Where's that nuke? (Final Freedom Tower design) (new WTC)

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-20 05:43am

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/12 ... index.html

we need a goddamn big puke smiley. Typical New Yorkers. Replace
something that was classic with modern art bullshit.

Tolya · Post by **Tolya** » 2003-12-20 05:54am

Ha, that's exactly the reason why my city (Warsaw) sucks so badly when it comes to visual look. Basically what they did is putting a big glassy-fancy-modern tower in a classical surroundings. Breaks the harmony of the view. WTC's blended nicely with the rest of the city.

And they forgot to install a big flashing neon on the top "Fuck You Ibn Laden"

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-12-20 08:06am

They should've just built an exact copy. Regardless, at 1,776 feet, it's going to be the world's tallest building (beating out Taipei 101 by 109 feet, which is still under construction).

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-20 08:08am

Vympel wrote:They should've just built an exact copy.

[new yorker mode]
But that's what those mouth breathers at the Pentagon did, they rebuilt it
to exactly the way it was before! We're NEW YAWKERS, we have style and
whatnot, not what those mouth breathing rednecks down in virginia have![/new yorker mode]

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-12-20 08:40am

Were's the Concrete Bunker with the surronding ring of SAM Sites and the point defends Gats for taking out...

Oh wait wrong plans, here we go

...Yep, its a giant perker(

)

KhyronTheBackstabber · Post by **KhyronTheBackstabber** » 2003-12-20 08:55am

I still like this concept better. It really captures the spirit of New York, and her people.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-12-20 09:52am

It's impossible to seperate any discussion of the WTC from Sept. 11th, and if you criticise it in any way, you're going to sound like an asshole.

Well, I'm an asshole.

The Twin Towers were boring as hell, the only architecturally interesting elements to them were the gothic arches, and they were at the bottom of the thing.
They looked like two boxes of saltine crackers standing on their ends.

Now, you can't mock the towers for their symbolic value, and an air of tragedy will always surround the mere mention of "World Trade Center", but on a purely asthetic level, they were International Style office boxes, and boring to look at, impressive mainly for their size.

I say this new design is not too shabby, but it certainly isn't any Chrysler Building.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-20 10:07am

These pieces of shit will only go up to the 66th floor of occupancy, everything
else will be just empty lattice work full of wind turbines.

Way to piss all over every 9/11 victim's grave by making the new WTC
HALF the size of the old ones, and claiming they're taller by adding bullshit
empty latticework.

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2003-12-20 10:50am

I'm no construction expert, but those screwball sloped roof on the other buildings look like they're going to be interesting to build

Not to mention, forget about having rooftop helipad on any of them.
Ah well, maybe it'll look better in reality than as a model

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-12-20 11:12am

Worlds tallest building, huh? Shame that it's only the architectural tallest, not the tallest to the roof or tallest to the highest floor. These will remain the Taipei 101's claims. Half of that fucking building is empy filler at the top. Thats such a fucking waste.

Raxmei · Post by **Raxmei** » 2003-12-20 11:30am

I can see why the did it that way. Very high skyscrapers are difficult to build. Using more buildings of lesser height is more cost-effective for the same floor space. However, shorter buildings are less impressive than taller ones, a concern that is of particular importance in this case. So the desigeners decided to cheat a bit, using a big spire to inflate the building's height to more monumental proportions. I don't personally think it works.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2003-12-20 01:23pm

Ughh. Really rather ugly design, I quite like the main tower, if it was solid all the way up, it would be pretty impressive, but the surrounding lot looks like someone couldnt think of anything to fill the rest of the space and just tossed them in at 4am before the deadline.

Raxmei · Post by **Raxmei** » 2003-12-20 01:35pm

What kind of name is Freedom Tower?

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-12-20 03:03pm

Frank Hipper wrote:It's impossible to seperate any discussion of the WTC from Sept. 11th, and if you criticise it in any way, you're going to sound like an asshole.

Well, I'm an asshole.

The Twin Towers were boring as hell, the only architecturally interesting elements to them were the gothic arches, and they were at the bottom of the thing.
They looked like two boxes of saltine crackers standing on their ends.

Now, you can't mock the towers for their symbolic value, and an air of tragedy will always surround the mere mention of "World Trade Center", but on a purely asthetic level, they were International Style office boxes, and boring to look at, impressive mainly for their size.

I say this new design is not too shabby, but it certainly isn't any Chrysler Building.

I'm with you.

I've been saying it for years. Ugliest buildings EVER> Of course, now downtown blends into midtown and Jersey, and from the Turnpike it's impossible to tell where the tip of Manhatten ends, but what are you going to do?

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-12-20 03:57pm

Raxmei wrote:What kind of name is Freedom Tower?

A name guaranteed to make that building a target in the dreams of every two-bit terrorist in the world.

And I don't want to sound insensitive, but the thing looks like a pile of crap. The WTC was at least utilitarian.

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2003-12-20 04:12pm

its called freedom tower cos its 1'776 feet tall...

1776 was the year of american independance was it not?

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2003-12-20 05:08pm

Zac Naloen wrote:its called freedom tower cos its 1'776 feet tall...

1776 was the year of american independance was it not?

Cripes, why not just paint giant arrows and bullseyes for the scumbags; with those parameters and a name like that, it just screams "blow me up, I dare you"

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-12-20 05:17pm

New Yorkers aren't exactly enthusiastic about working in high-rises anymore.

There's fears that they won't be able to fill even 70 stories of offices in the new towers. Check Newsday's cover stories over the past two days.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-20 06:02pm

Mr Bean wrote:Were's the Concrete Bunker with the surronding ring of SAM Sites and the point defends Gats for taking out...

Oh wait wrong plans, here we go

Was that DEFENSIVE strategy I just heard? You don't win by defending, you win by using the buildings shinny surfaces as a fire direction system for the giant laser that will be constructed and hidden inside on of the cities water tunnels. It will then be reflected off an orbital satellite, which will direct the beam at the enemies of freedom.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-12-20 06:24pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:Were's the Concrete Bunker with the surronding ring of SAM Sites and the point defends Gats for taking out...

Oh wait wrong plans, here we go

Was that DEFENSIVE strategy I just heard? You don't win by defending, you win by using the buildings shinny surfaces as a fire direction system for the giant laser that will be constructed and hidden inside on of the cities water tunnels. It will then be reflected off an orbital satellite, which will direct the beam at the enemies of freedom.

So we're using the reanimated corpse of Nikola Tesla?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-20 06:27pm

I think they should've made just one thick building, preferably cylindrical in shape and converging on top. And make it 2000 feet tall or something.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-20 07:56pm

SirNitram wrote:
So we're using the reanimated corpse of Nikola Tesla?

The tesla coils are going on the secret nuclear battleships the government built using enslaved fur seals and captured terrorists.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-20 08:00pm

Shinova wrote:I think they should've made just one thick building, preferably cylindrical in shape and converging on top. And make it 2000 feet tall or something.

The grain silo from hell in other words? Hmm.. Maybe we should built it in Mecca instead. No one will suspect that once we fill it will grain we can threaten to blow up the whole thing, flatting the city should there be any future attacks on America.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-20 08:24pm

Well a bit fancier than just "grain silo from hell" of course.

Would you rather have it a spire so that feminazis around the world can accuse us of building the ultimate phallic symbol?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2003-12-21 12:37am

Shinova wrote:Would you rather have it a spire so that feminazis around the world can accuse us of building the ultimate phallic symbol?

I thin we should just go all out and build a 2000 ft phallic monstrosity. Then we can plant lots of bushes at the bottom of it just to screw with people.