NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS

[sw5710]

Looks like the decking for floors 57,58 is just about complete. The red supports for the cranes have also been lifted for the next jump.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by NCYLuver

Great shots NCYLuver! (Glad to hear about the foot, too!)

And the cladding is looking great, the blue is very vibrant.

[CoolCzech]

Originally Posted by brian.odonnell20

when do you guys think that this project will get more national publicity? I know its on fox with that weekly segment, but when are Discovery channel and major broadcast networks going to have detailed specials and other things like that? the tenth anniversary? Its really starting to become quite imposing for the hole in the ground that most people think it is.

I'm sure that once the tower is topped out and fully glazed it will be the building in the backdrop behind every televised talking head speaking from New York.

[STR]

Originally Posted by Zensteeldude

T-Mobile is doing alot of expansion work in the Tri-State area. Maybe you could throw a few cell antennas up there too. (I have no idea if the top of the tower is a suitable place for cell antennas or not.

With NYC's density? That would be the single most congested cell site on the planet. Unless you're in the middle of the sticks, you don't want a cell site that big, and even in rural areas, you're going outside of spec, meaning you'd have to run the transceivers above their normal power. A cell company is more likely to be interested in hiding a cell behind the prismatic glass in the base, between the glass panels and the metal grating.

[Zensteeldude]

You confirmed my suspicions.

All the expansion T-Mobile sites are low rise (50 to 80 feet above grade)

[patriotizzy]

Originally Posted by NYCLuver

March 15th, 2011

(BTW, My foot has healed yay! )

Let us see an update on your foot. Ha jk.

[NYCLuver]

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

Let us see an update on your foot. Ha jk.

Haha nothing to see but a foot, I had tendonitis in my foot so it caused me pain to put pressure on it at all.

I'm glad that 1WTC is beginning to make an impact from different places around the city now, can't wait till it breaks through the 750ft barrier and reaches ever higher!

[animatedmartian]

NYMAN2010





^This is a good 20(by driving) 12 miles away in Queens.

Only a matter of time.

[NYYskyline]

Nice to see the shots from Queens

[Don098]

Has the earthcam been stuck on a night shot for everyone else?

[newhannibal]

Lower Manhattan From the Manhattan Bridge by newhannibal112, on Flickr

[JACKinBeantown]

Nice long exposure. Great angle too... you get 1WTC, Beekman and (still my favorite) the Woolworth.

[jthornton17]

I can't get an answer on the wtc 2 site from anyone. So does anyone know if wtc2 is a full go or is it still up in the air? Asking this I mean current status. Not from a year ago.

[JSsocal]

^^^It is not 'up in the air', they know exactly what they are doing. They are building to street level. There has been no report or article to suggest otherwise. The only way this would change was if a major tenant would sign, and even then tower 3 is the more likely choice right now, which similarly still does not have financing. There is still a long time until it reaches street level, so a lot can change, but it hasn't yet.

[MadGnome]

Originally Posted by STR

With NYC's density? That would be the single most congested cell site on the planet. Unless you're in the middle of the sticks, you don't want a cell site that big, and even in rural areas, you're going outside of spec, meaning you'd have to run the transceivers above their normal power. A cell company is more likely to be interested in hiding a cell behind the prismatic glass in the base, between the glass panels and the metal grating.

The big problem with cell signals is blockage. You don't need the antennas on the highest point in the city for range. You need them there to get over the other buildings. Antennas down low wouldn't reliably reach very far.
The newer 4g LTE systems will also have much larger cells than the old stuff. One site will be able to cover up to 2,000 square miles.
A lot of those high antennas will be for point to point links too. You'll have line of site to the tallest buildings in other cities up to 100 miles away.
Those short sites are usually for covering dead areas the main sites can't reach because of terrain or skylines. People picture cell coverage areas as neat little cells, but it's really much more chaotic. You're just as likely to be talking to a site 5 miles away as one 1 mile away in a tall city because of the unpredictable signal propagation.

[brian.odonnell20]

this is going to be more than twice as tall as the beekman.

[Don098]

Originally Posted by brian.odonnell20

this is going to be more than twice as tall as the beekman.

Well, in actuality it might close-ish, but from that angle, it's barely going to clear the top of New York by Gehry.

[rjb001]

I think it's funny how during the Depression, the ESB, Chrysler, and 30 Rock all went up and took no longer than a year and a half each. Yet, when we are presently in less of a recession, it's going to take till 2018 for 5 buildings to go up! And just to further my point, it took about 5 whole years for Trump, Chicago to be fully built! I find that very odd, especially in this age of modern construction. Although, I guess some of the speed difference is due to all the spending the government was doing during the Depression and construction provided a good way to get people jobs. Is that why there's such a big time difference??

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by rjb001

I think it's funny how during the Depression, the ESB, Chrysler, and 30 Rock all went up and took no longer than a year and a half each. Yet, when we are presently in less of a recession, it's going to take till 2018 for 5 buildings to go up! And just to further my point, it took about 5 whole years for Trump, Chicago to be fully built! I find that very odd, especially in this age of modern construction. Although, I guess some of the speed difference is due to all the spending the government was doing during the Depression and construction provided a good way to get people jobs. Is that why there's such a big time difference??

To be honest, I think it was the time period. I mean, people were FAR more industrious back then, and were highly ambitious. They not only thought big, but were determined to meet their goals. The sky was the limit, and in this particular case, almost literally. And vast revolutions in technology helped them achieve those goals during the Depression. That, and I also think New York, and America really in general, was younger, and was considered the dominant center of the world economy.

But today, life is much different. People are more lazier, with increasingly more jobs are done by machines. There is a lot more economic balance throughout the world now, and America is no longer the supreme power it used to be.

Not sure if this has much to do with it, but it's kind of my opinion.

[STR]

Originally Posted by MadGnome

The big problem with cell signals is blockage. You don't need the antennas on the highest point in the city for range. You need them there to get over the other buildings. Antennas down low wouldn't reliably reach very far.
The newer 4g LTE systems will also have much larger cells than the old stuff. One site will be able to cover up to 2,000 square miles.
A lot of those high antennas will be for point to point links too. You'll have line of site to the tallest buildings in other cities up to 100 miles away.
Those short sites are usually for covering dead areas the main sites can't reach because of terrain or skylines. People picture cell coverage areas as neat little cells, but it's really much more chaotic. You're just as likely to be talking to a site 5 miles away as one 1 mile away in a tall city because of the unpredictable signal propagation.

Few points:
1) A cell site isn't the same thing as a point-to-point broadcast. I'm not sure what your point is in bringing that up.
2) LTE or not, you're not going to have a 2,000 square mile cell site in Manhattan. Not nearly enough bandwidth for that kind of coverage given that people are paying for 4G equipment to get 4G speeds. Given the fact that this will be one of the most tourist packed parts of the city, I doubt they even want to blanket the entire WTC with a single cell. They'll, in fact, try to use the blocking effect of nearby buildings to compartmentalize the area to allow for maximum throughput.
3) LTE isn't the reason why the new cell sites are going to be larger. It's because they're going to be running LTE on 700MHz spectrum, which has better penetration and propagation characteristics than PCS, AWS and even a little better than 850MHz.

Given 1-3, I stand by my statement that no one is going to want to use the top of this building as cell site. It's just simply too tall. However, I will fully concede that it is incredibly attractive as a point-to-point hub, especially given that a decent amount of fiber goes into the Verizon building just 40 feet away on the other side of Vesey. I can imagine the array of dishes pointing out to Connecticut feeding hedge funds market data. As a cell site, directly connecting to consumer handsets, the base is the more attractive location.