SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
User
Joined
·
5,634 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
All the info you need...

Trump said he hoped Americans would “write to Governor Pataki and demand that the World Trade Center be rebuilt in a bigger, better form.”

Here is how concerned citizens can reach Pataki:

Governor George Pataki
State Capitol Building
Albany, New York 12224
Phone: 518-474-1041
e-mail: http://161.11.3.75/

The late Senator Everett Dirksen (R., Ill.) once famously said: “When I feel the heat, I see the light.” It’s time for the American people to build a bonfire.
 

·
Member, Winifred Fan Club
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Sure I'd write Pataki. But I'd write him that I want a World Trade Center that's better and bigger, which means not the Freedom Tower and not the Gardner/Trump plan.
 

·
Lurker
Joined
·
1,816 Posts
boybaha said:
Sure I'd write Pataki. But I'd write him that I want a World Trade Center that's better and bigger, which means not the Freedom Tower and not the Gardner/Trump plan.
Well, as of now, Gardner/Belton & Libeskind are the only plausible options.
- So obviously WTCII > FT
 

·
Professional
Joined
·
764 Posts
i'm still waiting to see how they are going to make them "better"

seeing as they really seem set on sticking thousands and thousands of people hundreds of feet in the air with the same old core fire exit design...
 

·
Lurker
Joined
·
1,816 Posts
Architorture said:
i'm still waiting to see how they are going to make them "better"

seeing as they really seem set on sticking thousands and thousands of people hundreds of feet in the air with the same old core fire exit design...
I dont think so...

> The core would feature the same columns as the exterior skin, and its walls would be of reinforced concrete.
> Fireproofing will be of improved technologies rather than the spray-on coatings used previously. Elevators would be of fireproof design, and the towers would have advanced fire-fighting systems.
> Both buildings would have six stairwells rather than four. The stairwells would contain sensors which indicate if they have been breached in any way. The stairwells would also be wider than the originals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,088 Posts
boybaha said:
Sure I'd write Pataki. But I'd write him that I want a World Trade Center that's better and bigger, which means not the Freedom Tower and not the Gardner/Trump plan.
I hear you.
 

·
Professional
Joined
·
764 Posts
some of the stair ways were COMPLETELY cutoff the last time, no number of sensors is going to help that...

when you have a fire 70, 80 90 stories up in the air, no number of fire fighting systems is going to help you especially when you have thousands of gallons of jet fuels burning... water isn't going to put out that kind of fire, unless it is an enormous amount of water... what kind of system are you going to have to put in to pump that much water up several hundred if not a thousand feet???

or are you going to have a wet sprinkler system... i wonder how much 100 stories worth of pipes filled with water weighs???

also what are they going to do about the trusses that were used in the original WTC, if they throw away that system in favor of solid beams they will be adding significant amounts of weight [price] and build time [price] to the structure as well...

all you can depend in that case of a high rise fire is that the fire proofing will hold out for the duration of the fire.... a fire like the WTC probably could have sustained itself for several hours... there isn't much fire proofing out there with that capability...

skyscrapers are INHERENTLY unsafe b/c of the chance of a devastating fire... they can say its 'redesigned' and 'better' all they want, but the core issues are still the same and the danger is still there...
 

·
Lurker
Joined
·
1,816 Posts
So you're saying the points you're making to back your feelings toward the safety of new twin towers mean nothing because they apply to all skyscrapers in general? - Thanks for clearing that up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Architectorture...how about focusing on how long the Towers stood, allowing people to escape before they collapsed? How about that this was a fire of unusual proportion? A simple fire in a high-rise won't have the effect of a 9/11 fire.

Why don't you focus your bitterness on America's security as well as the security of airplanes as well as immigration? Those are the chief reasons why 9/11 happened. People who don't belong in this country getting in past security with weapons and overtaking a plane and crashing them into a building. That's a bigger problem.
 

·
Long live the Twins!
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
if you are going to make that argument about the impossibility of building safe twins, then i don't see how can the freedom tower or any other building can possibly be built safe according to your standards either, unless you build a skyscraper that's like those concrete-walled telephone company switching center fortresses scattered across nyc.

besides, with the improvement on airport safety and the fact that we americans have learned to beat the crap out of any plane hijackers instead of letting them do whatever they want, the chance that the new wtc's gonna suffer any air attacks that would kill those on the upper floors is miniscule. what we should focus on is protecting the buildings from ground and underground explosions (but no turning base of the new wtc into concrete fortresses).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Definitaly Pataki will feel my heat!!!

But not only write to him, wirte to Trump to. Tell him you support him and his plan and that he is brave and bold and well you know.

Heres his info.

Mr.Donald Trump
CEO,Trump Organization
725 5th Avenue
New York,NY 10022




For the lazy folk, Im writing a letter to Trump, I will post it here and people can re-word it a little and it will look brand-new. Then you can mail it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
New York Yankee said:
i come from the Netherlands, and i want to send a mail. can i use a zipcode of anyone of yours???

i've a good story to tell to pataki.

sure heres some

Passaic NJ- 07055
Clifton NJ- 07011
Hoboken NJ 07034


Dont forget to write to Trump to!
 

·
What'u smokin' Willis?
Joined
·
2,097 Posts
Architorture said:
some of the stair ways were COMPLETELY cutoff the last time, no number of sensors is going to help that...
Umm, yes they will. The job of the sensors is to tell people which stairways are or are not cut-off so people can go down the right one.

Moot point as there won't be another airliner attack anyway.
 

·
Long live the Twins!
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
if there were indeed sensors installed in the towers before the devastating attacks, then most, if not all, of those killed in the south tower during the attacks would have survived the collapse. since flight 175 slammed into the south tower at an angle, the explosion failed to cut off the stairway farthest away from the impact, and it was still passable.

however, no one in the floors above the impact knew about that, and only 2 people in those floors took the chance, went down the stairwell, and escaped alive. the rest did not take the chance and went up to the roof of the tower instead, hoping for a helicopter to rescue them. but they had forgotten that the roof doors are locked, and as the result, they were trapped in the tower when it collapsed.

if there had been such sensors, such tragedy would've never happened...

like what someone said in a past post, it would be foolish for the terrorists to attack the future world trade center by air, because now we all know about such possibility, and had taken steps to prevens such horrible tragedy from ever happen again, and now such a method of attack will be harder to execute successfully.
 

·
Professional
Joined
·
764 Posts
NewYorkMantle said:
So you're saying the points you're making to back your feelings toward the safety of new twin towers mean nothing because they apply to all skyscrapers in general? - Thanks for clearing that up.
oh so since something applies to an entire typology we shouldn't be concerned wtih it? hasn't it ever crossed your mind that building over 50 stories might not be such a good idea?

consider the petronas towers... the 'skybridge' was only included after the Oklahoma City bombing when the designers decided there need to be an alternate route out of one of the towers if the other were damaged or on fire... so the sky bridge takes place at a point where rescue ladders and such wouldn't reach...

the idea was to try to make a building that is inherently unsafe, maybe a little safer by offering an escape route through the other building...


RichardNYC said:
Architectorture...how about focusing on how long the Towers stood, allowing people to escape before they collapsed? How about that this was a fire of unusual proportion? A simple fire in a high-rise won't have the effect of a 9/11 fire.

Why don't you focus your bitterness on America's security as well as the security of airplanes as well as immigration? Those are the chief reasons why 9/11 happened. People who don't belong in this country getting in past security with weapons and overtaking a plane and crashing them into a building. That's a bigger problem.
yes it is admirable how long they stood...and it certainly saved lives, but it doesn't mean everything was hunky dorry with the design

it was a fire of unusual proportion, but apparently it was a situation that had been considered since they claimed the building could withstand a hit from a 707...

just b/c i don't think rebuilding twin tower replicas is a good idea doesn't mean i'm bitter... have you ever considered that maybe there is NO GOOD REASON to build a 100+ story building, let alone 2 of them?

7 World Trade said:
if you are going to make that argument about the impossibility of building safe twins, then i don't see how can the freedom tower or any other building can possibly be built safe according to your standards either, unless you build a skyscraper that's like those concrete-walled telephone company switching center fortresses scattered across nyc.

besides, with the improvement on airport safety and the fact that we americans have learned to beat the crap out of any plane hijackers instead of letting them do whatever they want, the chance that the new wtc's gonna suffer any air attacks that would kill those on the upper floors is miniscule. what we should focus on is protecting the buildings from ground and underground explosions (but no turning base of the new wtc into concrete fortresses).
that is what i'm saying... skyscrapers are inherently unsafe structures... what the freedom tower does do is it doesn't have occuppied floors all the way up... occuppied floors stop at a lower [safer] level...

the twin towers, and any near replica is going to suffer from the same weaknesses... a large central core that contains all means of escape, and the shear height...there is no way to get water up so high if the sprinkler system fails or is cut off....and you hardly need jet fuel to have a out of control fire... think of the items you find in a normal office, lots of synthetic flammable fibers on partions, lots of wood or homosote, and plenty of loose leaf paper... if that all goes up in flames you are going to have a hell of a fire....

i'd just like to see something a little more creative in terms of circulation from at least 1 or 2 proposals...we should take the WTC case as a lesson learned and make whatever gets built there the safest it can be, which might mean breaking the mold a little bit, not building replicas...

also on your comment about make the base more secure... you can see plenty of examples for why that doesn't work in an urban context, look at any john portman building such as the renaissance center in detroit...when you make the base of your buildings like a fortress they don't work very well with the city around them...

of course that is more of a formal example...you can certainly take time to reinforce the base of the building, but you can't allow it to become a fortress

STR said:
Umm, yes they will. The job of the sensors is to tell people which stairways are or are not cut-off so people can go down the right one.

Moot point as there won't be another airliner attack anyway.
my point is that no number of sensors is going to stop a stairway from being cutoff... yes if could help people navigate down through the building, but if the entire core is destroyed those sensors did nothing...

and if its such a moot point, why include sensors at all?

as 7 world trade said... there probably isn't a very good chance of a plane attack happening again... but there is still plenty of chance for a devastating fire taking place... everyone has said, the plane isn't want brought down the WTC it was the fire...

anyone with male intent could quite easily build a fire bomb out of cleaning supplies and any number of items that can be found in any office building... and it could easily be a fire that could spread out of control, out of reach of fire hoses....

if there were a office fire on the 90th floor of a new WTC what kind of response do you think there would be to it... i don't think you would see police and firemen running up there like you did on 9/11... it could be jsut as devastating if it were allowed to burn out of control...
 

·
Long live the Twins!
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
i explicitly stated in parenthesis in that post you quoted that the new wtc must not have a base that resembles a fortress (the only good thing i find with the freedom tower design is that its base design is not close to being as wimpy as that of its top). if such things get installed, then we're just proclaiming to the world that we're scared about the prospect of a terrorist attack. to cower in the face of terror instead of standing firm against it is the last thing that the new wtc should advocate.

besides, to make a fortress look appealing is a practically impossible task to do... it's a world trade center we're talking about, not some military compound, so a fortress have no place at the site.

it's also important to keep in mind that a fire in a building is just as hard to deal with if it's 70 floors up as if it's 110 floors up. getting water pumped up a 70-floor building is no easier than doing the same thing in a 110-floor building. if a fire is more than 10 floors high, then conventional fire equipments will not work at all. the answer to deal with the threat of potential arson attacks against the wtc is not by making the buildings shorter, but employing a more fireproof structure that can protect the building's vital structural elements for a more extended period of time. either ways, some risks are needed to be taken in rebuilding the wtc complex. if we are not willing to face them, we might as well move everything on the wtc site underground, which is exactly the terrorists want us to do.

the biggest potential threat to the wtc in the future is likely to come in the form of car bombs, incendiary bombs, and dirty bombs. unlike aerial attacks, such weapon can likely be successfully implemented against buildings of all sizes and heights. all that matters is whether or not the building's worth the effort to target. no building, rebuilt twins or freedom tower, is any more safer again such potential infiltration attacks. the most efficient way to curb this possibility is step up intelligence so it could more easily uncover such operation (without jeopardizing basic civil liberties of course), like what we successfully did against an attempt to target citigroup, prudential hq in newark, and world bank last summer.

and about the stairwell sensors argument, did you read my last post about how more than 500+ people who perished in the south tower might have never done so if they had just realized that one of the tower's stairwell survived flight 175's impact? if there had been sensors, most if not all of them would have survived. it's amazing enough that 1 stairwell in the south tower managed to survive the impact of a plane going at 500+ mph, considering the tower doesn't even have a concrete core to protect those stairwells. i'm sure if concrete cores were used in the twins, at least one of the north tower's stairwell would've also survived the impact.

indeed, the sensors would be useless if the every stairwell is cut off. but what if that's not the case? if there are no sensors in such circumstances, the office workers above the damaged sections of the core will not be able to know that they have a chance of escaping down the building and might end up resorting to more dangerous means of getting rescued, like leaping out of the building in desperation or head to the roof, only to be killed in the building's collapse, which is exactly what happened to the office workers in the south tower who were never even trapped as they thought in the first place.

the tragedy of not having sensors in building stairwells had already resulted in the loss of 500+ lives on that fateful day (if the terrorists had been smart enough to attack later on in the day, the casualty would've been even higher). how can anyone possibly want to risk having that happen again in the future? you yourself have favored the implementation of as many safety features as possible in any new wtc building, so how is the idea of stairwell sensors too much for you to take?
 

·
Professional
Joined
·
764 Posts
sorry about the fortress thing... idon't know how i read right over that... but if you are familiar with john portman buildings, they aren't so much fortresses at the base in terms of materiality as they do in form and attitude...

on sensors, obviously, their presence is better than not being there...but what exactly are they sensing...smoke, fire, heat, overcrowding ect ect... personally i'm not all that familiar with the south tower stair well story...obviously it is based off of 2 peoples accounts, but the state of that stair well after those people passed through cannot possibly be known...so its all conjecture at that point as to whether or not it was still open...but anyway

back to the sprinkler deal...thats what i'm talking about... things like fire protection, fire extiguishing and circulation systems within a high rise should be seriously reconsidered and rethought to make them as effective as possible... those are the problems that should be being mulled over not whether or not you can fit a wind mill in the top or if it is a story taller than the last WTC
 

·
Long live the Twins!
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
it's all right. no harm done...

what we really need for skyscraper fire safety is a liquid flame retardant that's more effective than just water, and can be created in large quantities to be stored within skyscrapers. i heard about a kind of liquid recently developed that can put out fire as good as water does, but the plus is that it does not stick to surfaces and make them "wet". dunno if it's practical for usage in skyscrapers though...
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top