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

[uaarkson]

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??

Different times, different scenarios. There are basically 5 supertalls going up in NYC right now, with more almost definitely on the way.

Also, Trump Chicago was built in 3 years, not 5.

[MadGnome]

Umm...OK. I'll start removing the cells sites I've been installing. Thanks for correcting my mistakes.
And by the way, what 700mhz doesn't have is good reflection characteristics, and reflected signals are 90% of what your phone picks up in the city.

[bunky]

10th row of glass going up. Progress may be slow and erratic today due to St. Patrick's day.

[Kevin Scott Koepke]

icons of liberty. by ksk photography, on Flickr

[Obey]

Originally Posted by bunky

10th row of glass going up. Progress may be slow and erratic today due to St. Patrick's day.

Doubt it. But...

[STR]

Originally Posted by MadGnome

Umm...OK. I'll start removing the cells sites I've been installing. Thanks for correcting my mistakes.
And by the way, what 700mhz doesn't have is good reflection characteristics, and reflected signals are 90% of what your phone picks up in the city.

You're telling me your employer has had you put cell sites on top of the Empire State Building? Didn't think so. And yes, if a wavelength has better penetration ability, naturally it will have worse reflective characteristics. You can't bounce off of and go through something at the same time.

Don't get upset because I'm not going for the "I'm an expert, so you should just believe what I say at face value." Give proof or make an argument supporting your side. I can't see your diploma from here, nor your employee ID and work schedule. You don't know what my background is. It IS the internet after all, people say all sorts of things. Given that, I stand by my statement: the top of this building is less attractive for a cell site than the bottom. If you have a case where that isn't true, I'll bow to the proof, if such proof exists. My own telecom experience says otherwise.

In any case, cheers.

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! ... 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??

Quite a few people also died during the construction of the depression era buildings (except, I think, Chrysler, but don't quote me). Cheaper labor and lax safety standards meant more people crawling over the building getting more work done and occasionally getting maimed or dying in the process. The government wasn't directly involved in any of those projects. ESB, Chrysler and Rockefeller Center were all privately financed by a private equity group, a billionaire (Chrsyler was built by the man, not the company), and a family of billionaires respectively.

Sidenote: the only person to die during the original WTC construction was a worker that stumbled back on to the site after hours and drunkenly walked right off the edge of the ground-level floor into the basement levels.

[brian.odonnell20]

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??

Also, the current WTC buildings are much safer and stronger than anything built during the depression, meaning they take longer to build. Remember that all of these towers are over-engineered and overbuilt so they can withstand any kind of terrorist attack, meaning up to 2 normal towers worth of materials could go into one. And, in addition to that, everything is being built within the constraining parameters of city infrastructure (the site is essentially being built on a train station), and the countless more laws and regulations that, while sacrificing speed and efficiency, make the labor safer and the building more sustainable.

[STR]

No modern skyscraper is as overbuilt as the Empire State. They could literally add 30 floors to that building (and there was a plan to do so back in the late 70's) and still stay well within margins.

[CoolCzech]

Originally Posted by STR

No modern skyscraper is as overbuilt as the Empire State. They could literally add 30 floors to that building (and there was a plan to do so back in the late 70's) and still stay well within margins.

Well thank God THAT never happened. Can you just imagine?

[STR]

^No need to imagine. Check the ESB thread. It's all in there. When you're done going "WTF is that?" leave a comment.

[NYCLuver]

March 17th, 2011

[Kevin Scott Koepke]

the rising giant. by ksk photography, on Flickr

[MadGnome]

Sorry STR. Didn't mean to let my kindergarten side out there. I have zero knowledge of the plan for this building, but some general knowledge of the plans for future LTE deployment.

The penetration charachteristics of 700 mhz compared to 1.8 ghz isn't that much different. For many materials, the higher frequencies penetrate better. The bigger difference is from 700mhz refracting better, or getting around objects. The array on WTC1 looks exactly like I'd expect it to look like if they were using it for LTE. The plan is many phased array type spot beams with sharp cutoffs from great height, to allow for frequency reuse. The Tokyo Sky Tree (which topped out at 634 meters today) is a good example of going from low altitude, tiny cells to a more centrally based system. With active antennas you can create small cells from a central location instead of having to deploy hundreds of sites all over the place.
No frequency is going to penetrate buildings well enough to allow someplace like Manhattan to have reliable coverage. You can use low altitude antennas with 1.8ghz because you get so many multiple carriers bouncing off the buildings you can almost always pick one up. Extracting a usefull signal from that mess is the most impressive piece of signal processing I've ever seen. Makes you ashamed to use the word "algorithm" for your little pet projects.
Can't say I've ever done anything on the ESB but look at the city.
I'd really like to know what's going to be inside those units on the WTC1 rings. If you do the numbers, you realize how big they're really going to be. There could be dozens of antennas in each one.

Too much rambling. The stuff STR does here is worth 1,000 times as much as my meanderings to this forum, and I don't want to act like I'm competing or something.

[patriotizzy]

Originally Posted by NYCLuver

March 17th, 2011

More great pictures. I especially like the layering in this one

[TwinTowersForever]

March 17th, 2010


March 16th, 2011
From ESB







From Street





Brooklyn Bridge










P.S. What are the yellow looking crane things on top of it now?

[At0m1CSn0w]

Hey all. New guy here...
Wow! Lots of progess this year.

[Big Towers]

Hello guys, I got more renderings and models of the structural and steel frame of the One World Trade Center. The following renderings and models show the metal and steel that is currently being installed on the 57th, 58th, and 59th floors.

Since the blue cocoon wrap is obstructing the view of the steel frame behind, I hope these will create an image in your head of what it looks like:









The image below is a model representing what the 59th floor looks like right now, as construction workers are installing the steel.



The following images show the curtain wall glass on the 57th, 58th, and 59th floor. Since the glass installation hasn't reached these floors yet, these models will give an idea of what it should look like:

[Domamania]

I must say within 6 more floors Tower 1 will really make the New York skyline look different. like when it reaches 800 feet and taller, it will be able to be see through out the whole NYC and the immediate tri state area. Would any of you agree?

[Big Towers]

Yes, but in depends on the angle you're looking at it. For example, if your looking from the Northeast, the 1WTC will be blocked by the 7WTC.

I'd say once the tower reaches the 70th floor, then you'll see some changes in the skyline. Notice I said "some", because in order to fully change the skyline, we need Towers 2, 3 and 4 to be higher than the surrounding buildings, which won't be for about 2 or 3 years.

[Traynor]

If I am not mistaken, the highest corner nodes are even "Node-ier" and appear wider at the top, because that is the level where a new stack of slanted columns start on the sloping sides.

(Not using any technical terms, obviously.)