File talk:New amsterdam skyline.jpg

From IBWiki

(The first two sections were copied from Image:New Amsterdam.jpg, which had the real-world Twin Towers on it)

I like the picture, but surely they can do better *there* then the dull boxes of *here*'s WTC? Nik 01:50, 27 Sep 2005 (PDT)

I think they are called the World Trade Towers *there*. There is an early news article in which they where seriously damaged and possibly destroyed by an exploding airship. The thread has never been developed - too close to OTL events. (In hindsight I would suspect the Floridan regime.) I don't expect the new building there to be christened the Freedom Building; different ethos. - AndrewSmith

I don't remember that! Was it a deliberate act of terrorism *there*? How did the NAL government react? Were the towers at least better designed *there*? (Not that it's hard to improve on a simple rectangle ...) Nik 02:19, 27 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Found it. It was a BBC News Flash dated September 14 2001. It can be found on the News from Ill Bethisad:2001 page. - AndrewSmith

I'd read that, actually. But unless the WTT were a lot smaller and more feebly constructed, and the airships involved really huge, I have trouble believing they could have caused anywhere near the damage.

Sounds like something the old F-C would do -- a big pouf and little to show for it. [PB]

It was the raw force of the impact which knocked so much flame retardent from internal structures (the designers just never considered something so BIG would hit them).

Actually, they did consider the possibility of an airplane hitting the thing, but I suspect not such a large one. Or fully gassed up. Or going flat out. [PB]

That the sudden splashing of so much aviation fuel really--ultimately--brought the towers down *here*. Far more dangerous *there* IMO would have been falling debris setting off fires in the general area. In that case the NAFD (or would that be NAFB?) would probably have less trouble containing the disaster. As disasters go, it would be more akin to the bombing of the WTC's parking structure *here* a few years earlier, or maybe the Oklahoma City Bombing. Oh! Unless of course the airship were filled with explosives! Probably still a smaller whollop but a much bigger loss of life than just an airship collision. Having worked at the WTC *here* during the 1980s I can offer my own opinion that it was a fairly dull, sprawling design up close while it had a certain gradeur from a distance. My fave skyscraper was always the Chrysler Building, which was and is very art deco. But is the attack on the World Trade Tower canon? If so, who are the most likely candidates? And like Nik, I'm really curious to see how the NAL would have responded. Zahir 06:22, 27 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Yes, Chrysler Building is a much better design. And I think that one actually has an airship mast... The attack is canon in that there is a News Story on file. I'd rather hoped no one would ever pay it much attention (sometimes, I think, art really doesn't have to immitate life all thát closely); but the cat's out of the poke now! [PB]

Hast thou not heard of revisionist history? ::wink wink:: One could always dredge up a follow up article that declared it an aerial blunder... BoArthur (then again, QSS, always QSS. It makes things more fun to work around; hence, Louisianne.)

In comic book fandom this is known as retro'ing, usually tweaking a character's origin or significant background to suit whatever a creator wants to do with that character, and it can get wildly out of joint, much to the annoyance of dedicated fans. The observation about airshiip masts made me wonder if they are as common in Ill Bethisad as helipads are in OTL - the ultimate executive toy! - AndrewSmith

I suspect that smallish airships constitute one form of transport favoured by the wealthy of IB. Airship masts really aren't a Good Thing -- there's no easy way to control the back of the ship. I would suspect that masts on tall buildings might be used in emergencies or by small ships; but passengers probably won't be disembarquing a hundred stories up! [PB]

Airships

That's a bloody awful lot of airships....should we reconsider and make sure they're to scale? The one on the right looks like it's diving for the bay...BoArthur

Well, I'm sure the aerodrome is very busy! Could probably do with two -- the one on the right and perhaps the farther one on the left? Kudos to whoever did up those double gondola'd ships! [PB]

I was rather thinking there was at least one major Aerodrome out past Brooklyn and another in Queens. Possibly still another on Staten Island? I'm also thinking about redoing the skyline pic, putting some version of Chrysler Bldg in place of the WTC. I was assuming, btw, that airship traffic would be akin to water traffic. Zahir 18:35, 27 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Quite possible, since we all have nothing to base our ideas of Airship travel *there* on *here* aside port and airport traffic. They're just quite large and very big in the camera view. I think a large number of them, smaller, in the upper area of the skyline would match the approaches for your proposed aerodromes. I'm sure there are major aerodromes in Queens, Breuklin (sp?!), Staten Island, Perth Amboy, and others...to handle all the traffic that Major cities had, and since aerodromes at least *here* weren't built to handle a huge number of ships....but there, I suppose that the headache of *our* Chicago O'Hare is dwarfed by ANY minor Aerodrome...BoArthur

I like the picture! And no, I don't think the airships are off-scale. Quite recently I had the pleasure of seeing a zeppelin from very close, and believe me, these babies are huge! Especially in IB, where I imagine the biggest ones are far bigger than *here*. --IJzeren Jan 05:45, 28 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Towers

Well, bless my stars...a temporal-dimensional rift, and there stand the Petronas towers. Looks good! BoArthur 18:52, 29 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Véry nice! --IJzeren Jan 22:10, 29 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Now that looks cool! Deiniol 23:42, 29 Sep 2005 (PDT)

BTW, it looks like airships in the NAL behave exactly like buses: they like to travel in gangs of four! :) --IJzeren Jan 00:19, 30 Sep 2005 (PDT)

Superb job! Kyrmse 05:24, 30 Sep 2005 (PDT)

But with the WTF looking like the Chrysler building, what does the Chrysler building look like? BoArthur

Like a plain brick of glass, concrete and steel. Zahir 14:19, 30 Sep 2005 (PDT)

I think it shouldn't be looking like that, as such modern-style buildings weren't built until about 60s or 50s maybe, and Chrysler building is older as far as I know.Abdul-aziz 04:20, 31 October 2005 (PST)

Suggestion

I would suggest that you "skin" the blimps with various Airline's marks and colors, since I doubt all zeppelins there are plain and white. BoArthur

Good idea! Zahir

I think there are a number of airline graphics on the wiki, if you wanted to use them.