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 > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

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


View Poll Results: Should the height of Supertals be increased from 300m to 400m?
yes, its time to increase the height of supertall to 400m+. 131 39.94%
No, leave the height as 300m. 197 60.06%
Voters: 328. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:04 PM   #21
Pablitisimo Maximo
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Харукань (Kharkiv, Ukraine)
Posts: 6,568
Likes (Received): 35

And in Zimbabwe there is a 20+ a supertall and what?? We should say about global things.
Pablitisimo Maximo no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:14 PM   #22
poiman
Registered User
 
poiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 370
Likes (Received): 5

leave the height as 300m.
poiman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:31 PM   #23
Alle
Registered User
 
Alle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Göteborg
Posts: 2,337
Likes (Received): 9

I think so becouse supertall is quite a powerful word. And id prefer if there where a more noticeable difference between regular highrise skyscrapers and supertalls.

On the other hand this would raise the height of possible future categories (which we would not need by now if we raise the supertall height). But that issue of course is relative and we dont know how usual it will be with 800-900m plus scrapers being planned in the future. Personally i dont think it will get very usual in some time becouse its rarely practical. We are simply in the supertall era now, which we have just entered.

Brad:

This is not a sentimental issue, it doesnt matter how many of them we have in europe.




In the end though its the height that matters, there will never be a big difference between the heighest highrise and lowest supertall, i.e. 290m and 310m.
__________________
Stop the censorship in the BiH forums

Castles And Fortresses [Alpe Adria] [Bosnia]
Alle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:35 PM   #24
Racingfreak
Skyscraperfan
 
Racingfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 1,251
Likes (Received): 7

No, leave the height as 300m please
__________________
1.Maastoren............... 165M
2.New Orleans.............158M
3.Gebouw Delfse Poort.151M
4.De Rotterdam..........149M U/C
Racingfreak no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:36 PM   #25
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,504
Likes (Received): 6525

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad View Post
In Europe we don't have a single supertall of 300+m
And you already want to make it 400.
do you mean me? when yes i can say you: Supertall = 300m without any doubt for me
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:41 PM   #26
Gamma-Hamster
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,891
Likes (Received): 97

300m.
All this idea of changing categories based on how many buildings we have in different sections of the forum seems pretty silly.
Gamma-Hamster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:53 PM   #27
dommeltje
Registered User
 
dommeltje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: zeist
Posts: 4,768
Likes (Received): 468

Highrise From 100 m to 250 m
Supertall From 250 m to 350 m
Megatall from 350 m to ......

For European this is better, because there are no buildings higher than 300 m. Only in a view city's there come or have plans for buildings between 250 and 300 m. I almost never watch supertall now, because there are only VS and Asian towers. Whit supertall from 250 it will mixed whit a view European towers.
dommeltje no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 02:59 PM   #28
Dyn.tek
Unregistered User
 
Dyn.tek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 275
Likes (Received): 0

this topic is not about europe! its about the global situation where a 300m tower is nothing special anymore!
Dyn.tek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 03:04 PM   #29
Monkey
BANNED
 
Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Londinium
Posts: 14,110
Likes (Received): 38

I see no point in redfeining supertall just to get a smaller number of towers in the supertall section. Surely it's more exciting to have a large supertall forum? If you change the barrier to 400m all those supertall projects that people are excited about will simply clog up the regular high-rises forum which will become unmanagable.
Monkey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:36 PM   #30
Racingfreak
Skyscraperfan
 
Racingfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 1,251
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by dommeltje View Post
Highrise From 100 m to 250 m
Supertall From 250 m to 350 m
Megatall from 350 m to ......

For European this is better, because there are no buildings higher than 300 m. Only in a view city's there come or have plans for buildings between 250 and 300 m. I almost never watch supertall now, because there are only VS and Asian towers. Whit supertall from 250 it will mixed whit a view European towers.
This go about the world, and not about Europe...
__________________
1.Maastoren............... 165M
2.New Orleans.............158M
3.Gebouw Delfse Poort.151M
4.De Rotterdam..........149M U/C
Racingfreak no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:39 PM   #31
z0rg
fok julle naaiers
 
z0rg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Madrid
Posts: 24,723
Likes (Received): 15907

300m projects aren't "super" anymore...
__________________
What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger.

More than 300 supertall projects on going in China.
z0rg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:45 PM   #32
Nike12
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 193
Likes (Received): 25

IF you are going to change it, might as well change it to 500 m.
Nike12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:47 PM   #33
Arvin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Valkenburg (NL), Louvain (BE)
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 0

300m is still an impressive height, but record heights keep coming. I would suggest: consider a new category for 400+ (for example Megatall).
Arvin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 06:44 PM   #34
Gamma-Hamster
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,891
Likes (Received): 97

Maybe we should just stop using words like super- uber- mega- etc. and just assign a number to each category.
For example:
I - 150m
II - 300m
III - 600m
IV - 1200m
V - 2400m
Gamma-Hamster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:05 PM   #35
LMCA1990
Top tier
 
LMCA1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: España con ñ
Posts: 14,965
Likes (Received): 3454

I say yeah.
LMCA1990 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:14 PM   #36
Javier BF
iHate iStuff
 
Javier BF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Los varios Madriles y Madrices
Posts: 375
Likes (Received): 5

0 m / 0 ft

- regular building ( ~ 1-15 fl)

75 m / 250 ft

- highrise building (~ 15-30 fl)

150 m / 500 ft

- regular skyscraper (~ 30-60 fl)

300 m / 1000 ft

- supertall skyscraper (~ 60-120 fl; e.g. Chysler, ESB, Sears, Petronas, Taipei 101)

600 m / 2000 ft

- hypertall skyscraper (~ 120-240 fl; e.g. Burj Dubai)

1200 m / 4000 ft


hypertall



█ supertall
█ █
█ █
█ █ █ highrise
█ █ █ █ ▄
__________________
Doce es más que diez | 5 + 7 = 10 | 12 − 6 = 8 | 9 × 9 = 69 | 10 ÷ 3 = 4 | ½ = 60% | π = 3,18480949...

«I think there is only one meaning for the word “peace”. That is, the word should be used to signify an environment where everyone in the world can live happily as human beings. [...] We must strive for the same objective—that we all want to have decent lives as human beings. Why can't we strive together? I always wonder why we can't achieve it... I often discuss it with the children who visit me on school trips.» Sumiteru Saniguchi

Last edited by Javier BF; September 8th, 2007 at 07:20 PM.
Javier BF no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:42 PM   #37
Nike12
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 193
Likes (Received): 25

i think 300m to 499 m should be supertall and everything 500+ should get it's own section
Nike12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:55 PM   #38
skyperu34
TRUXILLO del PERU !!!
 
skyperu34's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: TRUJILLO, Perú
Posts: 13,534
Likes (Received): 808

YES, totally agree ! Although we have iconic building among the world such as the Chrysler or Empire State Building, we are now viewing a new era, an era that evolves and, unfortunately and being realistic, we have to evolve in our terms and definitions too. Not only the Chrysler or the Empire State Building, but also -in a few decades- the Burj Dubai, Taipei 101, SWFC or 2 ICC will be historical icons for our following generations, they might say exactly the same: "they are untouchable icons", but times will remian evolving and new definitions or terms will appear as well.... WE then have a constant and infinite evolution.


I think a 400-meter-high parameter is what we need now...
__________________
MIS DIBUJOS DE TINTA Y CARBON:


Diseño, arquitectura, arte y naturaleza en:

skyperu34 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:58 PM   #39
Gattberserk
Smith
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 376
Likes (Received): 17

300m at 1000ft is always the best in supertall.
__________________
WORLD TALLEST STRUCTURE


Kingdom Tower of Jeddah
Gattberserk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2007, 08:00 PM   #40
Nike12
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 193
Likes (Received): 25

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyperu34 View Post
YES, totally agree ! Although we have iconic building among the world such as the Chrysler or Empire State Building, we are now viewing a new era, an era that evolves and, unfortunately and being realistic, we have to evolve in our terms and definitions too. Not only the Chrysler or the Empire State Building, but also -in a few decades- the Burj Dubai, Taipei 101, SWFC or 2 ICC will be historical icons for our following generations, they might say exactly the same: "they are untouchable icons", but times will remian evolving and new definitions or terms will appear as well.... WE then have a constant and infinite evolution.


I think a 400-meter-high parameter is what we need now...
I dont think so, all the buildings that are 300m+ should keep the name supertall and we should make a NEW category for buildings 500 or 600m+
Nike12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 12:16 PM.


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