Join 3,557 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Demolition, man.
March 17, 2006 9:22 AM   Subscribe

At 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, one push of a button will bring down the 30-story Landmark Tower in Fort Worth, Texas, one of the tallest buildings ever to be imploded. Thousands will watch. Here’s a preview and detailed explanation of the process. Many locals remember the giant, 77-ton electric clock that once spun on the roof.
posted by punkfloyd (53 comments total)

 
As I recall, the clock had to be taken off the roof when the building was damaged by the tornado that hit downtown Fort Worth a few years back, right?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:37 AM on March 17, 2006


Yes, Crash. That's correct. Ft. Worth is presently building as many lofts/condos downtown that it can find the money for. Cool town, that Cowtown.
posted by TeamBilly at 9:40 AM on March 17, 2006


We need a good term for making an FPP too early. A mere twenty-four hours, and you'd have had the video for it, too.

Premature edification?
posted by five fresh fish at 9:40 AM on March 17, 2006


That preview implosion has a high fun/click ratio.
posted by unknowncommand at 9:41 AM on March 17, 2006


I'd go over there to watch it, but its too early in the morning. I don't *do* 8:00 am on weekends. If I do get my ass over there, I'll try to get some pictures.

This building has been largely vacant since it got smacked hard with the Tornado.
posted by dios at 9:48 AM on March 17, 2006


Premature edification?

Hard to say. Maybe by posting early we'll get better coverage of the event?
posted by 327.ca at 9:51 AM on March 17, 2006


Why are they demolishing the building instead of restoring it?
posted by Afroblanco at 10:12 AM on March 17, 2006


I think the building design did not lend itself to reuse as condos or more flexible office space. It had a bad asbestos problem too. We've been told that's been addressed, although if I was downtown watching the implosion, I'd wear a gas mask!
posted by punkfloyd at 10:17 AM on March 17, 2006


Great... the only thing exciting, other than gay rodeo of course, to happen in DFW in ages... and I'm outta town.
posted by NailsTheCat at 10:49 AM on March 17, 2006


We need a good term for making an FPP too early...

Premature pub-jaculation?

What makes it so awful is that you get it all over everyone else.
posted by three blind mice at 10:51 AM on March 17, 2006


the 30-story Landmark Tower in Fort Worth, Texas, one of the tallest buildings ever to be imploded

It's got nothing on the WTC towers.
posted by oncogenesis at 11:09 AM on March 17, 2006


wow... seeing that clock brings back memories...

I drove through downtown Ft. Worth (my hometown, although I moved away several years ago) a few days after the tornado ripped right through the center of that city and seeing all of the buildings missing many or all of their windows was eerie...

The downtown area has changed greatly from what it was in my childhood... When I was younger, downtown Ft. Worth was not a place to hang out (with the possible exception of the Tandy Center) but now it is bursting with life and energy...
posted by WhipSmart at 11:38 AM on March 17, 2006


I don't know...when I think about how, around the turn of the last century, skyscrapers were being built for the first time, and trains were getting faster every year...now this century is about destroying skyscrapers, and air travel/train travel getting slower. Not nearly as much fun.
posted by davejay at 11:47 AM on March 17, 2006


The demolition company isn't Familie Loizeaux? Whoa.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:57 AM on March 17, 2006


When you watch this on Saturday, note how remarkably similar this process looks to the "collapses" of WTC 1,2, and 7.
posted by stenseng at 12:47 PM on March 17, 2006


Thanks. I may have to drive over to Funkytown and check this out.
posted by First Post at 1:05 PM on March 17, 2006


note how remarkably similar this process looks to the "collapses" of WTC 1,2, and 7.

Might also be worth noting that its taken months of work and will take thousands of explosives to bring down a building about one-third the size of WTC 1 and 2.
posted by Cyrano at 1:26 PM on March 17, 2006


Yes, but they did it without anyone noticing, Cyrano! Stealth building demolition, that's where the big money is.
posted by five fresh fish at 2:29 PM on March 17, 2006


Man that thing was always broken. I'm not that old but my childhood memories are of it - NOT turning very often.
posted by ernie at 2:51 PM on March 17, 2006


Any webcams?
posted by kuujjuarapik at 4:51 PM on March 17, 2006


the wtc implosions took lots of planning and time as well.

well done, they were.
posted by Hat Maui at 5:02 PM on March 17, 2006


The work of astoundingly brilliant people.

Maybe that's the trick: astoundingly brilliant people who have us all convinced they're dumber than a sack of hammers.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:06 PM on March 17, 2006


why don't they just fly a plane into the damn thing and save all that expert demolition time and money?

/derail
posted by stirfry at 6:44 PM on March 17, 2006


Ladies and gentlemen, don your tinfoil hats:

Alex Jones explains how Larry Silverstein, owner of the Trade Center complex, states in a PBS video that WTC 7 was "pulled". Pulling is the industry-speak for a controlled explosion, which without prior planning and setup far beyond the 8 or so hours between Plane #1's impact and the implosion of WTC 7. In an amazing coincidence, WTC 7 was the headquarters of the branches of virtually every agency, covert and overt, local state and federal, which would have wanted to bury any information regarding a conspiracy.
posted by rollbiz at 7:18 PM on March 17, 2006


which without prior planning and setup far beyond the 8 or so hours between Plane #1's impact and the implosion of WTC 7.
Add "would not be possible." to the end of that sentance, and then tell me it's past my bedtime.

Also, sorry for the derail. The video lower in my link suddenly occured to me after the comments above.
posted by rollbiz at 7:21 PM on March 17, 2006


Yes, but they did it without anyone noticing, Cyrano! Stealth building demolition, that's where the big money is.

Right you are! Because there's no way anyone would notice a couple hundred of these!

Image hosting by Photobucket
posted by Cyrano at 10:01 PM on March 17, 2006


jesuschrist, did this thread really become a 9-11 conspiracy debate? Do we really need to MeTa this?
posted by Afroblanco at 10:23 PM on March 17, 2006


MetaTak? Nah.

I'm a big believer in letting threads go where they may (without denying anyone the option to tell someone, who might go where they may, that they're a fuckwit.)
posted by Cyrano at 10:53 PM on March 17, 2006


A Flickr contributor has been monitoring the preparations.
posted by dhartung at 12:13 AM on March 18, 2006


So, it didn't come straight down, but down it came.
posted by paulsc at 9:01 AM on March 18, 2006


MeTa it? Hell no, join in the fun. The conspiracy theorists have some valid points — there's a helluva lot unexplained about the way the WTC disaster was handled — but thinking the towers were wired for implosion is just looney. How the hell could they hide it? Can't be done.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:26 AM on March 18, 2006


I've flagged all the 9-11 comments as "derail."
posted by Afroblanco at 9:57 AM on March 18, 2006


good for you, afroblanco. way to use your power of flagging!

one thing, though.

why are you telling US about it?

and for the implosion doubters, it's as if you were totally oblivious to the fact that there were sizeable areas of the wtc that were completely vacant. or did you know that and just chose to ignore it?

I mean, how can you smuggle explosives into the most vast buildings in the country that take on tons of supplies daily? literal tons. it'd be as difficult as smuggling drugs across the border with mexico. and we all know THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE.
posted by Hat Maui at 1:42 PM on March 18, 2006


it's as if you were totally oblivious to the fact that there were sizeable areas of the wtc that were completely vacant

I am totally oblivious to this fact, if it is a fact. First time I've seen it mentioned.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:23 PM on March 18, 2006


So, it didn't come straight down, but down it came.
posted by paulsc at 9:01 AM PST on March 18 [!]


Cool video! But a considerably different look in how it came down from the WTC collapse.

Probably due to the fact that this one was wired by different people, eh? ;)
posted by stirfry at 3:25 PM on March 18, 2006


MeTa
posted by Afroblanco at 3:40 PM on March 18, 2006


wired by different people, eh?

In New York, they use union electricians.

I am not sure of the labor force in Texas.
posted by shnoz-gobblin at 4:29 PM on March 18, 2006


My previous FPP on implosions.
posted by grouse at 4:43 PM on March 18, 2006


One of the shortest AP stories I've seen, in its entirety:
FORT WORTH, Texas Fort Worth's skyline just got less crowded.
Thousands of Texans braved cold, wet weather to watch the implosion of Landmark Tower. The 30-story building come down without a hitch to make way for a parking lot.
Here's video, after an ad.
posted by Aknaton at 5:01 PM on March 18, 2006


9/11: Loose Change. A documentary detailing how totally staged 9/11 was.
[I know, parts of it are questionable]
posted by Count Ziggurat at 5:54 PM on March 18, 2006


It sure did have a lean coming down. It seems very intentional from the timing of the visible explosions - surely some blasts were hidden from view. I wonder if there are any reports available on how close they got to the predicted collapse..

Anyway, how can it be worthwhile to pull down a 30-story building to make way for a parking lot? Vile!
posted by Chuckles at 8:05 PM on March 18, 2006


Ooooh! I know! I know!

They made it fall over sideways on purpose! so that the sheep would make fun of the conspiracists!

It's all a plot!
posted by five fresh fish at 8:33 PM on March 18, 2006


sure is fishy!
posted by stirfry at 9:23 PM on March 18, 2006


Nah, they excavated a trench for it to fall into. Looks to me exactly as planned, any one see the grain silo that almost came down?
posted by hortense at 9:39 PM on March 18, 2006


Interesting to hear about the trench, but I'm fairly certain there was at least some measurable error..
posted by Chuckles at 10:35 PM on March 18, 2006


aknaton: During urgent breaking news you might have a wire report that is one sentence sometimes.
posted by grouse at 12:48 AM on March 19, 2006


from the article;The building will collapse from the northwest corner and basically fall in on itself. A 20-foot trench has been dug on the north and west sides, and the basement has been excavated to hold the debris.
posted by hortense at 9:04 AM on March 19, 2006


Yeah, according to the Star-Telegram's simulation, some amount of lean in the implosion was intentional -- the structure of the northwest corner of the building was wired to be destroyed first (at 8 seconds into the demolition), the back wall at 10 seconds, and the southeast corner at 12 seconds, all to direct the building into the pre-dug trench along the northwest corner.
posted by delfuego at 11:17 AM on March 19, 2006


Well, bummer. So much for my conspiracy theory. Bloody facts always get in the way!
posted by five fresh fish at 11:30 AM on March 19, 2006


five fresh:

this graphic from the new york times shows that there were lots of floors that were vacant in both towers.

make of that information what you will.
posted by Hat Maui at 5:16 PM on March 20, 2006


how can it be worthwhile to pull down a 30-story building to make way for a parking lot? - Chuckles

Keeping a big building like that up is very expensive if you can't keep it all occupied (even if you can). Taxes and all that.

this graphic from the new york times shows that there were lots of floors that were vacant in both towers. - Hat Maui

No. That graphic show precisely one floor unoccupied. There are several some that it doesn't indicate who, if anyone, occupied the floor. But it does not indicate multiple unoccupied floors.
posted by raedyn at 6:08 PM on March 20, 2006


What she says. One floor tagged 'unoccupied.' Note the caption at the top of the page, which specifically states that only some of the tenants are listed in this chart.

The white floors are occupied by tenants not listed in the chart. They do not depict unoccupied floors.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:46 PM on March 20, 2006


you're right, raedyn.

i couldn't find much else except a real estate article that said the occupancy was close to 100% before the attacks.

They do not depict unoccupied floors

you can't say that for certain, only that their occupation status is not certain in the graphic.
posted by Hat Maui at 2:37 AM on March 21, 2006


« Older Ayatollah Sistani says it's OK to kill gays....  |  At Dans Le Noir ?... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments