Can someone tell me how high the spire is in inches, lol?

You guys need to seriously lighten up, ALOT.

What's next? Chinese users wanting everyone to speak Chinese in threads of towers in China?

:lol: :rofl: :lol:

Now I am sure you pissed Zen off, well he already was but now he'll probably not come back.

But we Europeans and most other people in the world except US could also complain about Americans using month/day/year notation and not day/month/year. For example in the Dubai towers threads it's full of the American notation while in the Middle-East they all use the day/month/year notation.
But I'm not acting like a child and for me it's okay if they use there own so Zen please don't go mad for people using metric system

We don't have anything against measurments in feets or inches..At least I don't..All I was sayin' is that most of the world is in metric..People are used to measure things with meters..If I say 100 meters they know how high this is..That's why I said it would be way easier to use BOTH...It's a compromise..We will understand feets and inches more at the end and americans will understand meters and centimeters..I don't see anything bad in this..

But someone is obviously too proud to collaborate with the rest of the world..

January 23rd, DVDaniels

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5205/5382928493_f931f7ec49_b.jpg

This tower is not metric, suffer.

Or never hear my input again.

FYI, I have a full set of prints.

The clowns convert to imperial or I leave. Simple.

I'm sick of foreigner silliness imposing there way on this tower, it is imperial or nothing.

They can convert to metric, they are just lazy.

You're the reason the rest of the world stereotypes your country. You just set yourself back another few notches. Chill out, or get out. You're acting like a child.

January 22nd, nycteacherbrian

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5130/5383209946_57552bab0b_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5049/5383208534_23db5b2ef6_b.jpg

is absolutely beautiful :drool:

What's next? Chinese users wanting everyone to speak Chinese in threads of towers in China?
so we shall speak german then lol

but yeah a page of metric discussion and now we shall go back to original topic x). the diagram was cool though, now the top of the construction is already half of the final roof height. :) now i can start imagine how it will look when it's finished :)

Slightly off topic but I don't complain about any of the systems except the ones i find really difficult to understand like travelling distances and speeds such as I understand what mph is but not what kmh is, and can't understand what a meter is to a yard etc.

End of discussion, back to thread.

Dude..You're gonna get heart attack..We need you here..
It is not a big deal to put feet numbers in calculator and get meter numbers..
It's just..Way easier if we use both since this is an international forum, and the whole world is metric..But, true, the tower is in the US which is not metric..Let's make some compromis..
:cheers:

While he might be over the top, his point is sound - most people who would have information on the project are American, and it's much easier for them to convey that information in units they are familiar with, i.e. U.S. Customary. It would be like asking someone from Europe to quote prices in U.S. Dollars instead of Euros, simply because it's the reserve currency of the world.

While he might be over the top, his point is sound - most people who would have information on the project are American, and it's much easier for them to convey that information in units they are familiar with, i.e. U.S. Customary. It would be like asking someone from Europe to quote prices in U.S. Dollars instead of Euros, simply because it's the reserve currency of the world.

I know..I'm fine with that..I didn't ask to talk in metric..We could talk like this: feets (meters) like we used to talk till now..It's easier to follow to the rest of the world..

OK, I have had it with you metric people.
THIS TOWER IS NOT METRIC!!!!!!!!!

This Tower is NOT in the EU or anywhere other then the US

THIS TOWER IS NOT METRIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SUFFER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Enjoy the British measurement system lol.

Ask your scientists and engineers which is better.

What is the gravitational potential energy at the top of WTC1?

Let's see, convert the feet to metres...

^^ The discussion is over, buddy.
Excellent news, northwest corner is finally being cladded
BStyles (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=25592), WiredNewYork

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1228.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1229.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1230.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1240.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1242.jpg

Glad to see they don't have to wait for the climbing crane to be removed before adding the NW side of the glass.

Everyone should use the metric system. That will make everything much easier. I work with measurements all the time. And I deal with people from all over the world. But the US seems to be to proud to implement the metric system and I always have to convert so they can understand. Seriously, there is nothing wrong if you try to adapt a little to the rest of the world. Just like there is nothing wrong if you admit that America is not a country but a continent. Really, I´m not going stop liking the US or have less respect for this great country just for being a little more humble.
BTW I love the pics!!!!

I know is off topic but I had to say it.

January 23th by terryballard
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryballard/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5219/5384626659_d8bb8b8cff_b.jpg

Same date, different author, Jason Gegere (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gegere/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5220/5385370211_e102176936_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5385969452_670cf57862_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5212/5385373281_f2ea2d7e9c_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5220/5385370211_e102176936_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5212/5385374141_0274e71a3d_b.jpg

January 20, ryanfloyd (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanfloyd/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5218/5385926804_da70819d5b_b.jpg

OK, I have had it with you metric people.
THIS TOWER IS NOT METRIC!!!!!!!!!

This Tower is NOT in the EU or anywhere other then the US

THIS TOWER IS NOT METRIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SUFFER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I laughed until I cried :rofl:

sorry I can't be more on topic, this guy is just too much for me :lol:

...Just like there is nothing wrong if you admit that America is not a country but a continent.

Well, in fact, North America is a continent; South America is a continent; America is a reference to the United States and its citizens.

If we're being particular about it...

Great updates Otie. Thanks a ton.

a page and a half of people overreacting to an overreaction? let's take a step back here, folks

Photos taken by Joe Woolhead (http://www.joewoolhead.com) sometime during January

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/9305/wtc2.jpg


Very very nice pictures. This one in particular is lovely

BTW what is the current height and floor?

Well, in fact, North America is a continent; South America is a continent; America is a reference to the United States and its citizens.

If we're being particular about it...

You mean North America is a continent but just in a cultural way I dont see any sea in between, North America, Central America and South America,

But If you dont want to mix up with the South you could say North America and Latin America.

BTW what is the current height and floor?

56th floor, 666ft 8in.

a page and a half of people overreacting to an overreaction? let's take a step back here, folks

No kidding.

:lol: :rofl: :lol:

Now I am sure you pissed Zen off, well he already was but now he'll probably not come back.

But we Europeans and most other people in the world except US could also complain about Americans using month/day/year notation and not day/month/year. For example in the Dubai towers threads it's full of the American notation while in the Middle-East they all use the day/month/year notation.
But I'm not acting like a child and for me it's okay if they use there own so Zen please don't go mad for people using metric system

...although I don't post here very often, I lurk everyday, and was also very surprised by Zen's reaction. I looked forward to his insights. I also recognize that most of the rest of the world is metric, and didn't mind seeing the metric measurements, as it allows me to better compare WTC1 with buildings worldwide.

So about 220m. Is it now taller than the WFC's?

You mean North America is a continent but just in a cultural way I dont see any sea in between, North America, Central America and South America,

But If you dont want to mix up with the South you could say North America and Latin America.

No, actually Latin America is the cultural reference. North America is a geographic reference.

Unlike islands, continents don't need to be completely separated by water. An example would be Asia and Europe.

You mean North America is a continent but just in a cultural way I dont see any sea in between, North America, Central America and South America,

But If you dont want to mix up with the South you could say North America and Latin America.

Central America is apart of North America. And there's water between the two contientent. Just like there's water between Manhattan and Long Island.

220 meters that almost taller then 3 WFC.

220 meters :applause: Go New York...beautiful vibrant New York...don't let anyone or anything slow you down :)

It absolutely doesn't looks like it has 220m. It's max 150m for me.
This prooves New York to be biiig... ;)

^^ who says it's already 220m tall? as spectre, dino and others posted 1WTC's current height is 666ft = 203m.

^^ who says it's already 220m tall? as spectre, dino and others posted 1WTC's current height is 666ft = 203m.

Yup..Closest to the 220m will be on the 60th floor, which is 219,456 m (720' 00'')

Hi All, Can anyone tell me what the construction height of the build will be in mid May, when I'll be in New york - Feet/ inches/ Metres whichever you guys prefer.

Ta in advance.

Everyone should use the metric system. That will make everything much easier. I work with measurements all the time. And I deal with people from all over the world. But the US seems to be to proud to implement the metric system and I always have to convert so they can understand. Seriously, there is nothing wrong if you try to adapt a little to the rest of the world.

I live in the states and work on international projects quite often. We always either do the jobs in metric or in dual units, for the ease of those building it overseas. As for domestic projects, there is absolutely no need to cover to metric. Is it a better set of units? Yes, but it will never happen and I would be irritated if it did. No one wants to have to figure out how many liters of gas their car can take or about how far 61 meters is or how many kilos their dog weight when feet and pounds are already second nature to them.

cant find acurate data this is from this week

how many floors have been constructed since this date?

*The following information was last updated on January 21, 2011.

Facade installation began mid-November; now above floor 25
Tower steel is now above floor 55
Concrete is now being installed above floor 47

I live in the states and work on international projects quite often. We always either do the jobs in metric or in dual units, for the ease of those building it overseas. As for domestic projects, there is absolutely no need to cover to metric. Is it a better set of units? Yes, but it will never happen and I would be irritated if it did. No one wants to have to figure out how many liters of gas their car can take or about how far 61 meters is or how many kilos their dog weight when feet and pounds are already second nature to them.

Imperial measurement was second nature to me as well... Then Canada converted to metric in the late 70's and all the people then hated it... I hated it... Now I don't even give it another thought... I know how much 250 milliliters is, how far 10 kilometers is and so on. I can figure in both systems and intrinsically understand what someone means if they say either measurement, miles or kilometers.

Furthermore, anyone under 30 years old in Canada wouldn't even know how far a mile is. If the States converted, the same thing would happen. You just adjust and move on.

And as psycho-Zensteelfreak would say... "You just deal!"

I like how people who never post here. Come and write, just to bitch about what Zen said. The topic is dead. So you guys can go back to not posting in here.

snowing again in new york :ohno:

Hi All, Can anyone tell me what the construction height of the build will be in mid May, when I'll be in New york - Feet/ inches/ Metres whichever you guys prefer.

Ta in advance.

I'd say around the 72nd floor (880 feet).

Imperial measurement was second nature to me as well... Then Canada converted to metric in the late 70's and all the people then hated it... I hated it... Now I don't even give it another thought... I know how much 250 milliliters is, how far 10 kilometers is and so on. I can figure in both systems and intrinsically understand what someone means if they say either measurement, miles or kilometers.

Furthermore, anyone under 30 years old in Canada wouldn't even know how far a mile is. If the States converted, the same thing would happen. You just adjust and move on.

And as psycho-Zensteelfreak would say... "You just deal!"



If we can't agree on metric or imperial, let's just start measuring the tower by floors.

No, actually Latin America is the cultural reference. North America is a geographic reference.

Unlike islands, continents don't need to be completely separated by water. An example would be Asia and Europe.

Exactly

Central America is apart of North America. And there's water between the two contientent. Just like there's water between Manhattan and Long Island.



No, you can't count the Panama otherwise even Africa wouldn't be connected to Asia or the peloponnese to the rest of Greece

No one wants to have to figure out how many liters of gas their car can take or about how far 61 meters is or how many kilos their dog weight when feet and pounds are already second nature to them.

In 5 yaers you wouldn't even notice it anymore: in Europe everybody complained about the Euro at the beginning because they were not used to it and has to convert to the previous coin, but now nobody thinks about it anymore

Come on people..Let's stop this shit..Seriously..

^^ +1 Everyone shut up about the metric/imperial thing and let's go back to the tower.

I like how people who never post here. Come and write, just to bitch about what Zen said. The topic is dead. So you guys can go back to not posting in here.

Ya know what really cracks me up, people arguing with what I post AFTER I post a few pics of the prints.

WOW, I must have been really fed up with the rest of the world to post that !:)

Hey, this tower is all feet and inches, so the US of A is still not metric, cope. (I really wish we would convert, the metric system is child's play.)

This tower would make no sense if it were metric.

http://www.worldwidemetric.com/measurements.html

And there are a hundred others on line, but I like this one.

Back on topic, did I see a section of corner curtain wall on the northwest corner ! (It's called curtain wall, not cladding.)

I DID !!!!!!!!!!

Photo by BStyles over at Wired New York.
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1228.jpg

Link to the pic if it does not display.
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1228.jpg

Do we have a clearer idea of what the glass on the base will look like? I can only find some 5 year old articles that describe "prism-like" rainbow reflecting bomb proof glass. I've been curious about this for awhile.

Exactly



No, you can't count the Panama otherwise even Africa wouldn't be connected to Asia or the peloponnese to the rest of Greece



In 5 yaers you wouldn't even notice it anymore: in Europe everybody complained about the Euro at the beginning because they were not used to it and has to convert to the previous coin, but now nobody thinks about it anymore

It isn't a matter of whether or not people would get used to it. The metric system has serious disadvantages. I have nothing against most of the measurements, but meters are no good. They just aren't precise. The Gran Torre Costanera Center is 300m. So is the Dubai Pearl. But the Dubai Pearl is taller by one foot. Those who are interested in preciseness care about that. But I don't want to cause an arguement. Is it really that hard to do both measurements? I think for now that is really the only option that will work for everyone.

Do we have a clearer idea of what the glass on the base will look like? I can only find some 5 year old articles that describe "prism-like" rainbow reflecting bomb proof glass. I've been curious about this for awhile.

Take a look in this (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1283657&page=2) thread...Only 3 pages of it..Page 2 is what you're lookin' for..
:cheers:

Do we have a clearer idea of what the glass on the base will look like? I can only find some 5 year old articles that describe "prism-like" rainbow reflecting bomb proof glass. I've been curious about this for awhile.

Here's an article about it. STR's renders are great, but I don't think they show just how transparent the real thing will be.

http://www.azom.com/news.asp?newsID=25462

"...incorporate more than 2,000 pieces of prismatic glass and welded aluminum screens."

"Starphire ultra-clear glass uses a proprietary low-iron formulation that makes it the industry’s clearest, most transparent architectural glass."


The lobby glass of 1 Bryant Park also uses PPG's Starphire glass. Here is a picture from their website. If you visit the website you can see a much larger version.

http://projectgallery.ppg.com/projectimages/360/one_bryant_park_garden_8-web_medium.jpg

***sorry for the off topic***
Many years later, we in Canada still don't like the metric system.
7.5L/100km ? is this good or bad? we still can't figure it out!
30 miles/gallon, good, 40 better. (Canadian or American gallons)
Ask any teenager how big is a decimeter, they still have no clue.
Even though they are taught the metric system only,
they still are more comfortable with the imperial system.
.....why.....
Because the units are based on things you can see.
inch = last bone in your thumb.
foot = a man's foot.
yard = length of an arm, or an average stride.
etc.
Accurate, no, but for everyday items, it works great.
Living so close to the States, we are bombarded with the
imperial system on TV, radio, and News.

Just like this site is English only, (which some people still don't follow this rule)
The Mods should make a decision, Imperial, metric, or both!
Maybe, If the building is in North America,
(which includes all of central America and the Caribbean)
than both should be used, in other locations, metric should be used.

1000ft = approx. 300m = supertall, that's all you really need to know!

(back to topic)
When this building passes WTC7, that's when more people will start
to really get excited about it. It will also look larger as more cladding is installed.

56th floor, 666ft 8in.



No kidding.

Is that's 20 299.68 cm + 20.32 cm= 20 320 cm= 203.2 m

Correct?

It isn't a matter of whether or not people would get used to it. The metric system has serious disadvantages. I have nothing against most of the measurements, but meters are no good. They just aren't precise. The Gran Torre Costanera Center is 300m. So is the Dubai Pearl. But the Dubai Pearl is taller by one foot. Those who are interested in preciseness care about that. But I don't want to cause an arguement. Is it really that hard to do both measurements? I think for now that is really the only option that will work for everyone.

Oh no we are doomed...

For us who have used the metric system all our lives, we definitely have an idea what a decimeter is. The metric system is accurate because it has a scientific definition. It is the standard. As for me I cannot comprehend the imperial system. It depends on how you see it. Somebody like me might prefer the metric system and others the imperial system. But one cannot question the accuracy of either especially the metric system.

It isn't a matter of whether or not people would get used to it. The metric system has serious disadvantages. I have nothing against most of the measurements, but meters are no good. They just aren't precise. The Gran Torre Costanera Center is 300m. So is the Dubai Pearl. But the Dubai Pearl is taller by one foot. Those who are interested in preciseness care about that. But I don't want to cause an arguement. Is it really that hard to do both measurements? I think for now that is really the only option that will work for everyone.

Ok, you clearly don't uderstand the metric system.
1ft=0.3048m = 3.048dm = 30.48cm
You can easely say that building is 300m 30 cm and 4.8 mm. Or just that building is 300.3048m.You can go as precise as you want in metres. It is a decimal system.

This tower is not metric, suffer.

Or never hear my input again.

FYI, I have a full set of prints.

The clowns convert to imperial or I leave. Simple.

I'm sick of foreigner silliness imposing there way on this tower, it is imperial or nothing.

They can convert to metric, they are just lazy.

Wow, what a wanker.


Anyway, does anyone else think it looks a little like the Lunatic Pandora from Final Fantasy 8 at this point?

Ya know what really cracks me up, people arguing with what I post AFTER I post a few pics of the prints.

WOW, I must have been really fed up with the rest of the world to post that !:)

Hey, this tower is all feet and inches, so the US of A is still not metric, cope. (I really wish we would convert, the metric system is child's play.)

This tower would make no sense if it were metric.

http://www.worldwidemetric.com/measurements.html

And there are a hundred others on line, but I like this one.

Back on topic, did I see a section of corner curtain wall on the northwest corner ! (It's called curtain wall, not cladding.)

I DID !!!!!!!!!!

Photo by BStyles over at Wired New York.
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1228.jpg

Link to the pic if it does not display.
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1228.jpg

Zen, don't let all the whiners get you down, we really appreciate the expertise you bring here.

OTOH 1776 meters would have been much better!:)

Look with all to respect to everyone here on this thread and forum, cant we just stop arguing and lets go back on being on subject TOWER 1 WORLD TRADE CENTER. if some of us want to measure with feet then ok but if others want to meausre in meters its ok as well, just as long as we stay on subject that all it counts, its not the language of number that counts, what counts is that we stay on subject and make this a nice place to post and share knowledge, pics, and renderings on One World Trade Center.

Everybody else can cry on these threads but Zen can't speak his mind. Now that I got a problem with.

I think he's spoke his mind, loud and clear. Rather childishly in my opinion.
If we don't all play the game to his rules he'll take his ball home. :ohno:

I'd say around the 72nd floor (880 feet).

Thanks for the info spectre000

I think he's spoke his mind, loud and clear. Rather childishly in my opinion.
If we don't all play the game to his rules he'll take his ball home. :ohno:

Sounds about right.

So your saying he should take the bullshit, now who's being childish.

You guys now talkin' about way different thing than we started..I don't even know what the hell are you tryin' to say now..This is ridiculous..No one even understand what Zen said and what I said and what others back there said..So stop this pointless crap and let's get on with the toppic..This is goin' nowhere..

Does SSC have mods?

great shots with the cranes working

Just post some new pictures and the off topic polluted stream of crap will stop, I hope.

@Scraperab2: Here is one to start with:

http://blogs.discovery.com/.a/6a00d8341bf67c53ef0147e1f3d6ea970b-800wi

from http://blogs.discovery.com/rebuilding-ground-zero/

Perfect! Awesome! Look at the size of those main beams!

My question may be stupid but will the One world trade center the highest structure in US ? This building is growing on me.

My question may be stupid but will the One world trade center the highest structure in US ? This building is growing on me.

Damn right..:cheers:

Much to the dismay of those who love(d) the Spire.

It my be the tallest building in US but i don´t think it´s the tallest structure.
I ´ve heard of radio signal towers in the nouthwest that are 600 meters high

Snow has completely covered the site yet again. The Earthcam is covered too!

http://www.earthcam.com/clients/groundzero/groundZero.swf

KVLY-TV mast 628.8m
a guyed mast in blanchard north dakota

It cleared :)

it will be the tallest building and i think it will overtake the CN tower to become the tallest free standing structure in north america and thus become the tallest building in the western world

My question may be stupid but will the One world trade center the highest structure in US ? This building is growing on me.



Not withstanding, the spire on the top, it will be the same height as the original twins, give or take a little, so the answer to that would be no. That title will, just like before, belong to the Sears/Willis, or whatever it is nowadays called, in Chicago.

it will be the tallest building and i think it will overtake the CN tower to become the tallest free standing structure in north america and thus become the tallest building in the western world

read what i did just post guyed masts count to for tallest free standinstucture in north america wtc 1 will be 541m

The CN tower is 1815 feet in height and One World Trade Center will be 1776 feet in height so it will not be taller than the CN tower.

read what i did just post guyed masts count to for tallest free standinstucture in north america wtc 1 will be 541m

How can be free standing if it's guyed?

Not withstanding, the spire on the top, it will be the same height as the original twins, give or take a little, so the answer to that would be no. That title will, just like before, belong to the Sears/Willis, or whatever it is nowadays called, in Chicago.

Yes, that's what I thought. Since it's the same height at the twins, it can't be the tallest, because the twins never held that title when they were around.

Yes, that's what I thought. Since it's the same height at the twins, it can't be the tallest, because the twins never held that title when they were around.

actually that is wrong. the WTC was the world's tallest skyscraper from 1972 to 1974, because the sears Tower / Willis Tower was built after the WTC haha

Not withstanding, the spire on the top, it will be the same height as the original twins, give or take a little, so the answer to that would be no. That title will, just like before, belong to the Sears/Willis, or whatever it is nowadays called, in Chicago.

WTC1 will be tall as the twins to the roof...Then it's the spire which will give it the height of 1776 ft (541m)..Sears/Willis have antennas which doesn't count as part of the tower's height..So, yes, 1WTC will be the tallest..

Does anybody have a diagram to show me visablly show me how tall the towers is now compare it to a fnished tower 1v2 . Thanks so much.

^^ just go to skyscraperpage.com and check diagram for all New-York Skyscrapers and see it next to the Empire state building.

EDIT: here: (http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=8)

DinoVabec wrote:
WTC1 will be tall as the twins to the roof...Then it's the spire which will give it the height of 1776 ft (541m)..Sears/Willis have antennas which doesn't count as part of the tower's height..So, yes, 1WTC will be the tallest..

That's correct but I can't say that I agree with the idea of counting the height of a spire which often also functions as an antenna because it appears to be part of the architectual design while excluding the additional height of the Sears/Willis building because it's just antennas. Those antennas also give the Sears/Willis a distinctive appearance and I've always thought that their height should be included.

Edit: I just happened to look at the diagram of The New York Times Tower and they're counting that little pipsqueak spire as part of the height even though it's hardly noticeable.

The CN tower is 1815 feet in height and One World Trade Center will be 1776 feet in height so it will not be taller than the CN tower.

i knewit was close but wasn't quite sure, thanks for the info.

read what i did just post guyed masts count to for tallest free standinstucture in north america wtc 1 will be 541m

Freestanding means the whole structure withstands the loads inflicted on it without any aids such as guys, so guyed masts will be tallest but they aren't freestanding

DinoVabec wrote:

That's correct but I can't say that I agree with the idea of counting the height of a spire which often also functions as an antenna because it appears to be part of the architectual design while excluding the additional height of the Sears/Willis building because it's just antennas. Those antennas also give the Sears/Willis a distinctive appearance and I've always thought that their height should be included.

Edit: I just happened to look at the diagram of The New York Times Tower and they're counting that little pipsqueak spire as part of the height even though it's hardly noticeable.

Yeah..I think Sears antennas should be included too..I think this spire/antenna thing is error in height measure when we talk about architecture..

DinoVabec wrote:
Yeah..I think Sears antennas should be included too..I think this spire/antenna thing is error in height measure when we talk about architecture..

Well the spire on One World Trade Center is certainly one of the most distinctive ones that I've seen on a building. I get the feeling that whoever is deciding whether or not a spire or antenna should be counted for the total height is really making a judgement call that's not based on much more than an opinion. I suppose that if the Sears/Willis building had added some architectural elements to it's antennas then they probably would have counted it but they don't seem to be consistent because they've counted spires that look like insignicant flag poles in some cases. In any case I was so glad when they redid the design of this building because it's going to be recognized as one of the most important symbols of NYC when it's completed and it's one of my favorite projects that's being constructed anywhere.

DinoVabec wrote:

Well the spire on One World Trade Center is certainly one of the most distinctive ones that I've seen on a building. I get the feeling that whoever is deciding whether or not a spire or antenna should be counted for the total height is really making a judgement call that's not based on much more than an opinion. I suppose that if the Sears/Willis building had added some architectural elements to it's antennas then they probably would have counted it but they don't seem to be consistent because they've counted spires that look like insignicant flag poles in some cases. In any case I was so glad when they redid the design of this building because it's going to be recognized as one of the most important symbols of NYC when it's completed and it's one of my favorite projects that's being constructed anywhere.

Yes, I have to agree here..Talkin' about flag poles..Take a look at New York Times building..This is insane..

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70O08U20110125

Selling One World Trade Center not an option

http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20110125&t=2&i=316732892&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=2011-01-25T131458Z_01_BTRE70O10T000_RTROPTP_0_USA-SEPT11

Jan 25, 2011
(Reporting by Joan Gralla and Dan Trotta


New York state and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey are both grappling with severe financial problems, but selling off One World Trade Center to bail them out would be a mistake, according to Port Authority executive director Christopher Ward.

Both Ward and Janno Lieber, who directs the World Trade Center's rebuilding for developer Larry Silverstein, agreed in interviews that the commercial market was firming.

The Port Authority's One World Trade Center now stands about 56 stories high. Four World Trade Center, one of three towers Silverstein is building, stands 13 stories high.

"People are starting to get excited about moving here as they are starting to see the buildings rise," Lieber said.

"The city's economy is leading the recovery," Lieber said, adding media and financial companies are drawn to the prospect of four modern "green" skyscrapers suitable for their high-tech needs, especially in a city where large office buildings often have to be retrofitted or lack open floor space.

Ward, who was just reappointed by Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo, said the Port Authority was now confident that it no longer needed New York state to take space in One World Trade Center, partly because the state is too cash-strapped to afford the high rents.

"There may be a long-term decision to bring in less of the state or none at all," Ward said, noting New York now probably pays less than $25 a square foot for its downtown offices.

"We think we can definitely attract a higher-paying commercial tenant," Ward said.

Both the federal government and media giant Conde Nast are still expected to lease space in the complex.

Ward noted that the real estate market was far from as strong as it was when Silverstein signed a long-term lease for the properties just two months before the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"To sell out at the bottom of the market, in the market that we are in right, now would potentially be the worst mistake that we could kind of make," Ward told Reuters.

"The biggest mistake we would make now would be to sell short now -- to think that we could make up either the state's financial difficulties or the Port Authority's," Ward said.

"This has to be an asset that returns value to the Port Authority for years to come," he added.

One World Trade Center, called the Freedom Tower until that name failed to entice tenants, will likely be 85 percent or so rented by 2016 or 2017, Ward said.

The building, whose 1,776-foot (541-meter) height will match the year of U.S. independence, is expected to be finished by late 2013, around four years behind schedule.

Silverstein's Four World Trade Center should open in 2013, followed by Three World Trade Center in late 2014 or early 2015.

When Two World Trade Center is built depends on whether it attracts tenants, but Lieber said: "We are confident there definitely is interest in the marketplace."

i think they don't count antennas as they arent part of the designedstructure per say they are only used as a way to putup broadcasting and recieving equipmen, one fine example is the ESB it has a spire but the antenna on top isnt included because it was added later and only for broadcasting equipment

What about today?

That article was a pretty god read :)

Im so excited :)

Sounds about right.

So your saying he should take the bullshit, now who's being childish.


No, I was saying that issuing silly ultimatums is not a good way to win an argument, and leaves him looking stupid.

Back on topic

It's a great tower whether you measure it in feet and inches, metres or gnats nudgers.

DinoVabec wrote:

Well the spire on One World Trade Center is certainly one of the most distinctive ones that I've seen on a building. I get the feeling that whoever is deciding whether or not a spire or antenna should be counted for the total height is really making a judgement call that's not based on much more than an opinion. I suppose that if the Sears/Willis building had added some architectural elements to it's antennas then they probably would have counted it but they don't seem to be consistent because they've counted spires that look like insignicant flag poles in some cases. In any case I was so glad when they redid the design of this building because it's going to be recognized as one of the most important symbols of NYC when it's completed and it's one of my favorite projects that's being constructed anywhere.
I personally think Spires/antennas or whatever should only be considered part of the total height when they are integral to the design of the structure. Obviously the antennas on the Willis are not integral to the design. Of course the so called spire on top of this building is also not integral to the building's design! Its looks are completely different and contrast the smooth design of the building and no way does it look like it was even designed by the same person. In addition part of its original intent was to contain broadcast equipment but since the building is taking so long other arrangements have been made for this equipment so it will sit empty!

You know what's funny. 1WTC antenna was taller then, the one on Sears Tower. Then Sears added a taller antenna, so it could be taller then 1WTC.

Picture a old building adding 2000 feet of antenna, to be the tallest building in the world. Yeah spires are cheap but its NYC look around.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...-rss&FEEDNAME=

Condé to 1 WTC: 'Matter of time'

By STEVE CUOZZO
January 25, 2011


Five months after Condé Nast and the Port Authority signed a non-binding "letter of intent," a completed lease for the glam-magazine factory to move to 1 World Trade Center is inevitable, sources predicted.

The only disagreement is over timing. While several sources believed the epochal inking could occur as early as March, others insisted it would take longer -- "not because anything's gone wrong, but simply because it's so complicated," one said.

Condé Nast is currently at 4 Times Square. Last August, the publisher and the PA announced they had a term sheet. But it was far from a done deal, especially in light of the WTC site's notorious complexities.

However, a final deal for Condé Nast to take 1 million square feet in the 2.6 million square-foot tower's lower half is clearly in sight.

Nobody's breaking out champagne yet. All-but-done deals can and do break down -- as in last year's last-minute scuttling by A&E Networks of plans to move to 150 E. 42nd St.

But the Condé Nast commitment would, at a stroke, make nonsense of widespread skepticism since 9/11 that major companies would ever return to the WTC site.

Condé Nast's stature as a singularly prestigious brand would make all of the site's office space a hot commodity -- at 1 WTC, at Larry Silverstein's fast-rising 4 WTC and in two towers yet to come.

Meanwhile, word that Gov. Cuomo has decided to keep Christopher Ward on as PA executive director is "good news for downtown and good news for the state," said Silverstein Properties' development director Janno Lieber. Downtown Alliance president Liz Berger similarly called it "great news."

Lieber's praise is especially meaningful given the past animosity between Silverstein and the PA -- a history of blame and counter-blame, public name-calling and lawsuits.

Ward, who was appointed to the post by former Gov. Paterson in 2008, reversed a pattern by predecessors who seemed not only ineffectual at getting anything done, but also out of touch with what was going on at ground zero.

On Ward's watch, progress has been remarkable on 1 WTC, the memorial, and the site's fiendishly complicated infrastructure. (When we'll see the Santiago Calatrava-designed transportation "Hub" remains to be seen.)

Ward also pushed through two crucial agreements -- with Silverstein over financing terms for his towers and with the Durst Organization, which will be the PA's minority partner in managing and leasing 1 WTC.

On Site | An Inside Look at One World Trade Center (http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/wnyc-news-blog/2011/jan/25/world-trade-center-workers-weather-brutal-temperatures-photos/)


THIS WEEK: Frigid temperatures settled over the city but work at One World Trade Center steamed on. Workers, stuffing hand warmers into their gloves and boots, said the frigid temperatures somewhat slowed down progress but more than 52 floors have been completed and steel is up to the 56th floor.

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/glass-on-the-24th-floor-reflects.jpg

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/workers-stacking-elevator-shaft-materials.jpg
Workers stacking elevator shaft insulation on the 24th floor. This floor has windows installed, but there is still a strong draft and frigid temperatures.

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/24th-floor-has-windows.jpg
The 24th floor has windows, and an elevator shaft with stairs and a railing.

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/workers-packed-in-elevator.jpg
Steel has reached the 56th floor and with a limited number of elevators, workers are often stuck on various floors, banging on the steel shaft, hoping to get the operator's attention. As a result, workers are often stranded on floors for long periods of time, and workers say the elevators are more and more crowded.

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/wtc-on-1.24.jpg

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/lunch-break-on-site.jpg
A carpenter on his lunch break. He says his boots and gloves are stuffed with hand warmers.

January 24th by terryballard (http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryballard/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5217/5387097771_4f4628601b_b.jpg

8 hours ago by Clampants (http://www.flickr.com/photos/clampants/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5137/5390953244_ebbc5be087_b.jpg

Almost a week ago... January 21st by thebudman623 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebudman623/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5391373938_126ba3b4a0_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5053/5390767923_98a0762c6e_b.jpg

Although this is off topic, I came across a great video of Philippe Petit walking across the Twin Towers in 1974. I thought this might add a bit of historical depth to the WTC rebuilding. Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEU7lrtehDs&feature=related


Bugs

And now, skylines...

January 24th by kjitty (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kjitty/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5211/5385915843_4c31c435ec_b.jpg

January 23th, same photographer
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5386418474_86f5ff4f0f_b.jpg

In just a few short months, 1WTC will be visible from all sides soaring high above the plateau that is Lower Manhattan's skyline.

Aiyah! This is so exciting! :D

In just a few short months, 1WTC will be visible from all sides soaring high above the plateau that is Lower Manhattan's skyline.

Aiyah! This is so exciting! :D

I agree, i think in 10 floors tower 1v2 will be visable through out most of the city.

An act of evil madness is slowly being replaced by ingenuity, design, engineering, hard work, and a promise of hope

And now, skylines...

January 24th by kjitty (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kjitty/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5211/5385915843_4c31c435ec_b.jpg

January 23th, same photographer
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5386418474_86f5ff4f0f_b.jpg

Those massive, wide buildings should never have been built at the tip of Manhattan. Taller and thinner would have been better. The classic skyline has been lost forever.

It's wonderful to see these buildings rising. Congratulations New York.

I predict the american economy will be growing very strongly around that time when all of these are finished, they will not be vacant for long. Our GDP will probably rising by about 3.5 - 4.8 % annually.

I predict the american economy will be growing very strongly around that time when all of these are finished, they will not be vacant for long. Our GDP will probably rising by about 3.5 - 4.8 % annually.

I hope so ... It will be too bad to see such a beautiful building empty/

I don't care if it empty as long as it's finish.

What an amazing pics from lower Manhattan!! More, more!!

Those man on a wire images were sensational! I can't wait to snap some of my own photos of this when I visit NYC at the end of June. Will surely dominate it's surroundings by then...

i think they don't count antennas as they arent part of the designedstructure per say they are only used as a way to putup broadcasting and recieving equipmen, one fine example is the ESB it has a spire but the antenna on top isnt included because it was added later and only for broadcasting equipment

True, but the line between antenna and spire has really been moved too far IMO. Chrysler, ESB, Ptronus and Burj have spires. But when a glorified flagpole counts as a spire they need to re-evaluate. This thing on WTC1 is just a fancy broadcast antenna. If anything, it actually detracts from the design of the building. I say, either count them all or make official building heights count only to the roof line. I know it's only numbers but when officially Petronus is "taller" than the Sears/Willis tower even though you can stand on the ob deck in Chicago and look down 150 feet to where the top floor of Petronus would be its kind of ridiculous to say Petronus is taller just because it's antenna is encased in something that makes it prettier.

I predict the american economy will be growing very strongly around that time when all of these are finished, they will not be vacant for long. Our GDP will probably rising by about 3.5 - 4.8 % annually.

You're wrong! Way wrong! They economy will be 10x worse as the great depression. Gold will reach $5000 /ounce at least. Research! Research!
Great progress by the way and very nice cladding!

interesting skyline, I hope the building looks good

More cladding please!

Less bad weather please!

You're wrong! Way wrong! They economy will be 10x worse as the great depression. Gold will reach $5000 /ounce at least. Research! Research!
Great progress by the way and very nice cladding!

No, it won't. The American economy is projected to grow quite a bit in the coming decade. Stop posting non-sense you don't know anything about. :ohno:

1WTC will be the tallest structure in New York City by the end of 2011 (http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/q_a_intro.cfm)

For us who have used the metric system all our lives, we definitely have an idea what a decimeter is. The metric system is accurate because it has a scientific definition. It is the standard. As for me I cannot comprehend the imperial system. It depends on how you see it. Somebody like me might prefer the metric system and others the imperial system. But one cannot question the accuracy of either especially the metric system.

As someone who has grown up with the Imperial system I often look at the metric system with envy.

Try this simple exercise:

Add 5' 4 5/8" + 3' 9 15/16" = ?

vs.

48.9M +22.95Cm= ?

One of my hobbies introduced me to the metric system when I was about 10. Armored fighting vehicles. The gun calibers and armor thicknesses on tanks and such were given in millimeters. So, I learned the metric system.

The hight of this tower only has meaning in the Imperial system.

I hope we don't waste 3 more pages because I had a few drinks and got ticked off one night.:nuts:

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/3108/2605956cppgcarlisleonew.jpg
One inch-thick (25 millimeter) STARPHIRE(R) ultra-clear glass, specially manufactured for One World Trade Center, rolls along the production line at PPG Industries' (NYSE:PPG) Carlisle Glass Works in central Pennsylvania (Photo: Business Wire).

http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/glass-on-the-24th-floor-reflects.jpg


Wow, what a beautiful picture!

1WTC will be the tallest structure in New York City by the end of 2011 (http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/q_a_intro.cfm)

That was very informative. Thanks for posting it :)

A Q/A from Ask The Port Authority:

Q. When I visited last week, I noticed something strange with the glass. The reflections of things close to the building are very clear, but buildings and objects that are far away seem to be wavy and odd. Is this because the glass has just started to go in? Is there a film on the glass? – George, Philadelphia, PA

A. George, there is no film on the glass. Once the building is fully enclosed and pressurized, the wavy reflection will be reduced.

Interesting answer in relation to all the comments here about the glass and its distorted reflections.

Lynda Tollner is a program director in the World Trade Center Construction Department with design and construction responsibilities for One World Trade Center.

Ms. Tollner has more than 25 years of experience in project management and structural engineering and has worked for the Port Authority for seven years. In the past, she has managed design and construction of a variety of commercial, institutional and transportation facilities including projects at LaGuardia and Newark Liberty International airports and the Port Authority's current headquarters at 225/233 Park Avenue South.

One World Trade Center is scheduled for completion at the end of 2013.

(Note: We received more than 40 questions in response to our "Ask the PA" feature on One World Trade Center. Some of the questions were repetitive, so to avoid redundancy, we eliminated several of them).

Q. When do you anticipate that 1 WTC steel installation will exceed 7 WTC in height? – John, Washington, WA

A. John, we are getting real close. We expect to exceed the height of 7 WTC in February. Right now, we are on the 56th floor.

Q. What do you see as the greatest challenges looking forward toward completion of 1 WTC? – Mike, Moravia, N.Y.

A. We encounter challenges with this project every day and our staff works diligently to meet each and every one of them. Perhaps the greatest challenge we will face in the future is the construction of the 408-foot antenna concurrent with the completion of the roof and the rooftop mechanical systems. Essentially, we will be undertaking two separate projects simultaneously in very limited space.

Q. When do you expect 1 WTC to become the tallest structure downtown, as well as in New York City? Also, why does the first floor of glass skip to every other piece, and finally when will the plaza finishes begin? – Anthony, Commack, N.Y.

A. We anticipate 1 World Trade Center will be the tallest structure downtown by mid-summer when it surpasses the Beekman Tower, and the tallest in the City when it surpasses the Empire State Building by the end of this year. The missing panels of glass on the 20th floor were left out intentionally to accommodate supports for the protection required for the curtain wall glass installation.

Q. When I visited last week, I noticed something strange with the glass. The reflections of things close to the building are very clear, but buildings and objects that are far away seem to be wavy and odd. Is this because the glass has just started to go in? Is there a film on the glass? – George, Philadelphia, PA

A. George, there is no film on the glass. Once the building is fully enclosed and pressurized, the wavy reflection will be reduced.

Q. About what floor will 1 WTC reach by the 9/11/11 anniversary, and what floor will it reach by the end of 2011? – Michael, East Brunswick, N.J.

A. We expect to have steel up to a floor in the mid-80s by the 10th anniversary later this year and near the 104th floor by the end of the year.

Q. There appears to be vents in the façade that cover the large mechanical floors near the top of the building. These mechanical floors and vents also appear to correspond to the original impact site of Flight 11. Is this deliberate or simply a coincidence? – Kyle, Fargo, ND

A. If there is an alignment, as you say, it definitely was not intentional.

Q. How long will it take to reach the 75th floor? – Peter, Verona, N.J.

A. Our goal is to build one floor a week. Given that schedule, we expect to be at the 75th floor in about 22 weeks.

Q. When will the base of 1 WTC by completed in concrete, and how will this process happen? – Zack, Elkton, MD

A. Concrete work at the base of the tower is proceeding, but it must be carefully staged so that it does not interfere with other trades and delivery logistics at the base. Portions of the concrete wall will be done later so that various trades can drive trucks into the lobbies for materials deliveries. For example, all of the elevator rails are being delivered to the North Lobby. Fireproofing materials are delivered to the South Lobby.

Q. Does 1 WTC use the tube-frame structure system like the original Twin Towers? – Benjamin, Canberra, AK

A. No, it does not. 1 WTC involves a building system that consists of a steel frame and a concrete core.

Q. Since the tower is coming closer to being topped out, will there be a topping out ceremony toward the end of the year? – Dominic, Grants, NM

A. We anticipate the tower will be topping out in early 2012. Our focus right now is getting the tower built. When the time comes, we will focus on whatever announcements or ceremony is appropriate. For now, it's just build, build, build.

Q. 1 WTC seems about five floors shorter from street level than the neighboring 7 WTC, which claims a height of 52 floors. Why the difference in height and number of floors? – Josh, New York, N.Y.

A. The number of floors in office buildings does not correspond to a specific height. For example, the first office floor in 1 World Trade Center is the 20th floor, which is approximately 180 feet above street level. However, there are only nine floor slabs between the lobby and the 20th floor, which will accommodate the tower's mechanical systems.

Q. When will the glass façade for the base of 1 WTC be in place? – Tyler, New York, N.Y.

A. Installation of the podium wall glass will begin in early 2012. This work must be staged later to allow the tower's hoists to remain in place, so the podium glass won't be completed until the 2nd quarter of 2013.

Q. I was just wondering when the curtain wall will start on the mechanical floors under the 20th floor? – Spencer, Montreal, N.Y.

A. Just to be clear, the curtain wall and the podium wall glass are not the same. The curtain wall glass is currently being installed from the 20th floor to the top of the building, while the podium wall glass for the bottom 20 floors is in fabrication, with installation to begin in early 2012.

Q. I know that some steel recovered from the site after 9/11 was used to build the U.S.S. New York. Is any of the steel being used to build the new tower? – Joshua, Sparrows Point, MD

A. No. However, there will be two of the massive steel tridents that were part of the original World Trade Center towers on display in the Memorial Pavilion.

Q. When will the spire go on 1 WTC and how long will it take for the spire to be installed? – Logan, New York, N.Y.

A. Installation of the tower's spire will begin in mid 2012, and will take approximately six months to complete.

Q. I noticed a crane on the northwest corner of the building. What will this crane be used for? – Holmdel, N.J.

A. The “slider crane” on the northwest corner of the building is used by the concrete contractor to convey reinforcement and other materials into the building and to remove debris.

Q. How often do shipments of glass arrive at the World Trade Center site? – Erik, Baltimore, MD

A. The curtain wall panels are loaded into shipping containers in Portland, Oregon and shipped by rail to North Jersey, where they are placed on trucks for delivery to the site. We receive one major delivery at the site each week.

Q. Is it true that 1 WTC will top out this year? – Steven, San Diego, CA

A. We expect 1 World Trade Center will top out in early 2012.

Q. I noticed that the crane on the northwest portion of 1 WTC is still attached to the building and no glass panels have been installed on that section of the tower. When will the crane be disassembled in order for the glass to be put up? – Michael, East Brunswick, N.J.

A. As the slider crane moves up the building, the temporary steel on the lower floors is being removed so that the curtain wall installation can continue on this corner.

Q. How many workers are working at 1 World Trade Center at any given time? – Joe, Brooklyn, N.Y.

A. Currently, the total manpower of all of the trades is approximately 1,100 people.

Q. What brand of elevators will be used in 1 World Trade Center? What brand of chillers will be used? – Bob, Louisville, KY

A. Thyssen-Krup will provide 70 elevators and 9 escalators for 1 World Trade Center. There are no chillers in the building. McQuay is providing the self-contained direct expansion air conditioning units on each floor.

That was probably the best PA Q&A so far. Very informative.

12 hours ago by JeffandWill (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffandwill/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5392597065_86417a0113_b.jpg

Hi all.

True, but the line between antenna and spire has really been moved too far IMO. Chrysler, ESB, Ptronus and Burj have spires. But when a glorified flagpole counts as a spire they need to re-evaluate. This thing on WTC1 is just a fancy broadcast antenna. If anything, it actually detracts from the design of the building. I say, either count them all or make official building heights count only to the roof line. I know it's only numbers but when officially Petronus is "taller" than the Sears/Willis tower even though you can stand on the ob deck in Chicago and look down 150 feet to where the top floor of Petronus would be its kind of ridiculous to say Petronus is taller just because it's antenna is encased in something that makes it prettier.

Hi Fly.

I agree.
That's why I have been going by the height to tip measure for years. The CTBUH uses the height to architectural top as the measure they use to rate skyscrapers and I do see their point in doing that. I am happy to see them drop their height to roof measure also. But the height to tip is the number with the most meaning for me. IMO if they want to put a 610 meter (2000 foot) pole on the top of a 390 meter building they do have something a km. high. I also recognized the long reign of the guyed mast as mans tallest structure untill overtaken by a free standing structure. (by a large margin - the BK) :banana:

In my books the Sears Tower (OK - Willis ...) is 527 meters high and the BK is 830.

:cheers:
Ray.

A. George, there is no film on the glass. Once the building is fully enclosed and pressurized, the wavy reflection will be reduced.

Sorry, but it sounds like hopeful thinking! We see other towers around the world that are not 'pressurized' and look better. I am not saying which ones...

Just look at Oklahoma City:http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=71134315&postcount=1061

I think there is some validity in that answer, and not wishful thinking. The building itself is hardly cladded, especially near the base, whereas it appears the tower in Oklahoma is much further along in its cladding. You also have to consider the sheer size of these glass panes in comparison. From closer up its going to look wavier because that's just physics, but from far away, as in the renders, I have a feeling it will be a great reflector.

It appears that for the most part the wavyness will be similar to 7 WTC. The cladding isn't installed the same way, but 7 WTC has some wavyness as well. And for those who have seen 7 WTC in person, we know just how awesome it looks.

I think the wavyness was covered pretty well earlier here and elsewhere (WNY). It is probably due to how it was manufactured to prevent it from shattering into a million sharp shards if a bomb did explode.

I want to see a pic of the top of the building cause the webcam doesn`t show it anymore. :ohno: hope they continue erecting new steel on it
although this winter seems to be a harsh one !

There is another angle: not the best view, but you can see the steel of new levels.

http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/live-camera.html

Hey everybody, i just came back from the World Trade Center site and i was amased at how tall and huge 1 WTC has become. I spoke to the worker there and they told me that the first to second week of march 1 WTC will be taller than 7 WTC. Then i got a good view of the entire site from World Center Hotel.

You don't get that weather in Britain all the time! :ohno:

You don't get that weather in Britain all the time! :ohno:

Yeah, they don't get it very often in NYC either.

You don't get that weather in Britain all the time! :ohno:

wtf?



awesome progress. it's like watching the original wtc construction.

Yeah, they don't get it very often in NYC either.

mhm, we don't get this much snow this often. This year has been a particularly harsh winter so far. I think were at around 56 inches of snow now and we aren't even in February yet, our snowiest month of the winter. This January is also the 2nd most snowiest month in the history of nyc records. And the snowiest January in the history of nyc records. Were on track to having one of the snowiest winters in the history of nyc.

Damn that has to happen when the new 1WTC is under construction. Hope it's not delayed that much.

Today, by sarisha76 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarisha76/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5056/5396786864_9d8f48abc5_o.jpg

Some more floors and it will be clearly visible, for now, just the tip of the cranes...
Yesterday, running.to.stand.still (http://www.flickr.com/photos/runningtostandstill/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5132/5393418907_18d3441c3f_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5094/5393391143_c65ffca203_b.jpg

January 26th, bogdancondor (http://www.flickr.com/photos/12140131@N06/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5100/5390505284_fa22e30bed_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5211/5390509018_0e8a37e287_b.jpg

Greenwichboy (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=8720), WiredNewYork, Today
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=12061&d=1296263637

Does anybody knows why this night, tower 1 is without lights??

The first picture that Otie posted... does anyone know what building that picture was taken on the roof of? I've been wondering this for years since I always see pictures from this location and elevation looking south. Then yesterday Crocodile Dundee was on TV and there's a scene on that building's roof with the woman photographing Dundee with that exact view behind him (only the Twin Towers are still standing behind him).

Must be a pretty tall building but nothing comes to mind.

Top of the Rock (http://www.topoftherocknyc.com/), Observation Deck at the Rockefeller Center

Ah, thanks!

HD Earthcam (http://archives.earthcam.com/archives5/ecnetwork/us/ny/nyc/gzmpr/gzrobotic1.jpg)
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/186/gzrobotic11.jpg

Beautiful picture, i would do anything to get to New York to see it, the symbolism of the Big Aplle is growing back into place.

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/64/mg6045.jpg

^^ it's creeping up on 7WTC...

By GreenwichBoy, today.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=12065&d=1296318104

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=12064&d=1296318087

The blue screens reminds me of something...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/16583702@N04/5378203648/sizes/z/in/photostream/

WTF, well heres the link to his flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/16583702@N04/5378203648/sizes/z/in/photostream/

I'm going to NYC in April so I look forward to seeing this. :)

The blue screens reminds me of something...


The wtc had the blue safety netting before the shard was even above ground

The wtc had the blue safety netting before the shard was even above ground

Oh he was talking about the Shard! Thank God! I thought he meant...
Whoo!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5293/5397386348_bf3e92efa1_b_d.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9451351@N03/

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5095/5397386564_28e2d30d8e_b_d.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9451351@N03/

This thing is gonna be done ahead of schedule at the rate its going up

^Do you really think so. Thatd be great :)

^^No kidding. I can't believe how far up it is.

Can someone please tell me what happend to the discovery cam for 1 World Trade Center, its been down for 3 days now and i really want to see tower1 from up on top, if any of you have a simular cam from on top of tower 7 looking down on tower can you please share the link. Thank you.

Can someone please tell me what happend to the discovery cam for 1 World Trade Center, its been down for 3 days now and i really want to see tower1 from up on top, if any of you have a simular cam from on top of tower 7 looking down on tower can you please share the link. Thank you.

Webcams go down all the time. Earthcam was down for a period of almost 3 months back in 2008. Don't panic.

Webcams go down all the time. Earthcam was down for a period of almost 3 months back in 2008. Don't panic.

I will try not to panic, but it will be tough cause if the cams are down then how can we see the progress of 1 WTC.

I will try not to panic, but it will be tough cause if the cams are down then how can we see the progress of 1 WTC.

We got almost daily updates..Don't worry..You will survive..:cheers:

Maybe they're installing the discovery-webcam in a new angle?

Something is wrong with the page not the cams..

I'm going to NYC in April so I look forward to seeing this. :)

Lucky, I'm seriously jealous!

i hope new york will be nuked

WTF?

:omg::mad::wtf:

Calm down people, he doesn't hope that. He is just kidding, I think...

:cheers:

from my terrace....the cranes are getting taller and taller each day.....


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5401776101_79b1142894_b.jpg

is 1wtc anywhere near height of 7wtc yet?

is 1wtc anywhere near height of 7wtc yet?

Fast approaching! Supposed to surpass it by March!

is 1wtc anywhere near height of 7wtc yet?

It should pass it in February, but new snow storm is on the way, so..I think it will be closer to the end of February..

January 29th, kkalyan

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5296/5400807965_cbec4cf8e2_b.jpg

Looks great!

I am curious as to why there are no skyscrapers in between lower Manhattan and midtown, or, above Central Park going north. Is it simply economics of different neighborhoods, or, is the bedrock in different areas of Manhattan Island less suitable for supporting skyscrapers?

Bugs

:cheers:

from my terrace....the cranes are getting taller and taller each day.....


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5401776101_79b1142894_b.jpg

Ive said it once and Ill say it again: I envy you for your amazing view D:<

i hope new york will be nuked

And from what movie do you come from. No you don't need to answer. SCC is stupid funny

I am curious as to why there are no skyscrapers in between lower Manhattan and midtown, or, above Central Park going north. Is it simply economics of different neighborhoods, or, is the bedrock in different areas of Manhattan Island less suitable for supporting skyscrapers?

Bugs

Your about right. At first then steel was first used for buildings, midtown and lower manhattan had the strongest bedrock so they just built skyscrapers in those areas as there wasnt enough technology yet to build in places with not as strong bedrock.. Thats how you got the 2 financial districts. And people build skyscrapers in financial districts so thats why theres no skyscrapers bewtween lower manhattan and midtown and north central park.

Just as steel erecton has slowed down, photographers on Flickr aren't taking enough pictures (maybe the cold weather is another reason why people prefer to stay at home rather to go down and take some nice pics)... I hope that during spring I can find enough pictures to post all of them here.

January 19, by rasdourian
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5295/5399207081_ddaf2b7119_b.jpg

January 28 by La Femme Achitecte (http://www.flickr.com/photos/53601361@N03/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5139/5400418714_2072e62759_b.jpg

January 29, by andrew.galka (http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewgalka/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5399551395_c902a74c75_b.jpg

I am curious as to why there are no skyscrapers in between lower Manhattan and midtown, or, above Central Park going north. Is it simply economics of different neighborhoods, or, is the bedrock in different areas of Manhattan Island less suitable for supporting skyscrapers?

Bugs

Because the people who live there don't want them there.

I did a rough paint job with the last picture how WTC1 will look like in the skyline when seen from the vantage point.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/5082/83437221.jpg

If i'm on scale, than it won't have a very big impact on the skyline.

You sure it shouldn't be bigger?

I thought you were on scale until I got into the exact same place that picture was taken on Google Earth... It's incredible that even the Beekman is closer, 1WTC still looks higher.
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9606/earthk.jpg

January 25 by Starship Catvern (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48523101@N06/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5213/5387137951_136f0e8360_b.jpg

I am curious as to why there are no skyscrapers in between lower Manhattan and midtown, or, above Central Park going north. Is it simply economics of different neighborhoods, or, is the bedrock in different areas of Manhattan Island less suitable for supporting skyscrapers?

Bugs

That is an interesting question that much has been written about.

First, you have to realize that downtown, or lower Manhattan, is a business and commercial district. The same is true for midtown Manhattan. Downtown has Wall Street, the Financial District, the stock exchanges (not just the NYSE, but the American exchange, the commodities exchanges, etc.). Midtown is where the advertising industry (Madison Ave.), the fashion industry, the media and broadcast industry (Rockefeller Center, etc.).

In between downtown and midtown are neighborhoods like Greenwich Village, Little Italy, Tribeca, Chinatown, Soho, Chelsea and the East Village. These are primarily residential, restaurant, and night life districts ... so there is no need for skyscrapers in those neighborhoods.

Secondly, the solid bedrock that makes skyscraper building so much easier in Manhattan than most places comes closest to the surface precisely where the skyscrapers are clustered: in lower Manhattan and in midtown, and in some parts of upper Manhattan as well.

I know this has little to do with the building itself, but I will be in NYC at the end of February and I was hoping a local or two could give me a quick weather prediction? Excited to see this in the flesh.

I know this has little to do with the building itself, but I will be in NYC at the end of February and I was hoping a local or two could give me a quick weather prediction? Excited to see this in the flesh.

Ok snow out the ass.

Remember when tower 1 seem like it had two cores. We use to talk about it all the time.

I thought you were on scale until I got into the exact same place that picture was taken on Google Earth... It's incredible that even the Beekman is closer, 1WTC still looks higher.
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9606/earthk.jpg
This doesn't seem accurate. It is over halfway to the roof at this point but the render assumes a more than doubling of the current height.

Do we know the source and size of the model? It isnt the right shape either so it wouldn't be surprising if the scale was wrong as well. Or perhaps the perspective isn't from ground level. Note how all of the foreground objects appear shorter than in the photo. This suggests that it is from a higher vantage point.

The hand drawn comparison seems more accurate in terms of height. Though the top will be narrower from this angle given how the top floor is half the square footage of the first floor.


I did a rough paint job with the last picture how WTC1 will look like in the skyline when seen from the vantage point.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/5082/83437221.jpg

If i'm on scale, than it won't have a very big impact on the skyline.

Dude, you're dealing with the National September 11 Memorial and Musem model. (http://www.national911memorial.org/site/PageServer?pagename=New_Visit_GoogleEarth)

I am curious as to why there are no skyscrapers in between lower Manhattan and midtown, or, above Central Park going north. Is it simply economics of different neighborhoods, or, is the bedrock in different areas of Manhattan Island less suitable for supporting skyscrapers?

Bugs

The latter is the reason and not because people don't want them there as someone earlier suggested (sshezzz!). Where you find skyscrapers, the bedrock is closer to the surface.

This doesn't seem accurate. It is over halfway to the roof at this point but the render assumes a more than doubling of the current height.

Do we know the source and size of the model? It isnt the right shape either so it wouldn't be surprising if the scale was wrong as well. Or perhaps the perspective isn't from ground level. Note how all of the foreground objects appear shorter than in the photo. This suggests that it is from a higher vantage point.

The hand drawn comparison seems more accurate in terms of height. Though the top will be narrower from this angle given how the top floor is half the square footage of the first floor.

The shape looks funny because from that angle 2WTC is covering most of 1WTC.

That is an interesting question that much has been written about.

First, you have to realize that downtown, or lower Manhattan, is a business and commercial district. The same is true for midtown Manhattan. Downtown has Wall Street, the Financial District, the stock exchanges (not just the NYSE, but the American exchange, the commodities exchanges, etc.). Midtown is where the advertising industry (Madison Ave.), the fashion industry, the media and broadcast industry (Rockefeller Center, etc.).

In between downtown and midtown are neighborhoods like Greenwich Village, Little Italy, Tribeca, Chinatown, Soho, Chelsea and the East Village. These are primarily residential, restaurant, and night life districts ... so there is no need for skyscrapers in those neighborhoods.

Secondly, the solid bedrock that makes skyscraper building so much easier in Manhattan than most places comes closest to the surface precisely where the skyscrapers are clustered: in lower Manhattan and in midtown, and in some parts of upper Manhattan as well.

A lot of the neighborhoods you mentioned aren't zoned for skyscrapers, meaning you can't build higher than a certain amount of feet, and there are large areas of Manhattan in between Midtown and Lower Manhattan that are historical neighborhoods so you can't tear a building down or even dramatically alter the building, and even if you do find an empty lot within those neighborhoods, which isn't likely, you again have the zoning restrictions.

There is also the mass transportations hubs. Midtown has Penn Station and Grand Central, probably two of the countries busiest rail stations, and Lower Manhattan like you said is just closer to the exchanges, and historically has been the skyscraper hub of the city and a center of business and commerce. In between the two areas there aren't any major transportation hubs either, so. Interesting question, sorry for going off topic a bit.

January 29, by andrew.galka (http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewgalka/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5399551395_c902a74c75_b.jpg

Just to end this once and for all:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/meh_cd/1wtc.jpg

It's all about perspective. If you move to the other promenade on the southern end of the Brooklyn Bridge it looks shorter.

A lot of the neighborhoods you mentioned aren't zoned for skyscrapers, meaning you can't build higher than a certain amount of feet, and there are large areas of Manhattan in between Midtown and Lower Manhattan that are historical neighborhoods so you can't tear a building down or even dramatically alter the building, and even if you do find an empty lot within those neighborhoods, which isn't likely, you again have the zoning restrictions.

There is also the mass transportations hubs. Midtown has Penn Station and Grand Central, probably two of the countries busiest rail stations, and Lower Manhattan like you said is just closer to the exchanges, and historically has been the skyscraper hub of the city and a center of business and commerce. In between the two areas there aren't any major transportation hubs either, so. Interesting question, sorry for going off topic a bit.

Zoning restrictions only came after when they figured out the layer pattern of the bedrock (Manhattan Schist) underneath Manhattan therefore it's not the primary reason. Manhattan schist is found at various depths — from 18 feet below the surface in Times Square to 260 feet below in Greenwich Village. Where bedrock is far below the surface, skyscrapers are not practical because it is too difficult to reach the schist that provides structural stability and support. Consequently, there are few tall buildings in Greenwich Village, but skyscrapers stand in dense clusters in midtown and lower Manhattan where schist lies close to the surface. And since Manhattan is so dense, the skyline actually reflects the depth of the schist formation. New York City reaches its towering heights because of this strong foundation.

Sorry for the OT.

http://research.amnh.org/eps/f/NYCgeobig.gif

The latter is the reason and not because people don't want them there as someone earlier suggested (sshezzz!). Where you find skyscrapers, the bedrock is closer to the surface.

Has nothing to do with bedrock. If they can build skyscrapers in Queens and Brooklyn, they can build them anywhere on Manhattan. People live in those areas, it's for that same reason there's no skyscraper in Harlem.

Has nothing to do with bedrock. If they can build skyscrapers in Queens and Brooklyn, they can build them anywhere on Manhattan. People live in those areas, it's for that same reason there's no skyscraper in Harlem.

You can build skyscrapers everywhere now, but not a 100 years ago. The bedrock was stronger in midtown and lower manhattan, therefore they built skyscrapers there when there wasn't the technology to build in other places. Therefore you got the commercial districts and the residential districts. And those districts are still the same today. Therefore you get skyscrapers in midtown and lower manhattan.

You can build skyscrapers everywhere now, but not a 100 years ago. The bedrock was stronger in midtown and lower manhattan, therefore they built skyscrapers there when there wasn't the technology to build in other places. Therefore you got the commercial districts and the residential districts. And those districts are still the same today. Therefore you get skyscrapers in midtown and lower manhattan.

^^Exactamondo! As I was saying!:)

Today by knightbreather
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/knightbreather/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5405416743_708a0ddf4d_b.jpg

Smolenski (http://www.flickr.com/photos/joesmo/), January 30th (as posted by NYguy over at SSP)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5403245852_d1cd43fe05_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5052/5397636831_c3d4304f48_b.jpg

Madeline68 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/23956233@N04/) (Jan 27, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5294/5399588703_9c6139f3a4_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5400190480_b5f77126dd_b.jpg

I predict the american economy will be growing very strongly around that time when all of these are finished, they will not be vacant for long. Our GDP will probably rising by about 3.5 - 4.8 % annually.

Frankly, that's plain bullshit.

tomorrow more snow will rush into New York ! crazy winter here :ohno:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5173/5403763856_b0cf635c0f_b_d.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yogesharora/

(deleted)

Frankly, that's plain bullshit.

Off topic: Agreed, if the dollar looses its status as the world reserve currency (which some have speculated it will in the near future), I fear Americans will feel tougher times before anything improves economically.

On topic: I love how the triangular faces of this tower (when viewed from the ground) give a false perspective and appears to elongate the structure. Your eye could almost deceive you as to think the faces are actually rectangular but appear to be tapering at the top because of its sheer scale.

I believe Disney used this mind trick when they designing sleeping beauty's castle at disneyland (false perspective I believe).

Frankly, that's plain bullshit.


Why?

cause China is the new world economic leader, but hey that`s off topic !!

Is it? Well, just not yet, they are still behind the US and the Eurozone.
Nuke them while you still can and you won't regret it later :tongue3:. Wel'll give USA another half century of leadership, just like after Nagasaki.

New to posting on this forum, but I have some advice. (1) The US economy has nothing to do with the aesthetics of 1 World Trade Center. (2) If you are going to be off-topic, at least be correct: (a) US gdp is $14.8 trillion, China's is $5.8 trillion. (b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million). (c) New gdp estimates say US economy is currently growing at a rate of 3.2%. (d) (and most importantly), while China's economy is booming around 10%, they are dealing with rapid and devastating inflation. They have 2 choices: either allow their currency to elevate which would lead to far less economic growth, OR keep their currency deflated and thus allow inflation keep rising, resulting in social and political instability.

That being said, Tower 1 looks great.

I just realized something, tower 1 is now less then 75 feet away from conqering the Goldman Sachs building and tower 7 and once that happens it would be the 17th tallest building in NYC. So stay tuned because 6 more floors and Tower 1 will start to show its true dominance in height over the other skyscrapers of NYC.

^I mean it's going to be THE tallest in NYC soon so it's not even half the height yet.

Thanks for bringing some sensibility to this forum!

New to posting on this forum, but I have some advice. (1) The US economy has nothing to do with the aesthetics of 1 World Trade Center. (2) If you are going to be off-topic, at least be correct: (a) US gdp is $14.8 trillion, China's is $5.8 trillion. (b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million). (c) New gdp estimates say US economy is currently growing at a rate of 3.2%. (d) (and most importantly), while China's economy is booming around 10%, they are dealing with rapid and devastating inflation. They have 2 choices: either allow their currency to elevate which would lead to far less economic growth, OR keep their currency deflated and thus allow inflation keep rising, resulting in social and political instability.

That being said, Tower 1 looks great.

I really like you

discovery cam is working again

Biggest snow storm of the year predicted for tomorrow....

I would like to know how many days delay has been a result of this unusual (for NYC) weather?

TOronto is supposed to get a metre (3 feet) of snow tonight.

New to posting on this forum, but I have some advice. (1) The US economy has nothing to do with the aesthetics of 1 World Trade Center. (2) If you are going to be off-topic, at least be correct: (a) US gdp is $14.8 trillion, China's is $5.8 trillion. (b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million). (c) New gdp estimates say US economy is currently growing at a rate of 3.2%. (d) (and most importantly), while China's economy is booming around 10%, they are dealing with rapid and devastating inflation. They have 2 choices: either allow their currency to elevate which would lead to far less economic growth, OR keep their currency deflated and thus allow inflation keep rising, resulting in social and political instability.

That being said, Tower 1 looks great.

:applause: :bow: :applause:

You are my new hero. By the way, welcome.

New to posting on this forum, but I have some advice. (1) The US economy has nothing to do with the aesthetics of 1 World Trade Center. (2) If you are going to be off-topic, at least be correct: (a) US gdp is $14.8 trillion, China's is $5.8 trillion. (b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million). (c) New gdp estimates say US economy is currently growing at a rate of 3.2%. (d) (and most importantly), while China's economy is booming around 10%, they are dealing with rapid and devastating inflation. They have 2 choices: either allow their currency to elevate which would lead to far less economic growth, OR keep their currency deflated and thus allow inflation keep rising, resulting in social and political instability.

That being said, Tower 1 looks great.

Just a small correction, i don't mean anything bad...

The whole EU, consisting of 27 countries has around 500 million, and the Eurozone, constituted of 17 countries where the official currency is Euro, has far less then 500 million inhabitants, to be precise, it has 330 million...

Hope you don't get this the wrong way...

The tower is monumental... Cheers. :cheers:

From now on I'm goin' to report everyone who will post this crap which is not related to 1WTC construction..Expect to be banned..I'm seriously sick of it..

I watched today Sci-Trek programme on Discovery Showcase about possible earthquake in New York city and I was pondering over New World Trade Centers durability. Would the magnitude 7 earthquake destroy the new towers? I think the place where Freedom Tower is is covered by a hard rock so that the durable steel skeleton of the tower can withstand this. But the falling glass would be a big problem for people on the streets.
I would prefer to be in a skyscraper than on a street while earthquake happening.
I saw a map of Geologic Map of Manhattan, Bronx etc. on previous page but I'm sorry, I don't understand it :( I know that some parts of New York City are covered by deposit left by moving back glacier and that's where building are lower and more vulnerable to earthquakes, are skyscrapers in that zones? Are their foundations durable enough?
IMO EVERY new built skyscraper should be able to withstand magnitude 6 earthquake. Some in special zones (like Taipei) ought to be even more durable.

Today by Smolenski (http://www.flickr.com/photos/joesmo/), January 30th (as posted by NYguy over at SSP)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5403245852_d1cd43fe05_b.jpg


Kickass Pic! Love the effect!

Ronaldus...Dus! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronaldus/) (February 1, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5406894483_c9d76064a1_b.jpg

alexnyc2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/58945806@N02/) (January 31, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5056/5403886072_1fec233bda_b.jpg

Yogi.Arora (January 30, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5020/5407589416_d05b566a73_b.jpg

I watched today Sci-Trek programme on Discovery Showcase about possible earthquake in New York city and I was pondering over New World Trade Centers durability. Would the magnitude 7 earthquake destroy the new towers? I think the place where Freedom Tower is is covered by a hard rock so that the durable steel skeleton of the tower can withstand this. But the falling glass would be a big problem for people on the streets.
I would prefer to be in a skyscraper than on a street while earthquake happening.
I saw a map of Geologic Map of Manhattan, Bronx etc. on previous page but I'm sorry, I don't understand it :( I know that some parts of New York City are covered by deposit left by moving back glacier and that's where building are lower and more vulnerable to earthquakes, are skyscrapers in that zones? Are their foundations durable enough?
IMO EVERY new built skyscraper should be able to withstand magnitude 6 earthquake. Some in special zones (like Taipei) ought to be even more durable.

The entire WTC site is designed to handle a magnitude 7 earthquake.

The biggest problem in an earthquake that strong hitting New York is all the stone and brick clad buildings, and the "Brownstones".

You are right, probably the safest place to be if one hit would be in a modern, steel frame building, over 20 floors high.

(The Flatiron building would probably survive, but it's outside walls would be in the street.)

Stevebruza (http://www.flickr.com/photos/25374560@N05/) (January 19, 2011) (As posted by Spectre000 over at 4WTC thread)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5086/5374896419_5e2ef47239_b.jpg

^^nice shot, rare angle.

Cranes are visible from Staten Island...

Birdkid (http://www.flickr.com/photos/birdkid/) (January 29, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5020/5408587836_16f4e23d6c_b.jpg

I am really looking forward to fantastic summer pics from staten island ferry !:cheers:

Tonight we party in the snow.

Tonight we party in the snow.

Let's hope that will be one of the last/last snow storm this season..

New to posting on this forum, but I have some advice. (1) The US economy has nothing to do with the aesthetics of 1 World Trade Center. (2) If you are going to be off-topic, at least be correct: (a) US gdp is $14.8 trillion, China's is $5.8 trillion. (b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million). (c) New gdp estimates say US economy is currently growing at a rate of 3.2%. (d) (and most importantly), while China's economy is booming around 10%, they are dealing with rapid and devastating inflation. They have 2 choices: either allow their currency to elevate which would lead to far less economic growth, OR keep their currency deflated and thus allow inflation keep rising, resulting in social and political instability.

That being said, Tower 1 looks great.

Perfect. The text is more intelligent than I've ever read here. I agree with every word you said. :lol:

And I'm sure the U.S. government will do everything to improve the economic situation. USA wins! :okay:

Let's have a contest to see who can go the most off-topic.

Kickass Pic! Love the effect!

I agree. Very illustrative feel. It's a keeper.

January 31st, Gripjagraphy

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5095/5405772861_60117cbdb7_z.jpg

February 1st, bunky, Skyscraperpage..

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5013/5408471289_fd85b9e5ca_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5178/5408469767_2249cb6c65_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5300/5409080616_0a0b8f8f5b_b.jpg

Ice is all over the cams...Frozen NY..

it's pretty darn frickin cold up here right now too, hopefully we get less snow then expected.

Cranes are visible from Staten Island...

Birdkid (http://www.flickr.com/photos/birdkid/) (January 29, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5020/5408587836_16f4e23d6c_b.jpg

It's really just about to start sticking out against the skyline.

Time for some more cladding!

Don't know about you guys in NYC, but that was the weakest "blizzard" I've seen in a while. Hope all is well down South :)

Foggy day today here in Gotham.....:ohno:

Can't see shit.....
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5053/5410477253_1dcc77ebd5_b.jpg

4 days ago...

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5401776101_79b1142894_b.jpg

(b) Eurozone economies contain 700 million people, with just over $15 trillion gdp (note US population of merely 310 million).

Eurozone contains just 328 million people with 11.5 trillion gdp. The whole EU contains 500 million people with 14.793 trillion gdp.

Don't know about you guys in NYC, but that was the weakest "blizzard" I've seen in a while. Hope all is well down South :)

The city dodged the hit this time - more of the a frozen rain/slush mixture of what's got on the ground... we could get another round of stormy weather this weekend, but the outlook is yet quite murky... :ohno::ohno::ohno:

Eurozone contains just 328 million people with 11.5 trillion gdp. The whole EU contains 500 million people with 14.793 trillion gdp.You're right. All of Europe however (not the same as the EU), contains 700 million people, couldn't find any GDP numbers for this after a quick search though.

Lots of great shots in the Tribeca Citizen today:

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/1WTC-vesey-and-westish-12011-by-tribeca-citizen.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/1wtc-north-cove-pier-12011-by-tribeca-citizen.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/1wtc-murray-and-west-12011-by-tribeca-citizen.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/1wtc-liberty-and-west-12011-by-tribeca-citizen.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Rebecca-Soebbing-looking-north-from-Liberty-Court-apartments.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/1wtc-fulton-and-nassau-12911-by-tribeca-citizen.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

http://tribecacitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/mm-devoe-fulton.jpg
http://tribecacitizen.com/2011/01/31/1wtc-rising-part-2/

Perfect. The text is more intelligent than I've ever read here. I agree with every word you said. :lol:

And I'm sure the U.S. government will do everything to improve the economic situation. USA wins! :okay:

The economy of the European Union (nominal GDP) in 2009 was € 11,805.66 billion ($16,447.26 billion in 2009) (source IMF, quoted in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union).

The conclusion that if the American economy would have been larger "USA wins" is just ridiculous, it is not a sports game: who has the largest economy:ohno: . For instance most people in Europe enjoy much longer vacations than people in the USA. As a consequence GDP per capita is lower, but you cannot say that welfare in a broad sense is lower. Economists use a broad definition of welfare and welfare is not the same as GDP per capita. GDP gives just an indication of the amount of goods produced in one year (definition: the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time).

For instance GDP doesn’t include negative external effects on the environment. GDP does not say anything about which goods are produced (expenditures to restore the environmental damage in the Gulf, military expenditures, building WTC one, cosmetic surgery, advertisement, you name it :lol: ).

See for a description of the limitations of GDP as a measure of measuring the health of an economy and alternatives of GDP as a measure of well being:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP_per_capita

On topic: WTC one is becoming a beautifull building. Maybe when the whole project is finished it is time to visit New York again (visited in 1987 and 1994 :banana: )(of course with a carbon compensated flight).

Erik (Rotterdam The Netherlands)

I will be in NYC in the middle of April and will get some pictures of 1 WTC then. :)

progress of last January...

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5403489220_000e2e7ccc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/5403489220/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5139/5403488932_f9eb7dd1ef_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/xurijoe/5403488932/)

looks like in no time it'll surpass wtc 7...

Does anybody know how tall WTC1 will be on 9/11/01?

Does anybody know how tall WTC1 will be on 9/11/01?

I think we all know the height on that date... :bash:

I'm sorry. Correction: 9/11/11

Very close to topping out I would say. At or right around 100 floors would be my guess. Although I might be getting too hopeful :)

I'm sorry. Correction: 9/11/11

The recent PA Q&A stated they'll be up to the mid 80's floor.

nyperson (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nyperson/) (January 31, 2011)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5411806530_0021a15925_b.jpg

jamesg2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesg2/)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5056/5411421277_5bced04366_b.jpg

akeeks102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/akeeks102/) (February 1st, 2011)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5299/5409625842_893b24aa55_b.jpg