Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sorry, but I really don't get when people say this. Knowing what we know now about that type of construction and its vulnerabilities--REALLY? You think engineers are going to employ that design again and get it approved? And let's not forget that part of the reason so many people are dead is because of the fact that the only way that type of building was commercially profitable was the open floor space permitted by the staircases and elevators sitting in the core, and that presented a life-safety problem. Even if they built them to LOOK the same on the outside, the present life safety codes developed since 9/11 would take up too much rentable floor space, and the building would not be commerically viable. It's one thing to indulge sentimentality, but to spend billions on it is a little too much of an indulgence.
When we say "rebuild the towers" we don't mean literally, with the load bearing curtain wall and prefab floor sections sitting on bar joist on 3/4" bolts.
Just the general look and shape of the originals, with modern structural design.
I don't know, its weird as a young child I remember going to the towers and them being so huge. As an adult, the new buildings are huge but I still can't get over that perspective I had as a child when I saw the old ones. Up close freedom tower looks pretty cool but from afar its ugly, I thought the exact opposite about the older ones.
When we say "rebuild the towers" we don't mean literally, with the load bearing curtain wall and prefab floor sections sitting on bar joist on 3/4" bolts.
Just the general look and shape of the originals, with modern structural design.
Agree, I would've like to see that too. Maybe because of the new One world Trade Center still
under construction and not finish yet, I can't seem to connect this building to the Twin Towers.
The new building looks good in it's own way, it might grow on me with time, but I will probably
always have this nostalgia feeling for the Twin Towers.
Also, the new building kind of reminds me of The Lord of the Ring tower Barad-dur right now with
it's top half being black looking in color, and those huge Cranes on top that make it looks like horns,
just imagine a huge burning eye between those cranes at night.
There better be an observation deck on top of the new tower!
I miss the old towers. The two of them together added a lot of heft to the skyline of lower Manhattan. The new ones look a bit too elaborate, and not hefty enough.
There will be definitely be an obdeck. I believe it's in the RFP stage now.
When we say "rebuild the towers" we don't mean literally, with the load bearing curtain wall and prefab floor sections sitting on bar joist on 3/4" bolts.
Just the general look and shape of the originals, with modern structural design.
OK, I get ya. (And for some reason I remember engineers talking about 5/8" bolts, but I'm not sure enough to argue about it.)
The WTC was a wonderful place to work. Being inside of it was the best part--the views were magnificent. And some of the beauty in the exterior was the way it reflected the light.
OK, I get ya. (And for some reason I remember engineers talking about 5/8" bolts, but I'm not sure enough to argue about it.)
The WTC was a wonderful place to work. Being inside of it was the best part--the views were magnificent. And some of the beauty in the exterior was the way it reflected the light.
Whoops I was remembering wrong. I think they did use 5/8ths on the inside of the span. Which is even weaker.
There's a great book about the history of Koch, the steel erecting company that did the Towers. The sons were running it by the time of that job. They brought the old man to see the site, rolled him off the hoist on the hundredth floor in his wheel chair and he looked around and said "where's all the steel???".
I'm sorry, but I really don't get when people say this. Knowing what we know now about that type of construction and its vulnerabilities--REALLY? You think engineers are going to employ that design again and get it approved? And let's not forget that part of the reason so many people are dead is because of the fact that the only way that type of building was commercially profitable was the open floor space permitted by the staircases and elevators sitting in the core, and that presented a life-safety problem. Even if they built them to LOOK the same on the outside, the present life safety codes developed since 9/11 would take up too much rentable floor space, and the building would not be commerically viable. It's one thing to indulge sentimentality, but to spend billions on it is a little too much of an indulgence.
You've got to be kidding? There was nothing wrong with the old design. If you fly two 747 jumbo jets into any building with full tanks of fuel you are going to have a major problem.
Can't argue with good old-fashioned common sense, 9162. There just aren't any buildings designed to withstand direct hits by fuel-laden airplanes. Hit 'em just right, and down they go.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
