• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Will Freedom Tower's cables shed ice & be dangerous below?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: ThaGrandCow
Originally posted by: Shockwave
Originally posted by: ThaGrandCow
Originally posted by: Shockwave
It should ne the biggest building in the world. Period. And not by including atennas or turbines. Make that thing climb into the sky.
Anything less is a sell out IMO.

Anything less is the limit of current engineering including people wracking their brains to make every improvement they possibly can. Architects can't just pull a 10,000 foot tall building out of their a$$, they need something to work with. If you can do better, then submit a better idea to the decision makers.

So, you expect me to think for one minute we couldnt build a bigger building then anything standing now? BS. It doesnt have to be 10,000 feet, current record is around 1700 or so.

Current record is 1700 or so including antenna. The point of my previous post, which seems to have jumped into a Mclaren F1 and sped by your hitchhiking self on the side of the road without even a side glance, was that we can always make a taller building... but to make it completely 100% occupied space is not possible with current engineering methods. There will always be an antenna or sattelite or clothesline or something to make that last few feet to break the previous record. Engineering is an evolutionary process... not a revolutionary process.


Then why the jackass comment about 10,000 feet? Obviously, the McLaren didnt speed by me as the driver was too high to get the car in gear. The replacement is SHORTER then the original Towers (Based on occupied space). Considering they were what? 50 years old or something, I would think we could beat that by a few hundred feet by now. Unless the engineers were high, like the driver of your parked car 😉
 
Originally posted by: ZapZilla
Dagnabbit, I regret that I didn't start a new thread with the height comment.

Just in case the design team members grew up in the Mohave desert, I sent my concerns to the Lower Manhattan Developement Corporation.

I'm glad you did. I've seen many instances where you think that the high paid, uber-experienced professionals neglect to think of the simple things. You may have just given them something they've never thought of in the design. Hell, I'm willing to bet that they haven't. Let us know if you get a reply or not.
 
Back
Top