, that official height measurement is just an imaginary number which has got nothing to do with the real height of the building :cheers:

Stop spreading misinformation, especially to someone who doesn't know better and was asking about it. That poster was asking a clear-as-day question regarding official figures, not your inane irrelevant opinion.

The height of 1 WTC *did* change, as the CTBUH decides these things, *not* you. That "imaginary" number comes from an industry-wide accepted method of height measurement.

A spire is an architectural part of a building, while an antenna, flag pole or mast are not as they serve another purpose and are literally just tacked on to the top of a building. Spires do, and should, count towards building height.

GET OVER IT and move on already.

Roof height is obsolete in these days. Anybody who disagree is living the past.

That's a truth some will refuse to accept no matter how much you try to explain.

The CTBUH still lists the building as 1776 feet to the ARCHITECTURAL tip, that's what I'm going with until told otherwise, a few news articles about how the height may not officially be 1776 is not confirmation enough, there was no certainty.

Stop spreading misinformation, especially to someone who doesn't know better and was asking about it. That poster was asking a clear-as-day question regarding official figures, not your inane irrelevant opinion.

The height of 1 WTC *did* change, as the CTBUH decides these things, *not* you. That "imaginary" number comes from an industry-wide accepted method of height measurement.

A spire is an architectural part of a building, while an antenna, flag pole or mast are not as they serve another purpose and are literally just tacked on to the top of a building. Spires do, and should, count towards building height.

GET OVER IT and move on already.

Wrong! This is what he asked:

Sorry, I'm not understanding the changes, what actually happened with the spire? It will be redesigned or removed from the project? The WTC1 was supposed to have more then 500 mts, right?

Thanks!
____________

I answered exactly to what he asked, what happened to the spire and what the PHYSICAL height is and whether the antenna is now counted to official height, so PDC please don't throw false accusations at me :ohno:

I think he was referring to how you called it an "imaginary" number when really it's significant

Stop spreading misinformation, especially to someone who doesn't know better and was asking about it. That poster was asking a clear-as-day question regarding official figures, not your inane irrelevant opinion.

The height of 1 WTC *did* change, as the CTBUH decides these things, *not* you. That "imaginary" number comes from an industry-wide accepted method of height measurement.

A spire is an architectural part of a building, while an antenna, flag pole or mast are not as they serve another purpose and are literally just tacked on to the top of a building. Spires do, and should, count towards building height.

GET OVER IT and move on already.

There is a 300m building in Houston, and I am going to add a 250m spire to it. It will be the tallest building in America!

Here is a picture of it :lol:

http://i.imgur.com/PfLMs.jpg

First of you couldn't.

Second, what you don't understand is that official measurement system has to be consistent for all towers. You can't measure the spire for Burj khalifa but not for 1wtc even if for boxy towers this option would have sense.

First of you couldn't.

Second, what you don't understand is that official measurement system has to be consistent for all towers. You can't measure the spire for Burj khalifa and but not for 1wtc even if for boxy towers this option would have point.

Yeah you could. More than 50% is still a building, so you technically could. The main thing to think about here is not the skyscraper in Houston. It's that you can build a 300m building, and add a 250m spire, and call it America's tallest building

what? Not counting burj spire to the height? Really?

what? Not counting burj spire to the height? Really?

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I am saying that technically you could build a 300m building and add a 250m spire like this, and it would be the tallest in America by CTBUH standards.

http://i.imgur.com/PfLMs.jpg

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I am saying that technically you could build a 300m building and add a 250m spire like this, and it would be the tallest in America by CTBUH standards.


I see, so you don't have arguments against second (essential) part of my post :)

As for the spire I think it isn't technically possible without wires all the way up for such a thin spire. What's more nobody would decide to build such building because it would be subject to jokes, and probably baptized most stupid and ugly building on earth.

But hey, say someone build this. There is this saying in my country: The exception proves the principle ;)

the old world trade center was set as an icon to represent economic strength and in a few years of the post office in chicago is fully built then one world trade center will not be much of an icon anymore. the post office will

also posted in the post office redevelopment plan

the old world trade center was set as an icon to represent economic strength and in a few years of the post office in chicago is fully built then one world trade center will not be much of an icon anymore. the post office will

also posted in the post office redevelopment plan

the post office hasn't been approved yet, so hold your horses...:lol:

I see, so you don't have arguments against second (more important) part of my post :)

As for the spire I think it isn't technically possible without wires all the way up for such a thin spire. What's more nobody would decide to build such building because it would be subject to jokes, and probably baptized most stupid and ugly building on earth.

But hey, say someone build this. There is this saying in my country: The exception proves the principle ;)

I am discussing the fact that this technically could get built, and it proves that the CTBUH measurement of architectural height has a major flaw. Regarding the Burj Dubai, it isn't like a spire. It wasn't attached to the building. It was actually built like the rest of the building

^^ The thing is you don't have definite means of deciding which is spire and which isn't in every single case. And the rules have to be strict. And the Burj definitely have a spire, we just can't determine where it starts ;)

ilovelcassicrock7, that is the dumbest picture I've ever seen, let alone the two buildings you drew aren't even in proportion. The spire on One WTC is just 400 feet tall, not 1,000 so I don't know why you're making it sound like it's a ridiculously tall thing

what is sad about the new design where it is just an antenna is that the freedom tower will now be shorter even than the trump international hotel and tower in chicago. :ohno:

I feel now as if america will just be a third world country if the whole thing was just skyscrapers.

Now I will have to travel a million miles JUST for at least an acceptable view. shame, shame. :ohno::ohno::ohno:

once again, we just have to wait & see, you never know what can happen :)

This is all too complicated.

The best way to measure a height of a building is if its enclosed in the building structure like the Chrysler building, Trans-America building in San Francisco or the spire minus the antenna on ESB.

So in that sense, even if the antenna is enclosed in a radar dome material on One World Trade Center, it won't count towards the height.

These antennas are just cheats to increase the height of the building.

If these guys wanted to make One World Trade Center 1776 feet, the last floor of One World Trade Center should have been at 1776 feet, not adding a 400 foot spire on top of it to reach that goal.

I personally think the building should have been at 1776 feet with 225 feet antenna on top to reach the height of 2001 but the physical height should have been 1776 feet.

This is all too complicated.

The best way to measure a height of a building is if its enclosed in the building structure like the Chrysler building, Trans-America building in San Francisco or the spire minus the antenna on ESB.

So in that sense, even if the antenna is enclosed in a radar dome material on One World Trade Center, it won't count towards the height.

These antennas are just cheats to increase the height of the building.

If these guys wanted to make One World Trade Center 1776 feet, the last floor of One World Trade Center should have been at 1776 feet, not adding a 400 foot spire on top of it to reach that goal.

I personally think the building should have been at 1776 feet with 225 feet antenna on top to reach the height of 2001 but the physical height should have been 1776 feet.

There are no antennae enclosed in the Chrysler Building or TransAmerica Pyramid, that's why this idea was so complicated because it hasn't been done before

This is all too complicated.

The best way to measure a height of a building is if its enclosed in the building structure like the Chrysler building, Trans-America building in San Francisco or the spire minus the antenna on ESB.

So in that sense, even if the antenna is enclosed in a radar dome material on One World Trade Center, it won't count towards the height.

These antennas are just cheats to increase the height of the building.

If these guys wanted to make One World Trade Center 1776 feet, the last floor of One World Trade Center should have been at 1776 feet, not adding a 400 foot spire on top of it to reach that goal.

I personally think the building should have been at 1776 feet with 225 feet antenna on top to reach the height of 2001 but the physical height should have been 1776 feet.

Wrong, your technique is too complicated. For instance how you decide if this (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v9rvZO5Kiyg/TZgDGsIVABI/AAAAAAAAAgc/6C7CayCMBIk/s1600/5.jpg) building's spire is enclosed in the structure? We have to either count all spires or none.

There are no antennae enclosed in the Chrysler Building or TransAmerica Pyramid, that's why this idea was so complicated because it hasn't been done before

Well if that's the case, then make the height of the building from the top most habitable floor of the building. :cheers:

lets just do it like this, count the total height of all buildings in the world, includes the structure, everything. Therefore the willis tower is the 4th tallest in the world. that is how I judge height, by total roof to spire to antenna height.

ilovelcassicrock7, that is the dumbest picture I've ever seen, let alone the two buildings you drew aren't even in proportion. The spire on One WTC is just 400 feet tall, not 1,000 so I don't know why you're making it sound like it's a ridiculously tall thing

It's all relative. It's like comparing stealing a book, to stealing a car. Although stealing a car is worse, it is still bad to steal anything. It's the principle which matters. In this case the 300m building that has a 250m spire is clearly cheating, while the WTC is still cheating but not on as serious of a level. This is why roof, pinnacle, and top floor is what matters.

The topic of roof height vs. antenna/spire height has become redundant, but it seems clear to me that a building's REAL, ACTUAL height should be measured by roof height, period. The antenna/spire is ultimately just window dressing. The roof height of the structure is what should count. Especially when you have a building such as the Sears Tower or 1 World Trade Center, which have basically flat roofs. Now, when you have buildings like the Empire State Building, which have a more pointed roof, it is a bit murkier, but still, the final floor is what should count towards actual height....When you line the Petronas Towers up next to the Sears Tower, it is clear which is taller, the Sears is. However, someone decided to count antennas.....All that being said, it is too bad they are scrapping the original spire design for 1 World Trade Center, but either way, the building's roof height is 1368/1374 feet. The only way anyone could legitimately call the building 1776 feet would be if they had built the roof to that height....That's my opinion..

^^ The thing is you don't have definite means of deciding which is spire and which isn't in every single case. And the rules have to be strict. And the Burj definitely have a spire, we just can't determine where it starts ;)

It is possible to find the roof of Burj Khalifa, I will show it in my new thread in Architecture which I will make today or tomorow. Also, the rules are not strict, they are utterly unfair. Spires and antennas are for 98% the same thing .... thin steel sticks. That is why I'll never accept the current official height as a height measurement method, because it discriminates buildings :ohno:

The topic of roof height vs. antenna/spire height has become redundant, but it seems clear to me that a building's REAL, ACTUAL height should be measured by roof height, period. The antenna/spire is ultimately just window dressing. The roof height of the structure is what should count. Especially when you have a building such as the Sears Tower or 1 World Trade Center, which have basically flat roofs. Now, when you have buildings like the Empire State Building, which have a more pointed roof, it is a bit murkier, but still, the final floor is what should count towards actual height....When you line the Petronas Towers up next to the Sears Tower, it is clear which is taller, the Sears is. However, someone decided to count antennas.....All that being said, it is too bad they are scrapping the original spire design for 1 World Trade Center, but either way, the building's roof height is 1368/1374 feet. The only way anyone could legitimately call the building 1776 feet would be if they had built the roof to that height....That's my opinion..

And your opinion makes the most sense

It is possible to find the roof of Burj Khalifa, I will show it in my new thread in Architecture which I will make today or tomorow. Also, the rules are not strict, they are utterly unfair. Spires and antennas are for 98% the same thing .... thin steel sticks. That is why I'll never accept the current official height as a height measurement method, because it discriminates buildings :ohno:

Glad you joined the party. Here is the image i made to prove that roof height is best.

http://i.imgur.com/PfLMs.jpg

Its really a simple visual exercise...When you line up buildings next to each other, like the Sears, One World Trade Center, what pops out is the flat roof tip. That is what should count for actual height. Of course, the Burj Khalifa cheated this somewhat because the building is a hodgepodge of skinny swivels and setbacks towards the top, so it's hard to visually see where the roof ends and where the spire begins...But in your more basic towers like the Trade Center or Sears, with flat roof slabs, roof height is what should count. Period.

It is possible to find the roof of Burj Khalifa, I will show it in my new thread in Architecture which I will make today or tomorow. Also, the rules are not strict, they are utterly unfair. Spires and antennas are for 98% the same thing .... thin steel sticks. That is why I'll never accept the current official height as a height measurement method, because it discriminates buildings :ohno:

I think you don't understand what strict really means ;) The rules as they are now are strict and they don't have to be fair. That is unless you are kid getting emotional with everything. The measure system provides a way of equally comparing all buildings. Not only boxy towers with boxy towers, or only pointy towers with pointy towers. See the picture now?

And btw looking for burj height anywhere below the tip of the spire just makes me smile. Even iloveclassicrock7 understand how ridicules is that ;)

I think you don't understand what strict really means ;) The rules as they are now are strict and they don't have to be fair. That is unless you are kid getting emotional with everything. The measure system provides a way of equally comparing all buildings. Not only boxy towers with boxy towers, or only pointy towers with pointy towers. See the picture now?

The way of comparing they have now is not a good way of comparing buildings, it's very subjective actually. Going by roof or top floor, is the most objective way.

^^ I didn't say it's fair. Read the post again.

I think you don't understand what strict really means ;) The rules as they are now are strict and they don't have to be fair. That is unless you are kid getting emotional with everything. The measure system provides a way of equally comparing all buildings. Not only boxy towers with boxy towers, or only pointy towers with pointy towers. See the picture now?

And btw looking for burj height anywhere below the tip of the spire just makes me smile. Even iloveclassicrock7 understand how ridicules is that ;)

Equally comparing? Wrong! It is completely unequal. In some buildings it counts thin steel sticks and in some not, where is your precious equality in that? :ohno: All that I see is inequality and discrimination in the official height :ohno:

Btw, I once made a nice pic which I recovered from a long dead thread. Behold the Cheater Building, a building with the highest official height in the US:

http://i42.************/2mmi81g.jpg

And btw patrykus, fair and equal are the same :ohno:

It's all relative. It's like comparing stealing a book, to stealing a car. Although stealing a car is worse, it is still bad to steal anything. It's the principle which matters. In this case the 300m building that has a 250m spire is clearly cheating, while the WTC is still cheating but not on as serious of a level. This is why roof, pinnacle, and top floor is what matters.

For the hundreth time it's just your opinion and not officially the general truth

And you guys need to understand, Kanto too, that it's not like theres more spire than building, One WTC gets its dominance mostly from its structure, the spire is just a "side dish" lol

^^ My Cheater Building is perfectly within CTBUH limits with a roof height of 282 meters and a spire height of 550 meters (so the spire is 268 meters tall) :cheers:

Equally comparing? Wrong! It is completely unequal. In some buildings it counts thin steel sticks and in some not, where is your precious equality in that? :ohno: All that I see is inequality and discrimination in the official height :ohno:

Btw, I once made a nice pic which I recovered from a long dead thread. Behold the Cheater Building, a building with the highest official height in the US:

http://i42.************/2mmi81g.jpg

And btw patrykus, fair and equal are the same :ohno:

Exactly. A 300m building with a 300 meter spire is NOT taller then a building with a roof height of 301 meters, or 590 meters or 480 etc....

And btw patrykus, fair and equal are the same :ohno:

No they are not. I do understand that some developers cheats adding spires for extra height, but you have to have one system to measure all buildings. You can't measure some buildings differently because "you think" it is more fair in particular case, and others differently again because you think it's right. Thats because I can disagree with your personal judgment, and some other person can disagree with both of us. Thats why one equal but not necessary fair system is needed. Uff I think you'll finally understand ;)

^^ My Cheater Building is perfectly within CTBUH limits with a roof height of 282 meters and a spire height of 550 meters (so the spire is 268 meters tall) :cheers:

Exactly, we have just proved that CTBUH standards don't work.

Equally comparing? Wrong! It is completely unequal. In some buildings it counts thin steel sticks and in some not, where is your precious equality in that? :ohno: All that I see is inequality and discrimination in the official height :ohno:

The Sears Tower's antennas are not included in it's official height because they were added years after the building was completed, same with the antenna on the ESB, they were never in the building plans.

And people, a building is the entirety of the building. The height of a building is the height to the top of the building. The WTC has been designed with this spire that goes to 1776', so why would you ignore it and say the height of the building is lower than what the obvious top of the building is? No matter if it is a "thin metal stick" or not, it is part of the building, and the building is what is being measured.

CTBUH has reasoning for their rules, it isn't just somebody's personal opinion.

Guys, honestly you're wasting your time, no one gives a crap and hardly anyone in America even pays attention and hasn't even heard of CTBUH so really you need to stop..it still doesn't prove anything to me

Exactly, we have just proved that CTBUH standards don't work.

Let's see that spire stand without support. It could not be that tall, it would have to be a guyed mast which does not count.

No they are not. I do understand that some developers cheats adding spires for extra height, but you have to have one system to measure all buildings. You can't measure some buildings differently because "you think" it is more fair in particular case, and others differently again because you think it's right. Thats because I can disagree with your personal judgment, and some other person can disagree with both of us. Thats why one equal but not necessary fair system is needed. Uff I think you'll finally understand ;)

And that is exactly what I was talking all the time. You can't measure 2 buildings differently, you must measure them equally. The CTBUH measures them in its official height totally unequally. In one building it accepts the same thing that it doesn't accept in another building :ohno: On the other hand, roof height and pinnacle height measure buildings perfectly equally :cheers:

I see the usual suspects are still spinning this thread out of control. Take you bitching at each other to PM's please. I'm sick of seeing this garbage every time I come here. :ohno:

Let's see that spire stand without support. It could not be that tall, it would have to be a guyed mast which does not count.

The former spire on 1WTC had wires to support it too, yet CTBUH still counted it. Also, you say that antennas were added later, but spires are added later too, later after the building itself is completed structurally. You said that the building is the entirety of the building, however again, this means that both spires and antennas should by your rule be counted cause both of them are a part of the building.

I still keep the suggestion of a pyramid for additional floors for 1wtc. anyone here who can find a legit way to contact the PA or childs?

Yep anyone can stick a 500m spire on top of a building and then claim that building is the tallest. But that is ridiculous. Just like you measure a car's real length from bumper to bumper, the same is done for buildings. Spires are just window dressing. You wouldn't include a long hood ornament in the overall measurement of a car. Same for skyscrapers. Therefore, the Sears Tower will be the real tallest in the US for now, followed soon by 432 Park in New York, then followed by One World Trade Center by its roof height of 1368/1374. It seems pretty clear to me.

In actuality, even if the original intended spire of One World Trade had been kept, that was just an antenna encased in fiberglass, and did not include floors or anything, so either way, old spire or new Durst spire, One World Trade's height is actually 1368/1374. Whether the tip of an antenna counts in terms of unofficial height is another matter, but REAL height is simple...from ground floor to top of roof. If people wanted One World Trade to be 1776 feet, they should have built the roof height to that level. The end.

^^ Very well said. I 10000% agree with you :cheers:

I see the usual suspects are still spinning this thread out of control. Take you bitching at each other to PM's please. I'm sick of seeing this garbage every time I come here. :ohno:

Lets go to SkyscraperPage, garbage here won't be cleaned up. ;)

In actuality, even if the original intended spire of One World Trade had been kept, that was just an antenna encased in fiberglass, and did not include floors or anything, so either way, old spire or new Durst spire, One World Trade's height is actually 1368/1374. Whether the tip of an antenna counts in terms of unofficial height is another matter, but REAL height is simple...from ground floor to top of roof. If people wanted One World Trade to be 1776 feet, they should have built the roof height to that level. The end.

Exactly, no one can dispute real height. I would have been happy to see 1 WTC be 1776 feet, but it's not. Very well said. If adding a layer of fiberglass is the difference between an "antennae" and a "spire", then the CTBUH has surely lost their mind. Not to mention that neither should be counted outside of the pinnacle measurement. The possibility of a 300m building using a 250m spire to become taller then an actual roof height of 520 meters, shows just how flawed the CTBUH system is.

Lets go to SkyscraperPage, garbage here won't be cleaned up. ;)

So just because I have a different opinion, it's garbage ? Not to mention, that lots of people have come on here agreed with me and Kanto.

And that is exactly what I was talking all the time. You can't measure 2 buildings differently, you must measure them equally. The CTBUH measures them in its official height totally unequally. In one building it accepts the same thing that it doesn't accept in another building :ohno: On the other hand, roof height and pinnacle height measure buildings perfectly equally :cheers:

If you mean antennas as fordgtman1992 mentioned they are not part of the building, but equipment and we are measuring building not it's equipment. The 300m supertall, whatever shape it is, whether it has a spire or hasn't, when you put 100m ladder on top it still is 300m supertall. That's how ctbuh understand it and it's very reasonable. If it was up to me I would consider counting antennas as well for consistency as they are rather permanently added to the building and much more significant than other elements like air conditioning and such.

We can all end up permanently banned for all that fuss :D, night is coming, and I'm too tired to continue, so I will end this up leaving you with this dilemma:

Look at the two buildings below. Suppose the right one has higher top floor than the left one. Which is taller?

http://i.imgur.com/d6mf5.jpg

If you mean antennas as fordgtman1992 mentioned they are not part of the building, but equipment and we are measuring building not it's equipment. The 300m supertall, whatever shape it is, whether it has a spire or hasn't, when you put 100m ladder on top it still is 300m supertall. That's how ctbuh understand it and it's very reasonable. If it was up to me I would consider counting antennas as well for consistency as they are rather permanently added to the building and much more significant than other elements like air conditioning and such.

We can all end up permanently banned for all that fuss :D, night is coming, and I'm too tired to continue, so I will end this up leaving you with this dilemma:

Look at the two buildings below. Suppose the right one has higher top floor than the left one. Which building is taller?

http://imgur.com/iA7Mn


but equipment and we are measuring building not it's equipment

So if a piece of metal has some function to help broadcasting in a city, it automatically cannot be counted ? Well that makes no sense.

you know what would be lovely... some photos of 1WTC..... or am I visiting the wrong thread for that?? :lol:

So just because I have a different opinion, it's garbage ? Not to mention, that lots of people have come on here agreed with me and Kanto.

yea but you blabber on & on about it when no one cares, no offense...

yea but you blabber on & on about it when no one cares, no offense...

A lot of people do care. Marsh, Kanto, the tallest building, etc... all agreed with me

CAN WE JUST PLZ GET BACK TO CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS AND PICTURES AND QUIT WORRYING ABOUT THE DARN BLESSED SPIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7216/7201344638_d63979a417_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7201344638/)
*SEE LARGE* Pre-Dawn & New York City on May 13, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7201344638/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr

I agree with beast. lets all conclude that any structure that has ANY use for the building can be included in the height. PERIOD. kthxbye
PS: with my rule, spires, which are just for show, are not included in height while antennas are, spires can be incouded if the roof ends in a point.

you know what would be lovely... some photos of 1WTC..... or am I visiting the wrong thread for that?? :lol:

Nope, now we just get pages of tedious bickering to skip through. Or people post the same pictures that were already posted (such as the picture a few posts above this one)

Perhaps because it is a more striking building than 1 WTC, which most people see as a simple box?

Sounds a lot like how people spoke of the old towers before their demise. :naughty:

Usually when it's cloudy, there aren't very many update pictures.

No worries. I'm over the spire/antenna issue anyways. Moving on..1WTC will be a very cool skyscraper when finished regardless. Getting so close to topping out.
Maybe a nice July 4th present!

Usually when it's cloudy, there aren't very many update pictures.

Still, errbody stop the nitpicking, please.

No worries. I'm over the spire/antenna issue anyways. Moving on..1WTC will be a very cool skyscraper when finished regardless. Getting so close to topping out.
Maybe a nice July 4th present!

Yeah I am moving on too. About July 4th, I expect it to top out in June, and finish at the end of Summer.

A lot of people do care. Marsh, Kanto, the tallest building, etc... all agreed with me

you're right alot of people...all three of them

the spire shouldnt take long to finish. oh well, when madagascar comes out will be the time this tower tops out. hakuna matata about the spire, they count 1776 feet and that is what I am proud about, it doesnt always matter about height, it matters about iconism. when you make a list of worlds most iconic buildings, this one comes first, even now.

First off, please don't bite my head off if I am repeating what's already been discussed. I have been following this project for a long time on this site, but not nearly as closely as you all and this is the first time I've felt compelled to post, mainly because I have nothing to offer :)

I know you all have been discussing the new antenna, and I have looked back at many a post. But I am still confused as to what the actual roof will look like at this point? Mainly because when you go to www.wtc.com they have a new video on the first page with the older roof render (which is the one I love). Yet I thought the (in my opinion hideous-) ring was the current choice?

Any help would be appreciated. I really wish they'd go with the one in the new video - it looks fantastic.

Thanks.

The ring you're refering to is named Communications Platform Ring and its design changed a while back ino a more exposed version.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7198/6894906379_fc82a7f858_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/)
1 WTC | Rooftop (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/) by Otie O'Daniel (http://www.flickr.com/people/62018165@N04/), on Flickr

The video you saw at wtc.com was produced by Piranha, the same CGI company who also made the first animation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBu2fxCV_iM) for the site. Since the Port Authority became owner and developer of Tower One, Silverstein stopped being involved in the project, having no updated architectural drawings of it. Piranha, being hired by Silverstein, just received architectural papers for Towers 2,3 and 4. The result? A great CGI movie depicting accurate models of Tower 2, 3 and 4, while showing the earliest version of Tower 1.

So just because I have a different opinion, it's garbage ? Not to mention, that lots of people have come on here agreed with me and Kanto.

one man's garbage is another man's treasure so just dont listen to his opinion and watch this tower rise as steel gets bolted in, glass gets fitted in, and concrete gets poured in.

Does anyone know when they will put the rest of the glass up ?

The ring you're refering to is named Communications Platform Ring and its design changed a while back ino a more exposed version.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7198/6894906379_fc82a7f858_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/)
1 WTC | Rooftop (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/) by Otie O'Daniel (http://www.flickr.com/people/62018165@N04/), on Flickr

The video you saw at wtc.com was produced by Piranha, the same CGI company who also made the first animation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBu2fxCV_iM) for the site. Since the Port Authority became owner and developer of Tower One, Silverstein stopped being involved in the project, having no updated architectural drawings of it. Piranha, being hired by Silverstein, just received architectural papers for Towers 2,3 and 4. The result? A great CGI movie depicting accurate models of Tower 2, 3 and 4, while showing the earliest version of Tower 1.

Wait so there will only be 3 bare metal rings with none of those satellite dishes on it?

No, the dishes will go on after the rings.

In actuality, even if the original intended spire of One World Trade had been kept, that was just an antenna encased in fiberglass, and did not include floors or anything, so either way, old spire or new Durst spire, One World Trade's height is actually 1368/1374. Whether the tip of an antenna counts in terms of unofficial height is another matter, but REAL height is simple...from ground floor to top of roof. If people wanted One World Trade to be 1776 feet, they should have built the roof height to that level. The end.

for the billionth time, IT LOOKS BETTER, it's not all about the height.

for the billionth time, IT LOOKS BETTER, it's not all about the height.

Then I completely respect your opinion. The old antennae did look much better.

I wonder, with the redesign of the antenna/spire, will there now be room enough for an outdoor observation platform on the roof?

^ Probably not, and even if there was it wont happen.

Durst said on the news they were still planning on keeping the 1776 height, whatever that means.

Childs and the PA can work on a cheaper solution to cover the antenna, just because the radome is removed doesn't mean something else can't go over it.

the CTBUH and the WTC official site still list the tower as 1776 feet

PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE BACK TO 1776 feet 541 meters

Thank you

Is 419 meters the roof height?
I remember it was 417 meters,so they changed the roof height by 2 meters?
I dont care about the official height,but the more the roof height is,the higher it looks.

The ring you're refering to is named Communications Platform Ring and its design changed a while back ino a more exposed version.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7198/6894906379_fc82a7f858_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/)
1 WTC | Rooftop (http://www.flickr.com/photos/62018165@N04/6894906379/) by Otie O'Daniel (http://www.flickr.com/people/62018165@N04/), on Flickr



They should assemble cannons arround the top. :D

Exactly I want to tell about missile defence system of Freedom tower. :D

I have new pics :cheer:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5444/7205618634_0f7ca2c011_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rizzolo/7205618634/)
Looking Up (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rizzolo/7205618634/) by rizzolo (http://www.flickr.com/people/rizzolo/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7079/7206263538_1f3416ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24163663@N06/7206263538/)
NYCMay12_5 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24163663@N06/7206263538/) by thefamnews (http://www.flickr.com/people/24163663@N06/), on Flickr

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5156/7207551326_18c0266806_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/drocpsu/7207551326/)
Freedom Tower & World Trade Center (http://www.flickr.com/photos/drocpsu/7207551326/) by drocpsu (http://www.flickr.com/people/drocpsu/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7094/7208344152_d2a51c26aa_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/murphyzmike/7208344152/)
One World Trade Center (http://www.flickr.com/photos/murphyzmike/7208344152/) by murphyz (http://www.flickr.com/people/murphyzmike/), on Flickr

And the PA cam at the end :cheer:

http://oxblue.com/archive/487d07189e5fd2b7edce94fc0bcf4b68/800x600.jpg

I know it's ridiculous that this forum has already jumped to conclusions about the spire. at least keep it at 1,776 (541 meters) until it's official on whatever height it is

^^ Atm it's official that there will be an antenna, not a spire.

I don't care about a possible change in height, but its redesign.

Guys stop fighting about the spire here. go to http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=91438633#post91438633 to let off all your spire troubles.

^^ Atm it's official that there will be an antenna, not a spire.

Kanto it is not official first 1 wtc antenna is still part of its original design not an add on, two 1 wtc antenna will not be broadcasting any singles 1 wtc communication platform ring will those are still criteria for Council on Tall Building to rule it antenna or spire and like it or not its there ruling that counts not are opinions, so how come skyscraper city is the only web site that is stating that 1 wtc is 1374 skyscraper city should be a website of facts not bias opinions.

here is some more bad news.:ohno: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/hopes_are_dashed_for_wtc_morse_code_yansKFKmzzmB179SxrDV4O?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Business

here is some more bad news.:ohno: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/hopes_are_dashed_for_wtc_morse_code_yansKFKmzzmB179SxrDV4O?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Business

Meh.

Well they scrapped the morse code, but on the "bright" (lol) side at least it will be more powerful

The cut backs to this project is downright pathetic.

Really shows how far down USA has come.

In 1930, ESB was build in 1 year 2 months. And in 2012, it is taken over 7 years to get this building built with so much hassle.

Kanto it is not official first 1 wtc antenna is still part of its original design not an add on, two 1 wtc antenna will not be broadcasting any singles 1 wtc communication platform ring will those are still criteria for Council on Tall Building to rule it antenna or spire and like it or not its there ruling that counts not are opinions, so how come skyscraper city is the only web site that is stating that 1 wtc is 1374 skyscraper city should be a website of facts not bias opinions.

I agree. Technically speaking this still a spire, even if there is some transmission equipment attached to it. It has been included the project from the beginning. And even though thing is ugly and haven't went through any artistic design process its still part of the former spire and thus imo should be counted.

Btw the number in the thread is changed because ctbuh excluded spire at some point, now they have included it again.

Btw2 The inside bit of the spire is slightly lover than the complete spire isn't it? After all one supposed to be inside the other.

Here it is. The new "spire" is definitively lover than original.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7022/6709797023_da48179f12_b.jpg

I didn't even know there was a 'morse code'

Also, a new row of glass has started.

Durst said on the news they were still planning on keeping the 1776 height, whatever that means.

Childs and the PA can work on a cheaper solution to cover the antenna, just because the radome is removed doesn't mean something else can't go over it.

the CTBUH and the WTC official site still list the tower as 1776 feet

PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE BACK TO 1776 feet 541 meters

Thank you

The solution to the panel "problem" has existed since the new design for 1 WTC was unveiled in 2005. I present to you the original design for the antenna enclosure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/original.jpg

Thanks to NY Guy at SSP for posting the rendering. I had been trying to find it for a few days but no luck.

Wow. Me like it a lot. Much better than a joint one ;) Imo that would be the best option of all three if there has to be something on the roof.

^^

why the hell did they not use that design .:ohno:

¿Is my sensation only .....or the new WTC 1 not seems so high that the older WTC with the same meters?

The solution to the panel "problem" has existed since the new design for 1 WTC was unveiled in 2005. I present to you the original design for the antenna enclosure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/original.jpg

Thanks to NY Guy at SSP for posting the rendering. I had been trying to find it for a few days but no luck.

That looks horrible :ohno:

words

There is a reason every time you post it says this:

This user is on your Ignore List.

It amazes me how much disagreement can go on over a dressed up antennae and how tall a building actually is. The bottom line is, all buildings tall or not tall, should be measured to it's roof. Not the top of a "sphere" or Ferris wheel or anything else that might "sit" on top of it's roof. I just think it is completely cheating if you count an antennae within the height when comparing to other buildings. If I designed and built a building that was 1000 feet tall to the roof and someone built a building that was 600 feet to the roof right next to me but with a 401 foot antennae, or sphere if you will, I would be pretty pissed if someone labeled it as the taller building. "Building" being the key word. Just my opinion and I'm sure most would agree.

beautiful! I can actually see from the areas around my house and I live pretty far.

here is some more bad news.:ohno: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/hopes_are_dashed_for_wtc_morse_code_yansKFKmzzmB179SxrDV4O?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Business

:bash:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/original.jpg

This design is actually pretty nice, I like it a lot.

^^ That spire with a more sophisicated ring/platform would be a dream. *drools*

I'd like to see a render with that spire shown from a distance. Enough to see the whole tower. THEN one with the new 'antenna'. I'll bet it will look almost invisible.

Durst said on the news they were still planning on keeping the 1776 height, whatever that means.

Childs and the PA can work on a cheaper solution to cover the antenna, just because the radome is removed doesn't mean something else can't go over it.

the CTBUH and the WTC official site still list the tower as 1776 feet

PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE BACK TO 1776 feet 541 meters

Thank you

There is no reason to change it back. It has a roof height of 1374, and a pinnacle of 1776

It amazes me how much disagreement can go on over a dressed up antennae and how tall a building actually is. The bottom line is, all buildings tall or not tall, should be measured to it's roof. Not the top of a "sphere" or Ferris wheel or anything else that might "sit" on top of it's roof. I just think it is completely cheating if you count an antennae within the height when comparing to other buildings. If I designed and built a building that was 1000 feet tall to the roof and someone built a building that was 600 feet to the roof right next to me but with a 401 foot antennae, or sphere if you will, I would be pretty pissed if someone labeled it as the taller building. "Building" being the key word. Just my opinion and I'm sure most would agree.

Exactly, we had a huge discussion about this yesterday, and I said the same thing with a different example

^^
Had to be a reason why they did not chose that design, most probably cost issues as well.

^^ That spire with a more sophisicated ring/platform would be a dream. *drools*

Yeah, love that antennae

Exactly, we had a huge discussion about this yesterday, and I said the same thing with a different example

I just read it and could agree with you more! Good post!

I'd like to see a render with that spire shown from a distance. Enough to see the whole tower. THEN one with the new 'antenna'. I'll bet it will look almost invisible.

There are a ton of shots of the original model out there somewhere.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/10x7ftmstreet7ud.jpg

Apparently this spire was designed without the antenna in mind, but I'm sure if they tried hard enough they could make it work. I like how it blends in with the sky as you get further away.

There is no reason to change it back. It has a roof height of 1374, and a pinnacle of 1776

The official height will likely not change from 1776 feet, it was all media speculation. It's not really set it stone yet, why would you not listen to the official website and CTBUH?


And who cares about morse code? That's not even bad news.


That original spire design of the thick lattice was amazing I agree yet the spire is already assembled so they just need to come up with an alternative coating, Am I the only one who actually believes Childs when he says he and the PA will come up with an alternative design?

^^That other spire design is incredibly tacky. Plus the new antenna design is just as thick as the old North Antenna, if not thicker.

It amazes me how much disagreement can go on over a dressed up antennae and how tall a building actually is. The bottom line is, all buildings tall or not tall, should be measured to it's roof. Not the top of a "sphere" or Ferris wheel or anything else that might "sit" on top of it's roof. I just think it is completely cheating if you count an antennae within the height when comparing to other buildings. If I designed and built a building that was 1000 feet tall to the roof and someone built a building that was 600 feet to the roof right next to me but with a 401 foot antennae, or sphere if you will, I would be pretty pissed if someone labeled it as the taller building. "Building" being the key word. Just my opinion and I'm sure most would agree.

Tell me where Burj Khalifa's roof is. Shanghai Tower? Petronas Towers? Al Hamra Tower? Hell, even the Empire State Building?

Just because some buildings have a clear cut roof such as this tower does not mean that all towers do. That's why the CTBUH doesn't recognize "roof height" anymore. That measurement is obsolete. I can't believe it's so hard for people to grasp this concept.

STOP TALKING ABOUT THE SPIRE HERE! http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=91438633#post91438633
I started a new thread about this discussion. thank you.

Tell me where Burj Khalifa's roof is. Shanghai Tower? Petronas Towers? Al Hamra Tower? Hell, even the Empire State Building?

Just because some buildings have a clear cut roof such as this tower does not mean that all towers do. That's why the CTBUH doesn't recognize "roof height" anymore. That measurement is obsolete. I can't believe it's so hard for people to grasp this concept.

It's not a question of it being too hard to grasp as it is just not realistic. If you give me the designs of all the buildings listed, I have no doubt I could come up with a "roof" height for all. If you use the Empire State Building as an example, even though a large portion of the top is decorative, it is just that...decorative. Just because The CTBUH doesn't recognize "roof height" any more doesn't mean it makes sense. An antennae, whether covered in fiberglass or not, is still an antennae and not a building, nor should it be counted as such.

The solution to the panel "problem" has existed since the new design for 1 WTC was unveiled in 2005. I present to you the original design for the antenna enclosure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/original.jpg

Thanks to NY Guy at SSP for posting the rendering. I had been trying to find it for a few days but no luck.

Much better than the 2nd option mosquito antenna

The solution to the panel "problem" has existed since the new design for 1 WTC was unveiled in 2005. I present to you the original design for the antenna enclosure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/wtc/NEW%20wtc/original.jpg



Very Nice. I really like it.

I hope they can install some lights and lasers in that antenna and it will add some visual flair to the antenna like the ESB's spire.

I really hope they go for this.:cheers:

^^ they didn't go for 7 years, so it's not likely they'll go for it now.

The official height will likely not change from 1776 feet, it was all media speculation. It's not really set it stone yet, why would you not listen to the official website and CTBUH?


And who cares about morse code? That's not even bad news.


That original spire design of the thick lattice was amazing I agree yet the spire is already assembled so they just need to come up with an alternative coating, Am I the only one who actually believes Childs when he says he and the PA will come up with an alternative design?

Yes, because most of us understand how business works.

This building will always be 419 meters, but I would still like to see the old spire because it looked a lot better.

The cut backs to this project is downright pathetic.

Really shows how far down USA has come.

In 1930, ESB was build in 1 year 2 months. And in 2012, it is taken over 7 years to get this building built with so much hassle.

AGREE.

I have also thought about that many many times in here.
When you see the construction of ESB, chrysler and the twins they build it much faster then today.
And today we have modern tools. I don't understamd it. Look at china and arabworld they build in record spped 24/7

Here is what the new antennae design will look like far away

http://i.imgur.com/tuQTJ.jpg

ugh it's so gross.

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/2237_0076_120503_rgb.jpg


http://observer.com/2012/05/16/wtc/

^^

True, in those days, when they set their minds to building something, they build it. They weren't bogged down by a lot of bullshit and bureaucratic red tape. The The main problem with the pace of 1WTC's construction was that it was hampered by the Port Authority's crap and interference. The PA has proven itself to be largely inept. And it certainly is NOT a construction/design agency! Big supertall buildings just go up faster when they are privately run, have a simple end-goal, and basic benchmarks and timelines to meet. Luckily, I feel pretty confident that 432 Park will be very different, and we will see it rise a lot quicker than 1WTC...Due to the lack of Port Authority and bureaucratic involvement. Period.

AGREE.

I have also thought about that many many times in here.
When you see the construction of ESB, chrysler and the twins they build it much faster then today.
And today we have modern tools. I don't understamd it. Look at china and arabworld they build in record spped 24/7

There are much stricter building codes today than there were during the 30's. Buildings used to be erected with very little planking on previous floors. Which left plenty of room for workers to fall through. We also have stricter wind restrictions for crane operations. Nobody considered things like safety lines or netting back in the 1930's either.

Six workers died building the Hanoi Landmark Tower. Another six died on the ICC in Hong Kong. 17 died (directly and indirectly) building the orignal WTC. Four people have died so far in the new WTC (two building 7WTC, and 2 firefighters involved in a fire at the Deutsche Bank Building). It's taking a lot longer to build in the US than years past, or compared to other countries. But I'd say it's for the best.

If they would at least add on the dishes to the rings, it looks like rolls of barbed wire. Just like an ugly antenna out of Russia.

with the encasing gone the beacon reminds me of Excalibur from Ace Combat Zero

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66uztXuzaUo

i wonder if it shoots laser too :lol:
wouldn't be surprised if i'm the only person who knows this game

ugh it's so gross.

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/2237_0076_120503_rgb.jpg


http://observer.com/2012/05/16/wtc/


That doesn't look like a spire or antennae. It looks like a really large pipe with vault turning handles all the way up... disgusting...

The antenna will be dark grey and white, not brown like that photo above makes it appear. And they ARE adding dishes!

I hope the antenna is painted white like you said! If not, it would just look all rusted over and gross. Can we get a picture of the new antenna with some dishes on it? In white?

The antenna will be dark grey and white, not brown like that photo above makes it appear. And they ARE adding dishes!

How do you know what they're painting it? And does anyone know if this beacon is just going to be a light at the top of the building or will there be visible beams of light protruding from the top?

How do you know what they're painting it? And does anyone know if this beacon is just going to be a light at the top of the building or will there be visible beams of light protruding from the top?

It supposedly will still have a big beam of light

How do you know what they're painting it? And does anyone know if this beacon is just going to be a light at the top of the building or will there be visible beams of light protruding from the top?

There are other renders (that aren't in the sunset) that show it in grey and white.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-SX363_SPIREl_G_20120509212310.jpg

There are other renders (that aren't in the sunset) that show it in grey and white.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-SX363_SPIREl_G_20120509212310.jpg

Yeah, but that antennae looks completely different. It doesn't have the rings all the way up the antennae. I also don't know what time of day would make it look rust red.

Actually it does, just look closer, it's not a very high quality picture.

Elementary question but is it possible to encase the antenna at a later date so that it looks like the original spire design? Can't fathom New Yorkers being content with their skyline being scarred by that hideous growth sprouting from the top of that iconic building.

Those rings actually look like the supports for the would-be casing, but since they aren't adding the casing, they might not add those rings either.

I prefer an ordinary antenna over a fat joint being placed on top.

^^^^ I preferred the original spire design...

Those rings actually look like the supports for the would-be casing, but since they aren't adding the casing, they might not add those rings either.

Those are for communication-broadcasting, nothing to do with the Spire.

It supposedly will still have a big beam of light

Like a lighthouse?

Like a lighthouse?

yea, but not like spinning. I wish it was vertical, then it could probably been seen as far as Atlantic City-Philadelphia

The antenna, while still comparatively lacking, could be made so much better if they simply paint it white.

with the encasing gone the beacon reminds me of Excalibur from Ace Combat Zero

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66uztXuzaUo

i wonder if it shoots laser too :lol:
wouldn't be surprised if i'm the only person who knows this game

LOL, it's quite similar :hilarious

The new design really really looks like just an inner frame with a missing shell/covering... maybe because it is, lol.

why is the communications ring now empty? WTF

why is the communications ring now empty? WTF

It'll be filled in as time goes on.

can some plz post high resolution renderings of 1wtc

can some plz post high resolution renderings of 1wtc

I already did on the previous page, check back and look first.

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/2237_0076_120503_rgb.jpg

North tower antenna looked much better than this .... . :ohno:
And compared to Sears(Willis) tower antenna this is just :puke:

I'm getting REALLY tired hearing about the spire. :ohno: let's just move on already. I can't believe there's over 50 pages of spire complaints. What happened to all the progress pictures? I mean, this thread is going downhill quickly. See you guys at Skyscraperpage.



............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_..........._,-%.......`
...................................,

^^ Just a bunch of guys who can't deal with change.

looks like somebody stripped the spire and ring down for parts lol.

I'm leaving this thread and not coming back until people have calmed down about the spire. :ohno::bash:

Oh please, you people are so dramatic, even yankee fan for life said he was leaving to go to 432 Park Ave and he's still here. I bet a million bucks you two will still be commenting in the next hour or so..and fyi user with the Chinese symbols I can't write, I did post distant shots from NJ but no one even acknowledged them,

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7092/7179254460_307e6757bd_b.jpg

^^ Just a bunch of guys who can't deal with change.


They just ruined the NYC skyline, people have every right to complain.

There are other renders (that aren't in the sunset) that show it in grey and white.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-SX363_SPIREl_G_20120509212310.jpg

I actually like it (don't mind it) in this rendering :):)

I think we're all jumping the gun so let's get back to the pics!!

what do you mean jumping the gun? Durst's gun pretty much just shot New York

I prefer an ordinary antenna over a fat joint being placed on top.
I totally agree!

I actually like it (don't mind it) in this rendering :):)

I think we're all jumping the gun so let's get back to the pics!!

I like it MUCH better too!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7092/7179254460_307e6757bd_b.jpg

Awesome pic, it looks like there is a big city right over the hill, awesome.

I'm leaving this thread and not coming back until people have calmed down about the spire. :ohno::bash:
Good, I'm tired of hearing you complain. Of course the spire redesign is going to rile people up and cause plenty of discussion.
They just ruined the NYC skyline, people have every right to complain.
:nuts:

what do you mean jumping the gun? Durst's gun pretty much just shot New York

Jumping the gun on what we think the "revised antenna" will look like.

I want more construction pics

I think those 5 little knub/platform are the Biggest things that make it look "incomplete" like a frame..those 5 things make it look super ugly and out of place....

..the least they can do is remove those 5 little platform thingys to at least make it SMOOTH like every other buildings' spire/antennae on earth.

And paint it too! Wtf is up with the rust color???? LOL!

Paint it white, silver..or even black at least... but RUST/BROWN?!?!?!? WTH?!?!?!

White would be the best... like Willis's antennae, it's pretty nice.. much nicer than this anyways...

Oh please, you people are so dramatic, even yankee fan for life said he was leaving to go to 432 Park Ave and he's still here. I bet a million bucks you two will still be commenting in the next hour or so..and fyi user with the Chinese symbols I can't write, I did post distant shots from NJ but no one even acknowledged them,

I came back cause this is where all the fun is at, anyway as long if they get rid of those rings i wound not mind 1 wtc antenna so much. :cheers:

everyone shut up about the spire and get back to the progress of this building the building will be done by time you drop the subject of the spire!!!!!!

So has the height passed 1300 feet yet?

Can anybody go outside and take some pics of the scraper or must I take my jet to N.Y and do it myself. Because it is all about spire this and antenna that. YES one of the two will stand on top of the 1wtc, so SHUT UP about this horse shit and do your work and go out and take some pics NOW:bash: If I could choose none would stand on top. I would build an observation deck regardless of the mechanical floors right under:cheers:

So has the height passed 1300 feet yet?

No 1 wtc is 1297 3 feet under 1300 feet.

No 1 wtc is 1297 3 feet under 1300 feet.

It's actually 1307 feet over the lowest entrance, so yes, it has passed 1300 oficially.

May 16th, 2012.
New steel beams have been added.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8003/7213525456_a112dabff6_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/7213525456/)
IMG_1654 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/7213525456/) by xurijoe (http://www.flickr.com/people/xurijoe/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7081/7213526222_cd5a1021e8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/7213526222/)
IMG_1656 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/7213526222/) by xurijoe (http://www.flickr.com/people/xurijoe/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_be2f81ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/)
New York City on May 15, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr

There are other renders (that aren't in the sunset) that show it in grey and white.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-SX363_SPIREl_G_20120509212310.jpg

It looks even more like the North Tower in the rendering on the right. I like it. But it still would look a million times better with the enclosure, or even with the lattice antenna.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_be2f81ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/)
New York City on May 15, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr

:eek2:
Oh. My. God.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_be2f81ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/)
New York City on May 15, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr

Empire State building has a nice spire. It deserves that name.

No 1 wtc is 1297 3 feet under 1300 feet.

You forgot to add the 6 feet for the final height of 1374 feet, not 1368 feet as it used to be :cheers:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_be2f81ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/)
New York City on May 15, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr

Wow...can I have this in 1200x800 please :) ...for my wallpaper :)

WOW... Great shot!

Empire State's still the best building in New York now although it was completed in 1931. :)

Empire State's still the best building in New York now. :)

yup, these port authority morons took out all the best qualities from one world trade center :bash:

Excuse me, now and tomorrow are different.

Probably would have been a better idea to not start the thread with provocative statements, but hopefully this thread can stay on topic.

Can someone repost the most recent pictures? I'm not very skilled at posting images.http://www.unblockisp.info/ht1.jpghttp://www.unblockisp.info/jh88.jpghttp://www.unblockisp.info/test.jpghttp://www.unblockisp.info/huang10

Wow, that photo is absolutely stunning!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_be2f81ec81_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/)
New York City on May 15, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yukonblizzard/7210421738/) by mudpig (http://www.flickr.com/people/yukonblizzard/), on Flickr
Bigger one!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7210421738_4c3dc143e6_k.jpg

Thanks for beautiful photos. The city view's impressive.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5115/7207381874_2d20474f3f_b.jpg
cocktail tea
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7241/7195133070_8611d1f279_o.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7094/7201220290_95d4701c52_b.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4103/5066510183_e52de49742_b.jpg
andrew c mace
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7104/7178820230_836a51064d_h.jpg
MyNameIsClare
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7239/7184021826_41a80bb123_h.jpg
eLVé

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/2237_0076_120503_rgb.jpg

Ugly, uglier, this. :puke:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7074/7162633130_0c2163512c_h.jpg
xnir (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xnir/7162633130/sizes/h/in/photostream/)

WE WON OVER CANADA! I'm so happy! I'll gonna search for some pics, while I'm in this awesome mood :dance:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8011/7208880512_4e6dcb7eab_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmarella/7208880512/)
One World Trade Center (aka Freedom Tower) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmarella/7208880512/) by pmarella (http://www.flickr.com/people/pmarella/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8005/7208935614_f8fdd81f79_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmarella/7208935614/)
Tug & Barge on the Hudson Rv. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmarella/7208935614/) by pmarella (http://www.flickr.com/people/pmarella/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7244/7209142260_98444e0d01_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pattahan/7209142260/)
Freedom tower! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pattahan/7209142260/) by pattahan (http://www.flickr.com/people/pattahan/), on Flickr

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5469/7213891166_7cc629cdc7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wilsonrivera/7213891166/)
Exchange place pier (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wilsonrivera/7213891166/) by Wilson Rivera (http://www.flickr.com/people/wilsonrivera/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8022/7214009248_868e094051_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aaastudio/7214009248/)
Freedom Tower (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aaastudio/7214009248/) by AAA Studio (http://www.flickr.com/people/aaastudio/), on Flickr

And the PA cam at the end :cheer:

http://oxblue.com/archive/487d07189e5fd2b7edce94fc0bcf4b68/800x600.jpg

Love the pictures!

Beautiful building! Full steam ahead.. I mean UP!

Ty jsi zo Slovenska Kanto?? Já jsem z Čech (Plzeň). Samozřejmě gratuluju k vítězství nad Kanadou, snad se potkáme v semifinále:) Doufám ještě, že udělají u FT ještě neco s tou "spire". Jsem z toho špatnej, tohle je hnus...

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE ALWAYS ABUSE NYC RELATED THREADS AND MAKE THEM OFF TOPIC? STAY ON TOPIC AND LEAVE US THIS THREADS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID TOWERS AND USE THE PM MESSAGES FUNCTION FOR PERSONAL SHIT ! ! !

I AM SICK OF THE ONGOING OFF TOPIC BULLSHIT SO STAY ON TOPIC ! ! !

I BEG THE MODS TO FINALLY MAKE REAL ACTION TO SOLVE THE ONGOING ISSUE ! ! !

err what you are on about now? It was two day ago ;)

ugh it's so gross.

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/2237_0076_120503_rgb.jpg


http://observer.com/2012/05/16/wtc/

that looks like it is made out of LEGO...

trully pathetic...

^^ Read the post above my last one, and you´ll know what i mean.

Didn't think you know Czech. I don't ;)

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE ALWAYS ABUSE NYC RELATED THREADS AND MAKE THEM OFF TOPIC? STAY ON TOPIC AND LEAVE US THIS THREADS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID TOWERS AND USE THE PM MESSAGES FUNCTION FOR PERSONAL SHIT ! ! !

I AM SICK OF THE ONGOING OFF TOPIC BULLSHIT SO STAY ON TOPIC ! ! !

I BEG THE MODS TO FINALLY MAKE REAL ACTION TO SOLVE THE ONGOING ISSUE ! ! !

That's cool now go away..if it bothers you then just leave. Pick a better translator next time too

^^ NO! We have FORUM RULES so STICK to them. This is a thread to discuss the construction of WTC1, not a thread to discuss height measurement methods, CTBUH, sports, possibility of future twins, terrorists, religion and what not. I am sick of it, and Erbse said clearly that you all should stick to the rules and hold this and other threads on topic and yet you all manage to derail it into off topic, again, again and again.

Well nobody is discussing height measuring here for two days. People are just commenting the spire which unfortunately (because its getting a bit repetitive) is perfectly on topic.

I am sick of people complaining about people complaining (lol) about the Spire.

The Spire is part of the building, part of the building's construction, part of the buildings aesthetics.

IT IS PERFECTLY FINE FOR PEOPLE TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT THE SPIRE HERE.

The only offtopics posts around here are the ones complianing about the complaints (lol again) and this very post complaining about the people who complain about the people who complain about the Spire. (Ultra Mega LOL).

There are going to be complaints about the Spire and rightly so, it is the only chance we have of something changing about it, so GET OVER IT.

...keep going...

^^ You are probably in the wrong thread! :)

I am sick of people complaining about people complaining (lol) about the Spire.

The Spire is part of the building, part of the building's construction, part of the buildings aesthetics.

IT IS PERFECTLY FINE FOR PEOPLE TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT THE SPIRE HERE.

The only offtopics posts around here are the ones complianing about the complaints (lol again) and this very post complaining about the people who complain about the people who complain about the Spire. (Ultra Mega LOL).

There are going to be complaints about the Spire and rightly so, it is the only chance we have of something changing about it, so GET OVER IT.

Did i say ANYTHING about the spire in my post ? NO!

And there is a reason this thread got closed several times, because of said off topic bullshit. And on the last page, this thread derailed into sport posts and one of them even not in english.

We have rules here, so stick to them.

Stop dreaming about the possibilty, that we can change Durst mind to build a more sophisticated spire. As if he reads this thread and thinks "Wow them are right, i have to change the spire again". Come on.

Did i say ANYTHING about the spire in my post ? NO!

And there is a reason this thread got closed svereal times, because of said off topic bullshit. And on the last page, this thread derailed into sport posts and one of them even not in english.

We have rules here, so stick to them.

Stop dreaming about the possibilty, that we can change Durst mind to build a more sophisticated spire. As if he reads this thread and thinks "Wow them are right, i have to change the spire again". Come on.

Did I say anything about you? Or your post?:ohno:

And no, ofc I dont expect Durst to read the forum and change his plans. What I do expect is more people complaining the issue being noted, reaching the media and eventually start making some impact. "Spread the news" is the point. If we, a community of skyscraper fanatics shut up about the issue, who is going to spread the word exactly?

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE ALWAYS ABUSE NYC RELATED THREADS AND MAKE THEM OFF TOPIC? STAY ON TOPIC AND LEAVE US THIS THREADS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID TOWERS AND USE THE PM MESSAGES FUNCTION FOR PERSONAL SHIT ! ! !

I AM SICK OF THE ONGOING OFF TOPIC BULLSHIT SO STAY ON TOPIC ! ! !

I BEG THE MODS TO FINALLY MAKE REAL ACTION TO SOLVE THE ONGOING ISSUE ! ! !

haha:) I also talked about spire. It wasn´t only about off topic:) I´m from Czech, Kanto is from Slovakia, it´s almost same. 1 off topic sentense isn´t end of the world:) I think, you are angry, because there is a chance, that they build an anthena on FT. Me too:), I´m sorry:cheers:

I think i might go down and take a look at 1 wtc once the cocoon is up.

Ah the new spire aint so bad! It's got a nice Ostankino vibe to it! ;)

(I actually like the Ostankino!)

^^ You are probably in the wrong thread! :)

Lol I was wondering where did my post gone :lol: How did that happen :nuts: ?

Oh anyways you know now what I have had to tell you ;)

A couple of pages ago there's a photo of new steel at the top. It appears as though those angled beams are now very close to connecting which would make the top a perfect square. Does anyone know if the next jump to a new floor will finally connect them? Thanks!

^^ I think it might :cheers:

Good Article on this Building

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/17/the-post-american-skyscraper/

The Post-American Skyscraper

In the days and weeks after September 11 hardly a day would go by without another homemade design for the World Trade Center showing up in my inbox. Some were crude, some were obscene, some were impossible to construct and some were genuinely visionary. Even those most familiar with the crusted workings of New York state and city government, not to mention the bi-state beast of the Port Authority, could hardly have imagined that eleven years later one far smaller tower would still be under construction.

One World Trade Center, formerly the Freedom Tower before that name was deemed too showy and patriotic, is a faintly shiny presence on the skyline, glass slowly sliding over stories of naked steel, overshadowed by Frank Gehry’s strikingly surreal Beekman Tower with its rippling lines. If you didn’t know what you were looking at, you would hardly notice it was there.

Now One World Trade Center will lose a radome enclosure due to budget cuts, which means very little except that the building’s ridiculous 400 foot spire risks being classified as an antenna and OWTC will no longer be recognized as the tallest building in the country. The death of the radome is one of the many redesigns to the building that have made it the forgettable structure that it is today. And the difference in those 400 feet is the difference between a 1,368 foot skyscraper and a 1,776 foot skyscraper.

Having lost the Freedom Tower designation, losing the symbolic 1,776 height seems almost an afterthought. The 1,776 number was an artifact of Daniel Libeskind, the original architect, and his vision for the site. That vision was mostly discarded, along with its “sky gardens” and windmills. The “1,776″ height is about all that remains of the German-Jewish architect’s proposal. And regardless of whether we count the antenna as a spire or not, it will not be the tallest building in the world. Those can be found in the places that funded the terrorists, Saudi Arabia and Dubai, which have used slave labor to build glass and steel pyramids to the glory of their own pharaohs.

The Empire State Building, the Grande Dame of New York skyscrapers, has a roof height of around a 100 feet or 30 meters lower. The difference between a skyscraper built during the Great Depression and one built during the 21st Century Depression is around 100 feet and about a century of aesthetics. Where the spire of the Empire State Building is an organic extension of it, the one atop OWTC is awkwardly placed, it’s just there making time and filling up the space.

In its defense, One World Trade Center is graceful enough compared to the Sears Tower or the Dubai Burj, which pile blocks and needles together in a cluster of alien geometry. It will be better looking than the New York Times Building and the Bank of America Tower, which both have that made- by-IKEA look. It will also be completely unremarkable and that is a feature, not a bug.

Its blandness of name and design convey that it is an apolitical structure. Its only ambition is to embody a post-American bigness made possible by a large antenna. Its unexceptional nature is an antidote to the American exceptionalism sparked after the September 11 massacre. Much like welcoming in a mosque near Ground Zero or incorporating Islamic elements into the Flight 93 Memorial, it says that there is nothing especially American here.

One World Trade Center will need to fill all that office space, and many international renters may do business in America, but they don’t like us very much. And ever since September 11, American political and business leaders have tried to be as inoffensive as possible, to avoid stepping on anyone’s toes with our jingoism and our flags so that next time we don’t get bombed.

The former Freedom Tower will be a properly post-American building. It will be big, but not too big. It will be smaller than the towers put up by our enemies so that they will have no reason to feel jealous. It will not stand for anything in particular. It will just be office space, like the city and the country, a place that people can come to do business without making any commitment to it.

“A skyscraper rises above its predecessors, restoring the spiritual peak of the city, creating an icon that speaks to our vitality in the face of danger and our optimism in the aftermath of tragedy,” Libeskind had said of his design. One World Trade Center cannot be accused of doing any of that. There is no spiritual peak, not even the one at the top of its no-longer-1,776-foot height.

The rapid construction of the Empire State Building in a year’s time during the Great Depression made a statement about the ability of a nation to do great things even in its darkest hour. The slow pace, the perpetual redesigns and the bland final product of One World Trade Center make the opposite statement. A reminder that inept and timid leadership can rob a nation of its exceptionalism.

In 1910 the eleven tallest buildings in the world were in New York City. Now the city doesn’t even make it into the top eleven and barely makes it into the top twenty. And the majority of today’s top eleven buildings went up after the World Trade Center was destroyed. When One World Trade Center is completed, and, if its antenna is counted as part of its height, it will qualify as the third-tallest building in the world, until the latest monstrosities in Shanghai and Dubai topple it off that list.

A building is not a nation, but there are certain parallels to the diminution of national ambition, and there are undeniable parallels between the stumbling makeshift design process of One World Trade Center and the fumbling War on Terror. A great work can be done in a short time if you know what it is you want to accomplish. The blueprints for the Empire State Building were drawn up in two weeks and the structure was completed in a year. One World Trade Center has suffered from revisions and redesigns because it never had a clear purpose. Most people agreed that something had to go up, but they no longer knew why except that it was empty space and empty space has to be filled.

It’s not a tower of freedom, because freedom implies too much individual agency. It has opportunities for those who pursue them hard enough. It does not however have a future. Only the eternal present of buildings that, for all their futurism, are hardly any taller than they were a hundred years ago.

Futures arise from national destinies. A nation unmoored from its past has nowhere to go. It cannot make anything new, because there are no new things. Its horizons are limited to its geometry, it experiments with shapes and colors, it digs through the trash of earlier eras for things it can use, reviving trends, dumpster diving through history while feeling that other eras were more exciting and more interesting than this.

The Post-American America is a place unsure of its identity, whose new conceptions of American values all too often serve only to negate the old, creating an empty space in which nothing is forbidden and everyone is welcome, but that has no structure, only emptiness.

^^ NO! We have FORUM RULES so STICK to them. This is a thread to discuss the construction of WTC1, not a thread to discuss height measurement methods, CTBUH, sports, possibility of future twins, terrorists, religion and what not. I am sick of it, and Erbse said clearly that you all should stick to the rules and hold this and other threads on topic and yet you all manage to derail it into off topic, again, again and again.

Who's "we"? You're not even a moderator. You sound insane

^^ He is in a state of permanent, nonstop rage. One has to get used to him :cheers:

^^ The fact that i am not a moderator, doesn´t mean, i´m not allowed to express my opinion about the ongoing BS. And mind your language, i don´t sound insane, i just stat facts.

And if you would open your eyes, you would see, that i am not the only one who is pissed ybout people abusing this thread for their off topic bullshit, whining and ideologies of who knows what.

Yea we realized that the past 50 pages

^^ So, why can´t we finally get over some nonsense topics, get over ourselves and finally make this thread to a place to discuss WTC1´s construction and not the trillion other topics?

^^ It's kinda ironical that you're fueling the very thing you have stated you hated .... off topic discussion :hahano:

But now back on topic, that article was made very well. I love this building but my knees shake if I think of how much more we could be getting, of how much more we should be getting. If only the PA had sold the WTC in 2001 to Donald Trump. He would have done what had to be done for the good of the entire western world. Larry on the other hand cares only for office space and money :ohno:

^^ The fact that i am not a moderator, doesn´t mean, i´m not allowed to express my opinion about the ongoing BS. And mind your language, i don´t sound insane, i just stat facts.

And if you would open your eyes, you would see, that i am not the only one who is pissed ybout people abusing this thread for their off topic bullshit, whining and ideologies of who knows what.

Mind your language??????

You sir, are the one cursing!

Now, to make you happy. OMG, its SOOOO tall. There ya go, on topic!

Anyone know what is this?

http://i.imgur.com/E6fbA.jpg

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE ALWAYS ABUSE NYC RELATED THREADS AND MAKE THEM OFF TOPIC? STAY ON TOPIC AND LEAVE US THIS THREADS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID TOWERS AND USE THE PM MESSAGES FUNCTION FOR PERSONAL SHIT ! ! !

I AM SICK OF THE ONGOING OFF TOPIC BULLSHIT SO STAY ON TOPIC ! ! !

I BEG THE MODS TO FINALLY MAKE REAL ACTION TO SOLVE THE ONGOING ISSUE ! ! !


YPIsTKpAoE4

Just so funny how people get so upset if someone "goes off topic". Who f'ing cares. It's a talk forum. Its not a murder trial.

^^ At least we'll get to 1776 pages by this rate. lol.. Who cares if it's off topic, technically, the spire is part of the construction, but then again the spire is now an antenna which brings us back to square one (off topic).. Ooo i see.........

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE ALWAYS ABUSE NYC RELATED THREADS AND MAKE THEM OFF TOPIC? STAY ON TOPIC AND LEAVE US THIS THREADS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID TOWERS AND USE THE PM MESSAGES FUNCTION FOR PERSONAL SHIT ! ! !

I AM SICK OF THE ONGOING OFF TOPIC BULLSHIT SO STAY ON TOPIC ! ! !

I BEG THE MODS TO FINALLY MAKE REAL ACTION TO SOLVE THE ONGOING ISSUE ! ! !

ROAR!!!! CAPSSS LOCKKK!!!!!


http://blog.thestarrconspiracy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/CAPS_lock.png

Anyone know what is this?


Interesting observation! Maybe for the installation of the base cladding?!

Interesting observation! Maybe for the installation of the base cladding?!

There are RUMORS they installed a big portion of the base cladding already, but it isn´t visible because of the black netting, laying over it.

Anyone know what is this?

My future front porch. I'll have everyone over for a BBQ, as long as people stop complaining about the damn spire/antenna. ;-)

My future front porch. I'll have everyone over for a BBQ, as long as people stop complaining about the damn spire/antenna. ;-)

The antenna looks like it would be great for bbq... like a skewer.. or maybe even for rotisserie, brazillian bbq or even a vertical-spit for some delicious a-pastor or even doner kabobs... I'll take either! I dig al-pastor and also spit roasted goat.

Maybe Durst or the Port Authority were subconsciously thinking of Chicken & Lamb on rice and they were hungry! Hehehe, 53&6th halal cart! :banana:

From today & full update!

http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/2012/05/construction-update-one-world-trade_17.html

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HlIpK5UIUJo/T7Vc8CXd96I/AAAAAAAABPI/_W7QrUXStNs/s640/2012-05-17+15.53.40.jpg

The antenna looks like it would be great for bbq... like a skewer.. or maybe even for rotisserie, brazillian bbq or even a vertical-spit for some delicious a-pastor or even doner kabobs... I'll take either! I dig al-pastor and also spit roasted goat.

Maybe Durst or the Port Authority were subconsciously thinking of Chicken & Lamb on rice and they were hungry! Hehehe, 53&6th halal cart! :banana:

Dude, what the fuck. A little situational awareness please. Stop this shit, everybody. It has honestly never been this bad.

This really is pretty sad, I'm mortified to think that this will only be the third tallest even though the towers in Chicago were built long ago, and meanwhile they had all the time to plan this one. I'm mortified to think that 432 Park Avenue will have the title

I've said, metaphorically that, one thing the spire would be good for, aside from its obvious purpose, would be to skewer bin laden with it. Now that, the son-of-a-bitch is dead, they should have used his dead body as an example, that if anybody tries anything funny, such as another attack, they will be skewered alive.

Okay, fuck this tower. I'll rather miss the whole construction if it means sifting through heaps of your guys crap to get to something meaningful. Unsubscribed from now. Have fun wasting your worthless time on this planet, in this thread!

Okay, fuck this tower. I'll rather miss the whole construction if it means sifting through heaps of your guys crap to get to something meaningful. Unsubscribed from now. Have fun wasting your worthless time on this planet, in this thread!

Is the cursing necessary?

No, it isn't. It doesn't make you sound grown up or intelligent. Thank you.

Like I said before, go ahead and leave because chances are, you will be back here commenting here within the hour. You haven't been in the forum before, so I idk why you're acting like you've been facing a ton of bs

Skyline, I've been here longer than you have. Ghosting in the international forums, but a regular contributor to my local one. I wasn't aiming for intelligent, nor grown up. I was aiming for people like you guys realizing what complete waste of oxygen they are. And that they should go find a job or a hobby. So that we can follow the construction of this beautiful tower. I mean it. If you are so concerned about the way people see America, New York, Americans,... you are not really doing a great job. So please, I - along with the other ghosters - BEG of you to stop this waste of everybody's time. Thank you.

This really is pretty sad, I'm mortified to think that this will only be the third tallest even though the towers in Chicago were built long ago, and meanwhile they had all the time to plan this one. I'm mortified to think that 432 Park Avenue will have the title

It won't even be the 3rd tallest, it will be the 4th. But it's going to miss being the WTB by only 1,000 feet.

OK, now wait a minute. I have been cheering on the progress of this tower, and am glad it is almost topped out. I myself was not happy about the changes, initially about the spire, just for cost cutting, but I have also said, time and again that, the spire, in terms of the height of the building does not count. The building will be topped out when it reaches rooftop level. Not when the spire is built. That whole symbol of 1776 feet, is stupid. The spire will not be accesible to public, unlike the one on the Empire State Building. All it's for is TV transmission. I also thought the name 'Freedom Tower' was rather cheesy and silly. Yes there are too many complaints about the spire, but until. The best result is that the rooftop is the same height as the originals, and there are so many complaints about other countries building taller towers. That has nothing to do with 9/11. The spire doesn't count. I wish all these media morons would stop using the top of the spire as a topping out point instead of the rooftop. It is on the brink of reaching rooftop level, and that's when top-out will occur. Not when the spire is finished!

^^

Exactly. The topping out is when the steel reaches roof level, plain and simple. The antenna is just window dressing. Not part of the main structure at all.

Guys, does NO ONE of you think outside of the box?

IF they build the redesigned spire, they can still replace it some years later. The whole complex wont stay as it is forever and will be renovated after a couple of years.

Just some senseful thoughts.