The New WTC?
Monday, July 15, 2002 by joetheblow | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
What do you think about this design?
http://wtc2002.com/start.lasso
I like the idea of a living memorial. I guess that idea is getting around. That was the first thing I thought of when poeple wanted a park with no biuldings and I was like "but what about the economic and homestead solutions? People use to live there too?"
The Cyber sound wave airplane repeller is a far fetched and dangerous idea, but the egress escape plan is very valid.
Overall I think it is a wonderful plan. It did go to far as it was intended to do (actually that is how most architects design, from imagination, then reality and other factors set in)
Pushing the building envelope is a good idea but I am not sure how the neighbors will feel about the shadow that will be formed from this tower that is taller than the original WCT towers.
I am working on my ideas and will release them (with others from other people) in October Desktop X Future WTC release.
anyway what are your thoughts?????
http://wtc2002.com/start.lasso
I like the idea of a living memorial. I guess that idea is getting around. That was the first thing I thought of when poeple wanted a park with no biuldings and I was like "but what about the economic and homestead solutions? People use to live there too?"
The Cyber sound wave airplane repeller is a far fetched and dangerous idea, but the egress escape plan is very valid.
Overall I think it is a wonderful plan. It did go to far as it was intended to do (actually that is how most architects design, from imagination, then reality and other factors set in)
Pushing the building envelope is a good idea but I am not sure how the neighbors will feel about the shadow that will be formed from this tower that is taller than the original WCT towers.
I am working on my ideas and will release them (with others from other people) in October Desktop X Future WTC release.
anyway what are your thoughts?????
Jafo
Reply #2 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:06 AM
Reply #2 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:06 AM
It's not all that bad....a bit predictable in a lot of ways....I just wish I was the supplier of all the glass.....I'd be retiring along with a few thousand colleagues after a contract like that one...
AJCrowley
Reply #3 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:22 AM
Reply #3 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:22 AM
I think it's kind of ugly. The old WTC was by no means pretty, but it was dull enough to be inoffensive. While the size of the structure will certainly make it an impressive sight, I can't really say I'm keen on the design.
An efficient escape route is a sensible idea, and something that should have been implemented in the first (nothing to do with terrorist attacks, that just showed us what a nice hot fire could do to the structure), but the "airplane repeller" is one of the most ridiculous ideas that I've ever heard.
AJC
An efficient escape route is a sensible idea, and something that should have been implemented in the first (nothing to do with terrorist attacks, that just showed us what a nice hot fire could do to the structure), but the "airplane repeller" is one of the most ridiculous ideas that I've ever heard.
AJC
Dangeruss
Reply #4 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 9:42 AM
Reply #4 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 9:42 AM
Maybe an enourmous "bug zapper" device instead of the sonic repeller 
AJCrowley
Reply #5 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 11:03 PM
Reply #5 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 11:03 PM
Now you're thinking Dangeruss, my only fear would be that a giant fluorescent lamp hanging from the eaves of the building might attract mindless pilots who would swarm around it until they got electrocuted. If you have any doubts as to the lack of intelligence in pilots, please bear in mind that the starting pay for a pilot at Delta is about 15k, Continental gets around 13k, and American Eagle gets a whopping $17k, out of which they must pay for their own uniforms and their own first year of training. As I read somewhere, never trust your life to a man who earns less than the kid at taco bell.
AJC
AJC
kith
Reply #6 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 11:52 PM
Reply #6 Tuesday, July 16, 2002 11:52 PM
AJ,
I'm sure where you got your facts form but Airline pilots are very well paid. This is especially true for "Captains" who are the senior officer on the plane. I doubt if you could find a Captain of any large jet aircraft for any of the major airlines making less than six figures. Most airline pilots are recruited form military retirees and start at way above those figures mentioned above. Pilots are paid by the minute and pay scales above $3.00 are common. I can almost guarantee you that you have never flown in a plane piloted by someone making less than a kid at taco bell, well maybe if you've been on Aeroflot... With mandatory retirement at 60 you have to earn it while you can! Feel safe you are in good hands...
Here's a link:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm
I'm sure where you got your facts form but Airline pilots are very well paid. This is especially true for "Captains" who are the senior officer on the plane. I doubt if you could find a Captain of any large jet aircraft for any of the major airlines making less than six figures. Most airline pilots are recruited form military retirees and start at way above those figures mentioned above. Pilots are paid by the minute and pay scales above $3.00 are common. I can almost guarantee you that you have never flown in a plane piloted by someone making less than a kid at taco bell, well maybe if you've been on Aeroflot...
With mandatory retirement at 60 you have to earn it while you can! Feel safe you are in good hands...Here's a link:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm
kith
Reply #7 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:08 AM
Reply #7 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:08 AM
cough... make that:
"I'm not sure where you got your facts from..."
I should not type when this low on caffeine.
"I'm not sure where you got your facts from..."
I should not type when this low on caffeine.
migellito
Reply #8 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:33 AM
Reply #8 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:33 AM
quite true bill.. one of my cousins is a pilot, and he is quite well off.
f e r r e t
Reply #9 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:56 AM
Reply #9 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:56 AM
the 6 figure pay packet doesn't cover mechanical failure...
planetmonkey
Reply #10 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:37 AM
Reply #10 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:37 AM
They seem to be missing the point though. Why build the biggest building ever, and not just a park or a memorial in the place.
I'm not familier why NY, but are they planning on building it in the same place?
I wouldn't really fancy living or working where so many people have been left to rest. And they should be left to rest.
It's nice to see they are including a memorial and trees inside, shows some heart at least.
Also the fact that it's another WTC, paints a huge target on the side of it.
My 2 english pence.
Chris.
I'm not familier why NY, but are they planning on building it in the same place?
I wouldn't really fancy living or working where so many people have been left to rest. And they should be left to rest.
It's nice to see they are including a memorial and trees inside, shows some heart at least.
Also the fact that it's another WTC, paints a huge target on the side of it.
My 2 english pence.
Chris.
joetheblow
Reply #11 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:09 PM
Reply #11 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 12:09 PM
The problem with designing the site is that it is a place of work and school and living. So just having a park or a fenced memorial only will most likly not happen. My Mom doesn't like working down there but she does, and so do some other hundreds of thousand people. Some people moved but others stayed. What about them?
It is a really tough site to design in the first place. Now it will definatly be tougher and everyone will have a opition about it... and as they should.
I think they might leave the foot print of WTC alone. But frankly I do not know how they are going to do it. The tower itself did not take up that much of a footprint but it is a prime spot for biulding. That is why they put it there.
Smaller towers might work. 50 or 60 stories... but then the question os open space comes into play. A cluster of biuldings is the reason why the Zoning code was designed and so many biuldings taper off as they get taller or are set back from the street wall of other biuldings.
We will see what will be biult. It will probably take about 10 years to design and biuld. Normal design and biuld usually takes 7 years.
It is a really tough site to design in the first place. Now it will definatly be tougher and everyone will have a opition about it... and as they should.
I think they might leave the foot print of WTC alone. But frankly I do not know how they are going to do it. The tower itself did not take up that much of a footprint but it is a prime spot for biulding. That is why they put it there.
Smaller towers might work. 50 or 60 stories... but then the question os open space comes into play. A cluster of biuldings is the reason why the Zoning code was designed and so many biuldings taper off as they get taller or are set back from the street wall of other biuldings.
We will see what will be biult. It will probably take about 10 years to design and biuld. Normal design and biuld usually takes 7 years.
migellito
Reply #12 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:51 PM
Reply #12 Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:51 PM
it's interesting. i can't help but be reminded of the hours i spent on simcity 2000, and the self-contained arcologies. it's the first thing i thought of when i saw some of the new designs, and i think it's a fine goal.
manhattan really wouldn't be helped ecologically by trying to create greenspace in the area, and i'm sure any building constructed there will incorporate a heartfelt and prominent memorial.
but what's the best memorial? trying to make something shorter? not building? incorporating fear into the planning? i don't think so.
i think it's an excellent time to experiment with the idea of real-world arcologies.
manhattan really wouldn't be helped ecologically by trying to create greenspace in the area, and i'm sure any building constructed there will incorporate a heartfelt and prominent memorial.
but what's the best memorial? trying to make something shorter? not building? incorporating fear into the planning? i don't think so.
i think it's an excellent time to experiment with the idea of real-world arcologies.
Jafo
Reply #13 Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:11 AM
Reply #13 Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:11 AM
Economics would put the WTC footprint in such a developed city into the realm of dollars-per-square-millimeter....and with land values such as that, nothing cost-wise short of the Original towers would be economically viable. That means it's gotta be 'big' [tall], preferably more so than the previous, to re-establish its prominence in the World Scale of Phalluses....so it obviously becomes a 'target' again, but with clever form/design, can be made 'survivable'.
When the Towers were built originally, they conformed to a code of building standard which has never been accepted in Australia, for example, where a similar construction method was proposed for a contemporary building here in Melbourne, but was flatly rejected...purely for fire-standards. Around 1970, there was a high-rise residential tower in England where one flat had a gas explosion, blowing out one wall, and like a deck of cards, the tower disassembled itself, along with a few hundred tenants. Panic spread through the Architecture/Building fraternity in Aus because we, too had these 'Housing Commission' towers, but, being from 'Down-under' we did things a bit different....linking the pre-cast concrete panels with re-inforced concrete 'joints' - a sort of continuous weld, rather than a simple bolting method...and a quarter scale model was built [it was 4 storeys tall]..to test wind stability, but after the disaster in the UK, it was to test equivalent explosion-damage as well...
The way the WTC mk.2 is set-up, it certainly looks like a similar occurence as Sep 11 would be highly survivable.....though the 'Bug-zapper' is about as corny as you can get...
When the Towers were built originally, they conformed to a code of building standard which has never been accepted in Australia, for example, where a similar construction method was proposed for a contemporary building here in Melbourne, but was flatly rejected...purely for fire-standards. Around 1970, there was a high-rise residential tower in England where one flat had a gas explosion, blowing out one wall, and like a deck of cards, the tower disassembled itself, along with a few hundred tenants. Panic spread through the Architecture/Building fraternity in Aus because we, too had these 'Housing Commission' towers, but, being from 'Down-under' we did things a bit different....linking the pre-cast concrete panels with re-inforced concrete 'joints' - a sort of continuous weld, rather than a simple bolting method...and a quarter scale model was built [it was 4 storeys tall]..to test wind stability, but after the disaster in the UK, it was to test equivalent explosion-damage as well...
The way the WTC mk.2 is set-up, it certainly looks like a similar occurence as Sep 11 would be highly survivable.....though the 'Bug-zapper' is about as corny as you can get...
RobbieRobb
Reply #14 Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:53 AM
Reply #14 Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:53 AM
The one thing that caught my eye in the description of their plan is the requirement of a mandatory 5-mile no-fly zone around Manhattan. Then it goes on to say that the escape plan will be aided by using helicopters from the various levels. I take it the no-fly only pertains to planes and not 'copters...
And while I'm not familiar with the Manhattan area, isn't a couple major airports within 5 miles of Manhattan???
And while I'm not familiar with the Manhattan area, isn't a couple major airports within 5 miles of Manhattan???
f e r r e t
Reply #15 Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:42 AM
Reply #15 Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:42 AM
down here in New Zealand, nobody ever flies planes into buildings, there's just nothing valuable enough to destroy
besides, when all the buildings are only 30-45 floors high, it becomes rather difficult to take one out without getting the rest. Why not just build flack cannons or sam sites on the tops of all the big buildings?
besides, when all the buildings are only 30-45 floors high, it becomes rather difficult to take one out without getting the rest. Why not just build flack cannons or sam sites on the tops of all the big buildings?
goodmorphing
Reply #16 Thursday, July 18, 2002 6:15 AM
Reply #16 Thursday, July 18, 2002 6:15 AM
This is real pretty and I would like to see a building like that. But I was watching on the news some of the proposals and there was one with twin towers and I kind of liked the feeling that seeing those gave me. Kind of a missing piece that was all filled back in...
Tarkus
Reply #17 Thursday, July 18, 2002 4:04 PM
Reply #17 Thursday, July 18, 2002 4:04 PM
Does anyone think they'll have trouble leasing the higher floors? After all, there are a great many people still afraid to fly, because of 9/11.
Jafo
Reply #18 Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:42 PM
Reply #18 Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:42 PM
No...it'll be seen as thumbing one's nose at the events of 9/11.....and besides, people have short memories....even over things of this magnitude...
joetheblow
Reply #19 Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:04 PM
Reply #19 Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:04 PM
They just came out with 6 proposals. I really do not like any of them but I guess what I want biult is not really cost effective.
Any way here are the links. Check it out and give your opinion.
I know I will.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/779908.asp?pne=msn
http://www.renewnyc.com/plan/concepts.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/18/nyregion/18REBU.html
Any way here are the links. Check it out and give your opinion.
I know I will.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/779908.asp?pne=msn
http://www.renewnyc.com/plan/concepts.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/18/nyregion/18REBU.html
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Monday, July 15, 2002 9:34 PM
this is another link....
comments????