daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers Discussions of projects under construction between 200-299m/650-999ft tall.
» Proposed Skyscrapers



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 12th, 2010, 07:14 AM   #961
ghost101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: London
Posts: 304
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Comfortably Numb View Post
Those damn planes....can't they just fly around the damn thing, or fly 12m higher?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat...cal_separation

Would be interesting to know what CAA guidelines are.

edit:

Here's the answer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_...w_Flying_Rules
__________________
flickr
ghost101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 12th, 2010, 08:21 AM   #962
TXSkyWatcher
Registered User
 
TXSkyWatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Terrell...30 miles east of Dallas
Posts: 659
Likes (Received): 42

Excellent use of the last few floors....ob deck and restaurant/bar....very nice! Love the top of this tower!
TXSkyWatcher no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 05:53 PM   #963
PortoNuts
Registered User
 
PortoNuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Porto
Posts: 23,920
Likes (Received): 7150

Yesterday:

by Medo.









__________________
Got one head for money and one head for sin..
PortoNuts no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 06:07 PM   #964
Splish
Registered User
 
Splish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bedford
Posts: 4,659
Likes (Received): 624

Quote:
Originally Posted by Comfortably Numb View Post
Those damn planes....can't they just fly around the damn thing, or fly 12m higher?
It wasn't the fact that the tower was 307m high, it was the fact that the cranes needed to build it would be a lot higher.

It's all still a load of bullshit anyway
Splish no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 06:41 PM   #965
JackM
Registered User
 
JackM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 422
Likes (Received): 4

Hey guys, this is my first post, i just have a couple of questions because i'm pretty clueless on construction.

Why do they dig such a deep hole? is it to add extra stability when building up the core, to give better foundations, or is it to have a basement, or a place where the water pipes can come in?
And what are those big blue things, are they again for stability? Will concrete be poured around them?
And what are all those pipes coming out of the wall? Are they also for stability or are they water pipes/gas pipes?

Cheers
JackM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010, 09:53 PM   #966
bobdobbs
Person
 
bobdobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 321
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Comfortably Numb View Post
Those damn planes....can't they just fly around the damn thing, or fly 12m higher?
Yes, the base problem was building an international airport (London City) on the Thames in the middle of the city, within a mile or two of pretty much the only area towers can be built in London! Not really forward thinking!
__________________
Why not clad buildings in dazzle camouflage like these?: http://images.google.co.uk/images/dazzle
bobdobbs no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:31 AM   #967
eddyk
Registered Abuser
 
eddyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: G-Town Massive
Posts: 17,016
Likes (Received): 1490

I thought it was originally 311m high...purposely 1m higher than the Shard.
__________________
.
.

Visit Grantham Linconshire
eddyk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:37 AM   #968
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,968
Likes (Received): 3245

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdobbs View Post
Yes, the base problem was building an international airport (London City) on the Thames in the middle of the city, within a mile or two of pretty much the only area towers can be built in London! Not really forward thinking!
I was quite happy that I got from touchdown on the tarmac to my front room in 45 minutes yesterday... Heathrow you'd be lucky to be leaving the airport building within 45 minutes. LCA is incredibly convenient and hassle-free.

Joke of it is, you come in to land this close to One Canada Square... And you fly right over the roof of the 205m HSBC building:



(Apologies for the quality... My window was filthy!!!)
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:39 AM   #969
Megalothian
Blood, sweat, gravy, egg.
 
Megalothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,529
Likes (Received): 144

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyk View Post
I thought it was originally 311m high...purposely 1m higher than the Shard.
Isnt it a bit taller anyhow because the ground level in the city is higher than at London Bridge station?
Megalothian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:45 AM   #970
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,968
Likes (Received): 3245

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megalothian View Post
Isnt it a bit taller anyhow because the ground level in the city is higher than at London Bridge station?
Yes... The City of London is a natural hill above the Thames floodplain... hence it was chosen for settlement in the first place... Makes the CAA limits even sillier.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 12:53 AM   #971
SkyscraperSuperman
Registered User
 
SkyscraperSuperman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stirling, UK
Posts: 2,729
Likes (Received): 802

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyk View Post
I thought it was originally 311m high...purposely 1m higher than the Shard.
Yeah, the Shard was 306m high originally, got bumped up to 310 with a steel spire. The Pinnacle was originally 307m, 1m taller than the original Shard.
__________________
~*~*~ Level 1 Rope Access Technician - hanging off buildings and bridges for a living! ~*~*~

Also a musician, climber, creative writer, diver and world traveller!

Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/TheTitanAtlas

Flickr page (The_Titan_Atlas):
http://www.flickr.com/people/[email protected]
SkyscraperSuperman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 02:44 AM   #972
surgery
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 8
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyk View Post
I thought it was originally 311m high...purposely 1m higher than the Shard.
nah. less than that
surgery no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 04:35 PM   #973
Sesquip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,762
Likes (Received): 311

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackM View Post
Hey guys, this is my first post, i just have a couple of questions because i'm pretty clueless on construction.

Why do they dig such a deep hole? is it to add extra stability when building up the core, to give better foundations, or is it to have a basement, or a place where the water pipes can come in?
All four, although the basement space is the main reason. The foundations are piled many times deeper than this

Quote:
And what are those big blue things, are they again for stability? Will concrete be poured around them?
They are sections of the tower cranes that will be used to build the tower. When it's complete, the cranes are dismantled and used on another project.

Quote:
And what are all those pipes coming out of the wall? Are they also for stability or are they water pipes/gas pipes?

Cheers
They are temporary props to hold up the walls of the basement (and all the earth behind them). When the basement floors are constructed, the props are no longer needed and are taken away.
Sesquip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 04:39 PM   #974
JackM
Registered User
 
JackM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 422
Likes (Received): 4

Thanks for clearing that up, i should have known the blue crane sections from the previous picture

It's nice to see this thing finally being started on.
JackM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 04:51 PM   #975
The seventh shape
Master of his domain
 
The seventh shape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,356
Likes (Received): 819

The pinnacle doesn't look as elegant in the new renders in the last page than it does on page one, or so it seems to me. Is this due to a height reduction?
The seventh shape está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 05:05 PM   #976
JackM
Registered User
 
JackM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 422
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by The seventh shape View Post
The pinnacle doesn't look as elegant in the new renders in the last page than it does on page one, or so it seems to me. Is this due to a height reduction?
It was originally planned to be 307m I think. Although i think it might just be the angles of the pictures taken, still looks great though.
JackM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 05:52 PM   #977
RandomNameTag
Skyscraper fan
 
RandomNameTag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: rural Georgia, United States
Posts: 468
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdobbs View Post
Yes, the base problem was building an international airport (London City) on the Thames in the middle of the city, within a mile or two of pretty much the only area towers can be built in London! Not really forward thinking!
Maybe they should do what Kowloon (Hong Kong) did and move the airport further out, thus allowing the construction of higher buildings.
RandomNameTag no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 10:42 PM   #978
bobdobbs
Person
 
bobdobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 321
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomNameTag View Post
Maybe they should do what Kowloon (Hong Kong) did and move the airport further out, thus allowing the construction of higher buildings.
Funnily enough, there's a proposal for a 6th major London airport to be built several miles out to sea in the Thames Estuary:



http://www.publicservice.co.uk/featu...y.asp?id=11463
and
http://www.thamesestuaryairport.com/


Wouldnt replace LCA, though, which, @Tubeman, I agree is incredibly convenient... and I know why the runway is the way around it is, but if only it were angled 45-90 degrees away, the flight path wouldn't impede on The City or Canary Wharf!
__________________
Why not clad buildings in dazzle camouflage like these?: http://images.google.co.uk/images/dazzle

Last edited by bobdobbs; April 13th, 2010 at 10:50 PM.
bobdobbs no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010, 11:41 PM   #979
jimbo
Registered User
 
jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Leeds/London
Posts: 4,673
Likes (Received): 6

todays rumblings from the site:

t/c 2 base going up and you can just see the main boom/jib of t/c 6 now removed.


t/c 6 (soon to be t/c 2) absent the bit of boom:


t/c 3 with its cab on 'round the corner' at Crosby Square.
jimbo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2010, 12:18 AM   #980
cybertect
Registered User
 
cybertect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,903
Likes (Received): 182

I wasn't really intending specifically to take pictures of The Pinnacle (or any other buildng sites) today. I was just out for a walk with my camera and a couple of prime lenses in my bag.

But it would have been rude not to if I was passing by, wouldn't it?

As it happened, one of the primes was my 15mm fisheye...






the other was a 35mm f/2

Across 122 Leadenhall from St Mary Axe




Taking an interest... (I ended up having quite a long chat with the two gents on the right about The Pinnacle and The Shard)





__________________
my web site | my flickr
cybertect no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
britain, london

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu