Home › Forums › General Discussions › Open Topic › Should the towers be rebuilt? › Re: Should the towers be rebuilt?
That’s an interesting concept, Halfman. I don’t know how feasible it is, but still pretty cool. There are two concerns that come to mind about it…
1. Would it be able to effectively redirect the impact of such an enormous object, travelling at such a high velocity, such is a 767?
2. In such a densely populated area as Manhattan, will the solution cause more damage than the problem? All that burning debris would fall onto the other buildings and streets below.
My idea builds on the fact that the original buildings survived the impact quite well. It was the fires that weakened the structure that caused the eventual collapse. So, I think that the new buildings should be able to catch and hold the planes, much like the original buildings, but also be equiped with a powerful anti-fire system. Even if it couldn’t put out such an intense blaze, it may be capable of keeping it under a certain temperature threshold. The grim fact is that, when a plane rams into a building, people are going to die. The focus is try to minimalize the casualties… If the WTC buildings hadn’t collapsed from the fire, they likely could’ve been saved and a lot less people would’ve had to die.
As to ELJ’s post. Like I said, a memorial park of some sort is very unlikely. Manhatten is about as prime as realestate gets, I’m fairly certain that was not the case in OK. also, if my facts are correct, the WTC towers comprised about 10% of the island’s office space. In any case, I’ve heard rumors that Juliani has said that the towers will be rebuilt. No comfirmation of any kind though, so take it w/ a grain of salt…
Some sort of memorial within the new buildings would most certainly be called for though. I’d even say an entire floor in each building. Some sort of garden and/or museum.