modesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2631 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3751 times:
I was waiting to hear news about the new control tower. Looking forward to this new addition to the SFO skyline!
SANMAN66 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 608 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3714 times:
That's a very interesting design. It looks so much more imaginitive than the basic cookie-cutter design control towers
seen at most U.S. airports. Torch design, I wonder if the Olympic torch was an inspiration?
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22026 posts, RR: 51 Reply 3, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3714 times:
Kinda old news - A new tower was part of the larger T-2 redesign project.
anonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 561 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3484 times:
Quoting SFOA380 (Reply 4):
The design is what is newsworthy, not the news of a new tower.
This is also pretty newsworthy: "At the same time, the compact dimensions required that the lower neck of the tower be as narrow as possible, since room was needed for a pair of corridors between Terminals 1 and 2, one for general visitors and one for passengers who already had passed through security."
Looking at the second rendering, though, the corridor has such an afterthought-like look to it. You'd think they could've made it more integrated into T2's redevelopment.
as739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5819 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3226 times:
Quoting N126DL (Reply 6): How old is this rendering? Notice the old DL widget livery on the planes?
This a new design. I spoke with some of the construction companies personnel the other day as they moved into the 4th floor. It's design was finished 6 months ago according to one of them.
I highly doubt the a/c in the background really matter. That's not the focus of attention.
On a side note. Those of you locally coming through SFO can see the artist renderings of the E concourse just outside the closed TSA screening area. Looks beautiful and as an added note, nothing like T2.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
zippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 4720 posts, RR: 13 Reply 8, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3193 times:
I sure as heck hope this cool looking new tower improves SFO's ATC and reduces delays. SFO has been making a run in the delay derby with CLT, BOS, EWR and LGA.
anonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 561 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3137 times:
Quoting as739x (Reply 7): On a side note. Those of you locally coming through SFO can see the artist renderings of the E concourse just outside the closed TSA screening area. Looks beautiful and as an added note, nothing like T2.
legacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1831 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2888 times:
As far as I know, the current tower is about 30 years old, built around the same time T2 was turned into the Intl. terminal in 1984. They're replacing it because a FAA report said that the tower would not be able to survive a large earthquake.
N766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 7990 posts, RR: 27 Reply 14, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2829 times:
Quoting legacyins (Reply 12): It is not really the age but the current tower was not built to survive a substantial earthquake. The new tower will be built to survive up to an 8.0.
Ah, that makes more sense. 8.0 is kinda low-balling it, though, isn't it? What was Chile, 8.8? It's not like bigger isn't possible/probable.
aviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1344 posts, RR: 12 Reply 15, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2803 times:
Finally, a tower with some architectural pizazz here in the US.
No surprise to find it at SFO, one of the few American airports that bothers to distinguish itself.
Over at LGA, on the other hand, we recently lost one of the country's most distinctive towers. Frequent flyers remember this building well -- hourglass-shaped and of modest height, bejeweled with a top-to-bottom series of portholes. It was an odd, playful structure.
The new LGA tower is what you might call the FAA Standard Model A1 -- a control tower that looks like every other American control tower put up over the past 20 or 30 years. I think they come prefab in a great big packing crate.
The old one may not have been state-of-the-art, but it was a welcoming, almost mischievous visual flourish in an otherwise joyless vista of seawater and concrete. It lent a friendly touch to an airport that, in most respects, is anything but friendly. It was, almost literally, an exclamation point. It said: LaGuardia!
Airports, like the planes that serve them, have become painfully generic. Functionality aside, part of any major airport building’s job is to create a sense of identity, inside and out – the kind of place that, when you glimpse it TV or in a movie, even for just a second, you know * exactly * where it is.
A dwindling number of airport facilities are distinctive in this way. The spidery "Theme Building" at LAX is the most enduring. The main terminal at Denver is another, as is the one at Washington-Dulles (Eero Saarinen).
And, we shan’t forget my sentimental favorite, the twin-stanchion control tower at Boston-Logan.
If only its 16th floor observation deck were still intact.
- PS
[Edited 2012-06-27 19:25:52]
Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
The main reason is that they're different types of faults. In Chile, the Nazca plate is subducted beneath the South American plate. In California, the Pacific and North American plates rub up against and slip past each other. Subduction zones can create far more powerful earthquakes than faults like the San Andreas/Hayward faults are capable of. I might be wrong, but I believe the largest earthquake that the San Andreas can create is around 8.0-8.5.
mexicana767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 59 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2737 times:
On a quick side note...does anyone have the link to the renderings or the proposals for the redevelopment of T1? They where posted a while ago and i havent been able to find the link.
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4402 posts, RR: 37 Reply 19, posted (10 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2624 times:
Quoting aviateur (Reply 15):
The old one may not have been state-of-the-art, but it was a welcoming, almost mischievous visual flourish in an otherwise joyless vista of seawater and concrete. It lent a friendly touch to an airport that, in most respects, is anything but friendly. It was, almost literally, an exclamation point. It said: LaGuardia!
The old LGA tower was terrific. How difficult or expensive would it be to give control towers a little more flair? They're a distinctive, stand-out part of an airport and should look like it. Good for SFO.
warden145 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 426 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (10 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2463 times:
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 8): I sure as heck hope this cool looking new tower improves SFO's ATC and reduces delays. SFO has been making a run in the delay derby with CLT, BOS, EWR and LGA.
That would be nice, but unfortunately, the new tower doesn't solve the issue of runway spacing. The only way that's ever getting fixed is if the FAA grants a waiver to the visual rules or the bay gets filled and another runway installed (which is politically impossible). SFO's really stuck between a rock and a hard place in that regard...
shengzhurou From China, joined May 2010, 32 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (10 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2430 times:
Does anyone here have info for future terminal 1 after the renovation of the E concourse at T3 and the new build tower? SFO is been packed with airplanes on ground lately with specially with UA airplanes.
phlwok From United States of America, joined May 2007, 374 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1207 times:
Quoting N782NC (Reply 16): The main reason is that they're different types of faults. In Chile, the Nazca plate is subducted beneath the South American plate. In California, the Pacific and North American plates rub up against and slip past each other. Subduction zones can create far more powerful earthquakes than faults like the San Andreas/Hayward faults are capable of. I might be wrong, but I believe the largest earthquake that the San Andreas can create is around 8.0-8.5.
This is correct - low 8's is about the strongest the San Andreas is expected to generate. Not that anything like that wouldn't be a massive disaster, but it's still not as bad as a 9. The last three major quakes the San Andreas generated were the Fort Tejon quake of 1857 at 7.9, the infamous 1906 San Francisco quake at 7.8, and the Loma Prieta quake of 1989 at 6.9. And SFO needs to be very concerned about that fault - it's within three miles of it along I-280 and San Andreas Lake (see http://www.thulescientific.com/san-andreas-fault-map.html)
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 104 posts, 
From China, joined May 2010, 32 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
