CHICAGO | AON center | 1,136 FT / 346 M | 83 FLOORS | 1973

[djvandrake]

I love this building. It has vertical presence like no other, and is massive and elegant at the same time. I always try to visit its base when in my favorite city.



















I really wish Aon had a bar at the top like Hancock does!

Edit: Oh yeah, all pictures by me.

[Amanita]

Nice shots! Such a simple yet elegant skyscraper!

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by djvandrake

I really wish Aon had a bar at the top like Hancock does!

Actually it does. Its just not open to the public like the Hancock is. Its a fancy good-ole-boys club called the Mid-America club and its on the 80th floor of Aon.

Its a famous place to have wedding receptions: Here are some pictures of a wedding there:

http://www.angeleyesphotographyblog....ub-chicago-il/

[Tom In Chicago]

^We used to have company parties up there. . . pretty nice I suppose. . . but really it's just a bunch of banquet rooms with nice views. . .

. . .

[george]

[The North One]

Elegant yet simple.

[ChicagoChicago]

When did they take down that hot water heater on top?

[SpeedoPro]

I have always loved this building: massive and simple. it reminds me of the wtc.

[george]

11-16

[simms3_redux]

As massive as this building is, it would essentially constitute a little more than the "core" of the Twin Towers; they were just so massive. I once applied for a job with a firm headquartered in the building and located towards the top. I ended up with a competitor .

[J_M_Tungsten]

Actually, the trade centers were 208' wide, Aon is 194'. I doubt the trade centers had 14' of floor space from the cores.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

As massive as this building is, it would essentially constitute a little more than the "core" of the Twin Towers; they were just so massive. I once applied for a job with a firm headquartered in the building and located towards the top. I ended up with a competitor .

That simply is not true. Just from basic math. WTC floor area was ~4.3 million sq. ft, AON is ~3.6 million. yes the wtc were larger buildings but to say AON would be "little more than the core" is just wrong. As was pointed out WTC was some 14 ft wider and of course about 225 ft taller. If these two were standing next to each other from a distance the width would probably be barely perceptible the height of course would be noticeable; but it would dwarf the AON by any imagination.

[simms3_redux]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Actually, the trade centers were 208' wide, Aon is 194'. I doubt the trade centers had 14' of floor space from the cores.

Well just using your numbers and doing simple math, you have a floor area of 3.123M SF for Aon Center and 4.759M SF for the WTC (not rentable area, which is closer to 2.3 or 2.6 million SF for Aon Center and less than 4 million SF for WTC). Also, I can't find a source for the width of Aon Center, but I found an offhand source for the dimensions of the WTC cores: 87 x 133 ft wide. That is a massive core, but efficiently small for a building the size of WTC. I think the WTC mastered the art of sky lobbies, thus reducing the need for a massive core with rows of elevator bays, so it would typically be a lot larger than it was. Aon was in the Twin Towers, too, during 9-11.

http://911review.com/coverup/fantasy/pancaking.html

Either way, excusing my exaggeration and as beautiful as Aon Center is, it is a dwarf next to the Twin Towers, which each gave the "Willis" Tower a run for its money in terms of sheer size.

I was only responding to comments above comparing it to the WTC, wasn't trying to make a big competition.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

Either way, excusing my exaggeration and as beautiful as Aon Center is, it is a dwarf next to the Twin Towers, which each gave the "Willis" Tower a run for its money in terms of sheer size.

Aon isn't a "dwarf" compared to Willis, and Willis is taller than the Twin Towers were, so how could Aon possibly have been "dwarfed" by them?

[simms3_redux]

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=52603538

To me that is a large difference, to you it may not be. It's all relative. I also think TwoPru is a dwarf compared to Aon Center, but you may not.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=52603568

And I think Aon is a dwarf compared to the Willis/Sears.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=52603572

In terms of RSF the Twin Towers were each a good 50% larger than Aon Center, which is very substantial.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Inasmuch as it comes down to one's definition of "dwarf," then you're right. But if you describe Aon as being a "dwarf" in comparison to the Twin Towers/Aon, what word would you use for the relationship between the Twin Towers and one of the earliest skyscrapers, the Home Insurance Building (138 feet tall), for example?

[MolsonExport]

simple elegance, well proportioned.

[simms3_redux]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Inasmuch as it comes down to one's definition of "dwarf," then you're right. But if you describe Aon as being a "dwarf" in comparison to the Twin Towers/Aon, what word would you use for the relationship between the Twin Towers and one of the earliest skyscrapers, the Home Insurance Building (138 feet tall), for example?

Well obviously we're not comparing those two. People were comparing the WTC and Aon.

[george]

[ri89]

Hi! Has anyone the construction details of the Aon Centre? It's very important!!!!

Thanks