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

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 9th, 2013, 08:42 PM   #51561
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by liny631 View Post
Every single day my drive to work is on the Ocean Parkway (LI) where you can start to see the WTC come into focus about 40 miles away and really becomes quite obvious 30 miles away. I can't wait to see the view now with the spire lit! In fact, on clear days the sun reflects off the buildings in midtown and actually blinds me a bit 30 miles away! LOL! That's how amazing this skyline is and gives you an idea of just how big.

The place I took the picture from closes at 4 PM so I'm not sure if I can get in there at night to take a skyline picture and capture it all lit up 25 miles away but I'll try! Does anyone know if it will be lit tonight? If so I may go to Ocean Parkway and pull over to try and get a good shot.
Yeah Ocean Parkway is a good 32 miles from Lower Manhattan on a straight line
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 9th, 2013, 08:43 PM   #51562
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5307

Awesome photos!
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 08:54 PM   #51563
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

I'm not sure how I would classify it under current ctbuh rules. I think CCs77 made some good points. What I am sure is that "future height alteration" is idiotic argument since everything is removable/replaceable. For instance there is one classic boxy 30 years old skyscraper in Warsaw whose owner consider refitting it which includes adding several regular floors at the top of it. So the fact that the spire is removable means nothing because anything really is. In my opinion best move to stop this nonsense would be to alter the rules of ctbuh so they would count all be it spire antenna or what not. After all those structures are there pretty much permanently and in some cases even showcased as an architectural element (ie lighted up sears tower antennas) so I think it makes as much sense counting them in as it makes to count fake wanna be spire 1wtc is fitted with.
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C


pteranodon liked this post

Last edited by patrykus; November 9th, 2013 at 08:59 PM.
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 09:19 PM   #51564
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 2436

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
But it certainly is possible to alter its height in the future just as it is possible with the antennas of the Willis Tower. We can't say that "this will never happen", the future might bring many unexpected decisions. For example if one day, in a few decades the spantenna (as I neutraly call it) could be extended if its current height wouldn't be anymore enough to fully perform the full extend of its broadcasting duties. i'm not saying this will happen but I'm saying this can happen and therefore I think that the future height change point isn't appliable in this decision
Possible, as doable, yes, of course, but is pretty unlikely that they do that, since, again it is an architectural fixed height, with all the 1776 ft symbology. It can be done, just as the spires of Chrysler, Burj Khalifa, Trump Chicago, BOfA or NYT can be altered, or just as you can add five more floors (to say a random number) atop Sears Tower, but that's pretty unlikely to occur.

It would be pretty expensive and complicated to alter the height of this spiretenna, if only to increase the height of the building, just not worthed.
The antenna of Sears, or the one of the former WTC, or John Hancock or whatever, are clearly "cheaper", as structures, meant just to serve its functional purpose and nothing more, much more easily to alter if needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wtcforever View Post
this is NOT an antenna because it has no communication equipment and it was ment to be a spire
I think that several times has been said that it WILL have communication equipment attached to it, it is a mast and one of the purposes is to hold communication equipment, if not, we weren't having this discussion, it would be be called an spire from the very beggining, the rings are just for a part of the transmiting devices. But it's also true that was meant to be an spire, in this case is both, an spire and a mast for communication equipment, an spiretenna if you want.
BTW, Sears tower antennas are also masts, that hold the communication equipment, they are not the actual antennas, the difference is that the only purpose of them is broadcasting.
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 10:29 PM   #51565
4npower
Rooftop Shooter
 
4npower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hanover, Pennsylvania/Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,003
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCs77 View Post
I think that several times has been said that it WILL have communication equipment attached to it, it is a mast and one of the purposes is to hold communication equipment, if not, we weren't having this discussion, it would be be called an spire from the very beggining



I have asked the question several times for over a year now where someone could show me PROOF that there was ever OFFICIAL plans from the developer or anyone officially involved in the project to mount any kind of transmitting equipment to the actual spire. All I have ever received is people saying, "look at that notch, or hole right there, it was meant to hold communications equipment". To me, that's like saying, "hey, look at that tree branch, it was meant to hold a Bird's Nest". But that doesn't mean a Bird will build a nest there. Maybe in a decade or two the Bird will settle on that branch, but as of now, it has not.



Quote:
Originally Posted by CCs77 View Post
BTW, Sears tower antennas are also masts, that hold the communication equipment, they are not the actual antennas, the difference is that the only purpose of them is broadcasting.


The big Difference with Sears antennas, is the fact that they were added many years later, after the Tower had opened, and their main purpose, WAS, to hold communications equipment.
4npower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 11:16 PM   #51566
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

I took these yesterday, & today

image hosted on flickr


From Morristown this evening

image hosted on flickr


From Hoboken yesterday



enjoy
__________________
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 11:29 PM   #51567
AnOldBlackMarble
read lightship chronicles
 
AnOldBlackMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 5757

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oasis-Bangkok View Post
My only disappointment is that they did not build two of them. There's just something sad there all by itself. My hope is that in the near future someone will wise up and build another one right next to it.
__________________

Kanto, Vertical_Gotham liked this post
AnOldBlackMarble no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2013, 11:59 PM   #51568
Zaanstad_1987
Walking Dutchman
 
Zaanstad_1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 112
Likes (Received): 30

Just wait until 2WTC rises into the skyline! (perhaps 2021-2025 if keep the slow economy in mind)
Zaanstad_1987 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:00 AM   #51569
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4605

There's are 2 more towers that will rise on the site, one of them pretty much as tall as 1WTC so it will have company and more.
I saw the spire close by yesterday and personally, I think it desperately needs the ring to be lit. It's already skinny as it is and with those lights, it looks disconnected from the rest of the building. Also the beacon is not as bright as I thought. A bit disapointed I might say.
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:09 AM   #51570
NYdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 93
Likes (Received): 38

The beacon was really bright. I saw it from around 20 miles away, and when it faces you, it's very bright. Did you see it when it faced you?

Also, I wonder if they're lighting it tonight. They went public yesterday with the "test" so why would they continue to wait?
NYdude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:27 AM   #51571
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 2436

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4npower View Post
I have asked the question several times for over a year now where someone could show me PROOF that there was ever OFFICIAL plans from the developer or anyone officially involved in the project to mount any kind of transmitting equipment to the actual spire. All I have ever received is people saying, "look at that notch, or hole right there, it was meant to hold communications equipment". To me, that's like saying, "hey, look at that tree branch, it was meant to hold a Bird's Nest". But that doesn't mean a Bird will build a nest there. Maybe in a decade or two the Bird will settle on that branch, but as of now, it has not.
Here are some articles about it

One World Trade Center readies for broadcasters
Read more at http://rbr.com/one-world-trade-cente...ZUJGfcXr49M.99

Quote:
RBR-TVBR interviewed John Lyons, Assistant Vice President and VP/Director of Broadcast Communications and Jordan Barowitz, Director of Consumer Affairs for the Durst Organization. Lyons is in negotiations with the broadcasters and is charged with coordinating leases.

What will be the height of the antennas atop 1WTC? I know the old one at the twin towers was 1,335 feet.

Lyons: The top of the building is 1,368. Going up another 408 feet is the spire above the rooftop. The antennas will be starting at about 1,480, and going to 1,700 feet. The top of the spire is 1,776 feet. [not an accident]

One World Trade Center awaits FCCs repacking decisions for new broadcast tenants

http://broadcastengineering.com/towe...adcast-tenants

Quote:
Now, as work is being completed on the top of the new One World Trade Center, broadcasters are faced with the decision of whether or not to return to the location. Antennas can go up to a height of 1700ft on the new building, and the facility will be ready for broadcasters who want to move there in 2015.






Quote:
Originally Posted by 4npower View Post
The big Difference with Sears antennas, is the fact that they were added many years later, after the Tower had opened, and their main purpose, WAS, to hold communications equipment.
Why WAS? as long as I know it is still their main purpose (and I think the only one)
Anyway, I think the big difference is that the 1WTC spire was planned from the beginning with the 1776 ft. height figure (an architectural decision) The Sears antennas, although added later, were also planned to be there from the beginning (they had to have structural previsons to support such big antennas) BUT NOT planned architecturally, they let the prevision, but the architects didn't care about the antennas, that was a technical issue not related with them, neither they know nor care about the height or other aspects of those antennas. The characteristics of the antennas were decided later, based solely in the technical aspects related, by the technicians or engineers that designed them.
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:52 AM   #51572
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

Yea not lit tonight, oh well
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:55 AM   #51573
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 2436

Adding to the argument as how because of their nature, antennas are far more mutable than spires, here's this pretty interesting article originally posted at SSP by drumz0rz.

The article dates back to february 16th 2000, when the Sears had recently lost its title as the world's tallest building to the Petronas, and nobody ever imagined a building as Burj Khalifa or some of the supertalls being constructed in Asia to be build so soon in the future. (and certainly not that the WTC would be destroyed a year and a half later in a masive terrorist atack)

Back then, they lenghtened the antenna of the Sears, surpassing the antenna of the old 1WTC, until that moment the highest building by pinnacle height. That's not something likely to happen with the 1WTC spirettena, which as I said, has an already fixed height.

Sears Tower To Stand Tallest In Antenna Race
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...ldings-tallest

Quote:
It's a game of inches up there in the skyscraper heavens.

Sears Tower, which lost its world's tallest building crown in 1996 to twin towers in Malaysia by a scant 33 feet, is adding 22 feet to one of its twin broadcast antennas for digital TV.

That will do more than alter the most prominent set of rabbit ears on the Chicago skyline.

It will give Sears the arcane distinction of having the tallest broadcast antenna atop a building--1,729 feet, precisely 12 inches higher than New York's World Trade Center.

And it will heighten the competition for lucrative lease deals with local television stations.

But it won't make Chicago home to the world's tallest building. The Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur will retain the title--at least until developer Scott Toberman one-ups the Malaysian upstarts with his planned 1,550-foot cloudbuster at 7 South Dearborn.

The people who run Sears Tower are pooh-poohing the prospect of the record, just as those who backed Petronas said that snatching the world's tallest title from Chicago was practically an afterthought.

"It's not something I spend every day studying," said Steve Budorick, senior vice president for the Midwest region of TrizecHahn Office Properties, which leases and manages Sears Tower.

But others suggested that, when a title beckons, real estate developers, building managers and architects inevitably find it irresistible.

For Sears, that means its antennas are likely to stretch just a tad taller than they might if no record had been in sight.

"If you're going to do 20 (feet), why not do 22?" said John Zils, an engineer at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, the Chicago firm that designed 26-year-old Sears Tower.

Skidmore is assisting TrizecHahn on the current expansion of Sears' antennas.

In January, a 55-foot section atop Sears' western antenna was removed by a helicopter, according to Budorick. A new, bigger chunk of antenna is likely to be installed between mid-March and May 1, TrizecHahn officials said.

It will be at least 75 feet tall and probably extend another 2 feet to reach 77 feet, Budorick said--enough to take the antenna record away from one of the World Trade Center towers in Manhattan.

"We're not going higher just to be higher," Budorick said. "We're going higher to accommodate specific users."
__________________

Vertical_Gotham liked this post
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 12:59 AM   #51574
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

[IMG]http://****************.wordpress.com/2013/11/worldtrade.jpg[/IMG]
http://nypost.com/2013/11/09/new-wtc...nally-beaming/
__________________

A.J.B 22, CCs77, little universe, DELL181 liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 01:02 AM   #51575
4npower
Rooftop Shooter
 
4npower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hanover, Pennsylvania/Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,003
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCs77 View Post
One World Trade Center readies for broadcastersRead more at http://rbr.com/one-world-trade-cente...ZUJGfcXr49M.99

One World Trade Center awaits FCCs repacking decisions for new broadcast tenants

http://broadcastengineering.com/towe...adcast-tenants


Thanks for the links CC. Definitely the first article I have read, that actually gave height numbers



Quote:
Originally Posted by CCs77 View Post
Why WAS? as long as I know it is still their main purpose (and I think the only one)

Was, as in past tense. I was referring to 1982 when the first antenna was erected atop Sears. But of course you are right, in saying that it is still their only function. After all, they are still there
__________________

CCs77, L.A.F.2. liked this post
4npower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 01:17 AM   #51576
Joshua Dodd
Registered User
 
Joshua Dodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 1,579
Likes (Received): 1548

So Sears Tower remains the tallest building?
Joshua Dodd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 01:28 AM   #51577
4npower
Rooftop Shooter
 
4npower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hanover, Pennsylvania/Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,003
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Dodd View Post
So Sears Tower remains the tallest building?


Technically, right now, yes. But only until the official height of 1WTC is announced. Although, most lists out there already have 1WTC as the tallest in the US.
4npower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 01:41 AM   #51578
wtcforever
higher than 1wtc
 
wtcforever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: St.petersburg,Florida
Posts: 768
Likes (Received): 684

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Dodd View Post
So Sears Tower remains the tallest building?
__________________
wtcforever liked this post
wtcforever no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 01:57 AM   #51579
baavaz17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 22
Likes (Received): 8

Does anyone know when it will officially open?!
baavaz17 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2013, 02:09 AM   #51580
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 2436

- deleted by request
__________________

Kanto liked this post
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
construction updates, development, ground zero, manhattan, new york city, nyc, port authority, supertall, world trade center

Thread Tools

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

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:25 PM.


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

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

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

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