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

[Otie]

Originally Posted by STR

On a related note, does someone have a close up of the new pinnacle? I might update my model some time. With my new PC I could probably render it in 4K in less than 15 minutes, as oppposed to the 720p renders that took 30 minutes.

They haven't changed the mast design at all, it's still a 411'-4" tall steel tower sitting atop of the roof slab with a 38'-0" tall beacon structure above it, plus a 8'-0" lightning rod. North entrance finished floor elevation is El. 305'-6", making Tower One 1797'-8" to the tip.


Antenna at 1WTC by Otie O'Daniel, on Flickr

[JayPro]

I'm a bit lost here. The radome schematic shows the beacon whereas the lattice steel set-up does not. So I conclude no beacon or lightning rod in this latest redesign....as well as aforementioned lattice set-up appearing shorter than aforementioned radome schematic because of lack of aforementioned beacon and lightning rod.
I'll gladly accept being stood corrected if proven wrong.

[Otie]

Was too lazy to model the beacon's structure; both beacon and lightning rod (this one is crucial) are staying, in fact everything is staying as originally planned, they just got rid of the architectural enclosure/radome.



Beacon at the steel shop

[CalibratedZeus]

Originally Posted by Otie

Was too lazy to model the beacon's structure; both beacon and lightning rod (this one is crucial) are staying, in fact everything is staying as originally planned, they just got rid of the architectural enclosure/radome.

How does the beacon fit up there if the radome is being scrapped? From the render of the bare antenna there appears to be nowhere the beacon can go without the radome structure to support it....

[Otie]

The beacon will get attached to the mast through cast steel connectors, though you're bringing up a good point, due to its proportions, it will look like a spearhead standing on a thin stick.

[NYC GUY]

Will they leave the spire/antenna that rust color or will they paiint it white at least?

[JayPro]

The rust color you're referring to IIRC is based on a rendering of the spire redux at sunset. IIRC it should have a dark silverish sheen to it...unless they have a way of making it look kinda like stainless steel.

@Otie: Thanks for the clarification. The slight bulk that the beacon gives might be of some slight merit as IMO it evokes the image of a flame....albeit atop an extremely tall and malnourished-looking birthday candle.

[Otie]

If they're going to add something to the steel that would be intumescent fireproofing.

[brooklynbandit]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

For an idea of what a thinner spire might look like, I went ahead and copy/pasted the old north tower antenna on top of 1WTC. Doesn't look too shabby, honestly.



All credit goes to STR for the original image.

if they are gonna give it an antenna instead of a spire they might as well give it one like the former north tower

[Kevin Scott Koepke]

titans of new york; 5/28/2012. by plastic fantastic photography, on Flickr


lower manhattan; 5/28/2012. by plastic fantastic photography, on Flickr

[pnapp1]

Otie, as usual... thanks for the info and caring!

[Roadcruiser1]

Me and my love for the World Trade Center has contributed to this today. Pictures were all taken by me on 5/28/2012. It's late so I will upload Three and Four World Trade Center tomorrow.

[NYC GUY]

^^^
Great photos

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by Modulair

Don't care about the height measures, that doesn't count the masts: 1WTC IS 1776 feet high.

That's totally fine since measurements are arbitrary anyway--just treat all buildings the same. The Willis Tower is then 1,730', John Hancock Center 1,500' and the Empire State Building is 1,454'. In that case, WTC1 is not yet the tallest building in NYC or the country, but it will be as soon as the mast is erected.

[NewYorkDominates]

If you count the antennas of those buildings than that means 1WTC isn't going to be 1776' tall.The building no matter what,will never be 1776'.Also the what was going to be spire was something around 1792'.In my opinion 1787 would have been a cooler and more relevant height,but I was never into the height of a building representing a time period as the height of a building would be measured subjectively.

[QUEENSNYMAN]

FROM: NYMAN2010

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5194949...in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5194949...in/photostream

Also my channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/NYBOY75

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by NewYorkDominates

If you count the antennas of those buildings than that means 1WTC isn't going to be 1776' tall.
The building no matter what,will never be 1776'.Also the what was going to be spire was something around 1792'.

Not true, there was a cut off up there with the radome.



Like the article I posted earlier, people are forgetting the most important thing about the spire - it's not about the height - it's how it looks. In NO way is this an improvement. It just isn't.

Originally Posted by Otie

Renderings by Miller Hare

It's a shame, but it's what we will be getting.


travellingcari





panda073





Chung Chu





Phyllis Featherstone









ktorster





RichardSchneider

[NYC GUY]

Originally Posted by viewguysf

That's totally fine since measurements are arbitrary anyway--just treat all buildings the same. The Willis Tower is then 1,730', John Hancock Center 1,500' and the Empire State Building is 1,454'. In that case, WTC1 is not yet the tallest building in NYC or the country, but it will be as soon as the mast is erected.

When I went up to the empire state building observatory a few years ago it said it was 1,454 feet tall. Not sure why but it was on some facts thing.

[RockMont]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

That design...

Was a piece of s**t. Glad they changed to the right one.

AMEN! This would have been insult added to injury.

[CarlosV]

81 degrees...HOT


DSC_0060 copy by Ceva321, on Flickr