HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive

    

One World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram
New York Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #33821  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 2:42 AM
JMGarcia's Avatar
JMGarcia JMGarcia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 3,723
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
As much as I want to get in on that, the question on hand is whether or not the mast on top of the Freedom Tower is to be considered a spire or simply an antenna......
Specifically about what the CTBUH will do, it will be interesting. They're in a very touchy area here that is laying bare how out dated their current rules are.

On the one hand, if they decide it's an antenna because its covering was not put on, there's going to be a lot of media attention and quite a bit of head scratching from a lot of people. I'm sure there'll be a lot of folks that'll be interviewed in the media saying they're wrong. It'll hurt their credibility.

On the other hand, it's so obviously not designed to be seen I can see how lots of people can also wonder how it would be considered an architectural feature if the CTBUH rules that it is. It just doesn't look like something someone would design to be seen, i.e. a piece of architecture. I think if they rule in favor that this could also hurt their credibility.

Personally, I think if you read the rules carefully it should be considered an architectural feature as it does not meet all the criteria for being a non-architectural feature and clearly has an architectural meaning behind it.

I also think, that this is a perfect opportunity for them to say that modern construction and design technology has advanced enough that they are "refining" their rules and correct standards that allow the toothpick on the NY Times to count and something like the Willis Tower's antennas to not count. This is the type of thing that'll enhance their credibility IMO.

To me, the tip of the building is 1787 and the top is 1368. It was quite obvious tonight that the FAA light is above the beacon at 1776 feet.
     
     
  #33822  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 3:22 AM
deepen915 deepen915 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sayreville, NJ
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadiomals View Post
I think it looks weird that only the antenna is lit and it's kinda just floating there in the dark, seemingly detached from the rest of the building. I hope they'll light the communication ring or parapet, like what they do for the Goldman-Sachs building and 4WTC.
definitely agree with this!
     
     
  #33823  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 4:11 AM
bunky's Avatar
bunky bunky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 88
     
     
  #33824  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 4:44 AM
weidncol weidncol is offline
weidncol
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunky View Post
Wow, amazing photo!
     
     
  #33825  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 6:02 AM
kpdrummer82's Avatar
kpdrummer82 kpdrummer82 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by weidncol View Post
Wow, amazing photo!
That just screams "F U terrorism" Go America!
     
     
  #33826  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 6:21 AM
Yankee fan for life's Avatar
Yankee fan for life Yankee fan for life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn new York
Posts: 287
1 wtc beacon 14 miles away from Coney Island !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFPBNJwjr8s
     
     
  #33827  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 7:27 AM
dropdeaded209's Avatar
dropdeaded209 dropdeaded209 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 232
let's all just be honest and admit how stupid it looks without the radome...
     
     
  #33828  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 7:34 AM
NYdude NYdude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 62
Love it! It looks amazing at night with everything lit up. I like personally, but that's just my opinion.
     
     
  #33829  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 7:47 AM
weidncol weidncol is offline
weidncol
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 386
Hey didn't the original Twin Towers change their antenna after about 10 years or so? Who knows, maybe the same will happen with One World Trade Center...
     
     
  #33830  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 10:20 AM
marvelfannumber1's Avatar
marvelfannumber1 marvelfannumber1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 209


I doubt it, since the twin's original antenna was very small, and obviously temporary.
     
     
  #33831  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 1:23 PM
Tectonic Tectonic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 428
This antenna looks better at night but you can tell something's not right with it.
     
     
  #33832  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 1:31 PM
wilfredo267 wilfredo267 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 134
lt would look a thousand times better if the the rings were lit up.
     
     
  #33833  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 3:21 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 36,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadiomals View Post
I think it looks weird that only the antenna is lit and it's kinda just floating there in the dark, seemingly detached from the rest of the building. I hope they'll light the communication ring or parapet, like what they do for the Goldman-Sachs building and 4WTC.
I do believe they plan to. I don't understand why they couldn't just keep testing it like they have been doing, no need to pull extra attention to it. I was looking for the rotating beacon, but was disappointed I didn't get to see that. And to have it lit up without the ring being lit was just silly.

I wonder why they wanted all eyes on the Freedom Tower mast for last nights showing.

Hmmm, it's maybe just a coincidence that it just happened to be on the same day the case was being made in Chicago to include it in the buildings height! That's right folks, nothing to see here, just a coincidence.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JMGarcia View Post
Specifically about what the CTBUH will do, it will be interesting. They're in a very touchy area here that is laying bare how out dated their current rules are.

On the one hand, if they decide it's an antenna because its covering was not put on, there's going to be a lot of media attention and quite a bit of head scratching from a lot of people. I'm sure there'll be a lot of folks that'll be interviewed in the media saying they're wrong. It'll hurt their credibility.
Their credibility is already hurt in that they're entertaining this farce to begin with. And now they may want to alter rules yet again, where a simple "no" would have done the trick. But as I've said, if they want to include it, you may as well include all the others. Imagine the fun with the rankings. The Freedom Tower brings everyone up. On the other hand, if they decide that neither spires nor antennas will count in official height, then it's all the same.

Meanwhile, the media is all over themselves with this one, and nobody has a clue...


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1511259

Chicago contending if One World Trade Center rises above Second City's Willis Tower on a technicality
With the imminent completion of 1 World Trade Center, the logical question arises: is it bigger than the Willis Tower in Chicago.






By Larry Mcshane
November 8, 2013

Quote:
The Second City — apparently tired of looking up at New York — could be conspiring to steal the title of the nation's tallest building. A Chicago-based committee of 30 architects will decide whether the 1,776-foot 1 World Trade Center rises above all skyscrapers from coast to coast, or finishes second to the Willis Tower on a technicality.

Architects for 1 World Trade Center say the spire is not merely a broadcast antenna, but a part of the building’s overall aesthetic appeal.

Disappointment awaits one of the two cities, as either the new World Trade Center or the Windy City skyscraper will wind up as second-tallest. A decision is due next week.






And I love this beautiful headline.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/25490938.cms

Is the 1 World Trade Centre tallest building in the world? Chicago panel debates

By AP | 9 Nov, 2013



http://nation.time.com/2013/11/08/wh...-main-mostpop2

Whoops! One World Trade Center May Not Be America’s Tallest Building
A change in the tower's 400-ft. spire opened debate over the building's height


By Noah Rayman Nov. 08, 2013



http://www.npr.org/2013/11/08/243714...uilding-debate

Size Does Matter, At Least In The Tallest Building Debate




by David Schaper and Joel Rose
November 08, 2013

Quote:
There's a question that's looming over the new skyscraper at the World Trade Center site in New York: Should it count as the tallest building in the country?

The developers say yes. But by some measures, the Willis Tower in Chicago — formerly known as Sears Tower — can still lay claim to the title.

Now, an obscure organization known as the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat is preparing to settle the debate.

"It's a seminal moment for skyscrapers," says Antony Wood, the council's executive director. "It doesn't come along every year."

The issue has been hanging over the architecture world since the spring, when construction crews hoisted a 400-foot metal mast into place at the top of One World Trade Center. As far as New Yorkers are concerned, it's now the tallest skyscraper in the hemisphere.

"It's a fact. It's taller," says Jerry Romano of New Jersey. "It doesn't matter to me. I'm just stating facts."

Veronica Smalls of Harlem agrees. "It has to be the tallest," she says.

"Not one of the tallest," interrupts her friend Tyreek Jones of Brooklyn, " 'cause New York City needs to be known as No. 1."

"We're standing on a sheet of glass, looking 1,353 feet straight down to the street," says Bob Wislow, standing on a ledge extending out from the sky deck on the 104th floor of the Willis Tower.

Wislow is a lifelong Chicagoan who watched this building go up 40 years ago. Now he's chairman and CEO of the company that manages it. Wislow says he has great respect for New York and for the developers and builders of One World Trade Center, which he calls a great symbol of American resilience. But, "I do think technically, if you strictly interpret the rules, that this would continue to be the tallest building," he says.

Even visitors from overseas agree. Lee Colgan and her family are visiting the sky deck from England.

"I think Chicago should have it, yeah," says Colgan. "The mast doesn't matter — it's the floors, in my eyes."

But Colgan doesn't get to decide; the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat does. It's based in Chicago — suspiciously — but it's made up of people from all over the world. Its 30-member "height" committee will be debating these buildings on Friday.

"The last time we did this, in 2007 ... we spent all day talking," says Wood.

There are two other issues that people aren't picking up on. One, this building won't be 1,776 ft either way. And two, forget about Chicago, this building is potentially on course to be no higher than number 3 in New York.
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.

Last edited by NYguy; Nov 9, 2013 at 3:36 PM.
     
     
  #33834  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 3:50 PM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 846
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I was looking for the rotating beacon, but was disappointed I didn't get to see that.
really? it was on all night.
__________________
click here too see hunser's list of the many supertall skyscrapers of New York City!
     
     
  #33835  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 3:54 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 36,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
really? it was on all night.
I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...




http://www.allledlighting.com/author...&doc_id=559438

Quote:
The capstone of 1-WTC's lighting will be a rotating beacon at the top of the spire. The beacon will project light in two opposing directions in a horizontal plane, like a lighthouse. It will rotate once per minute. John Gebbie sent this description of the beacon, developed by equipment suppliers J.R. Clancy and Strong Lighting: "...they developed the energy-efficient LED beacon which uses 50W LED modules, shot into a set of mirrors that concentrate the 288,000 lumens into a 1-degree beam spread, visible from miles away."

Once it lights up, the 1-WTC spire will be illuminated from dusk until 12:00 a.m. ET time.
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.

Last edited by NYguy; Nov 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM.
     
     
  #33836  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 3:55 PM
NYC GUY's Avatar
NYC GUY NYC GUY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 575
^^^
Don't forget about 1 Vanderbuilt isn't that supposed to at least reach 1500'? New York will eventually have it.
     
     
  #33837  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 4:29 PM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 846
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...




http://www.allledlighting.com/author...&doc_id=559438
it looked sort of like that from where I could view it, ~25 miles north. The rendering is exaggerated of course.
__________________
click here too see hunser's list of the many supertall skyscrapers of New York City!
     
     
  #33838  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 6:20 PM
Tectonic Tectonic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 428
11.07.13
Day & Night...sorry no tripod











©tectonic
     
     
  #33839  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 6:24 PM
Silverfox's Avatar
Silverfox Silverfox is offline
Gigatall Skyscraper
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunky View Post
It appears that the rings are lit up in this photo.
     
     
  #33840  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2013, 7:48 PM
TransitEngr TransitEngr is offline
(the rascacielo freak)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...




http://www.allledlighting.com/author...&doc_id=559438


I think that rendering might be an exaggeration. I could make out the rotating beacon last night, and also on the very first night they tested the beacon a few months back .... it's somewhat like the rotating beacon atop the Eiffel Tower.... only much much less bright.

Although I could be wrong... perhaps someone knows the precise lumen count for each beacon. I also seem to remember the rotating beacon on the Eiffel Tower is double-ended and I don't remember what I saw last night was double-ended here at 1 WTC.
__________________
I wouldn't kick him oudda bed for eatin' crackers.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:19 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.