Is Super Tall still Super? - Page 3 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers General news, discussion and announcement forum about skyscrapers
» Skyscraper Living forum


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 July 29th, 2015, 10:03 PM   #41
KøbenhavnK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 380
Likes (Received): 355



If we are lucky there is one or two towers in the world above 1000 meters in ten years time.

And you are sitting around trying to figure out what towers above 15 km should be called.

Guess it's time to go back to school. Your vacation has already lasted way too long
__________________

Shaddorry, elculo, Crowns n' Spires liked this post
KøbenhavnK no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old July 30th, 2015, 03:05 AM   #42
Shaddorry
Futurologist
 
Shaddorry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Hofstade-Aalst
Posts: 1,561
Likes (Received): 707

Quote:
Originally Posted by KøbenhavnK View Post


If we are lucky there is one or two towers in the world above 1000 meters in ten years time.

And you are sitting around trying to figure out what towers above 15 km should be called.

Guess it's time to go back to school. Your vacation has already lasted way too long
Hahaha I haven't set foot in a school for two years. :P
Shaddorry no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2015, 01:21 PM   #43
Mike-
Registered User
 
Mike-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 283
Likes (Received): 1848

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaddorry View Post
You're close, but this is how I see it:

Lowrise - < 100m
Highrise - 100m - 200m
Skyscraper - 200m - 300m

Supertall - 300m - 600m
Megatall - 600m - 1000m


HYPERTALL - 1000m - 2000m
Gigatall - 2000m - 3000m
Teratall - 3000m - 4000m
Ultratall - 4000m - 5000m
Petatall - 5000m - 8000m
Yotatall - 8000m - 10 000m
Monolisk - 10 000 - 15 000
Orbitalisk - 15 000m +
yeah... monolisk, orbitalisk pretty names, but... after year 3000-4000 may be
__________________

Zaz965 liked this post
Mike- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old July 30th, 2015, 05:25 PM   #44
Shaddorry
Futurologist
 
Shaddorry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Hofstade-Aalst
Posts: 1,561
Likes (Received): 707

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike- View Post
yeah... monolisk, orbitalisk pretty names, but... after year 3000-4000 may be
I know. I'm only born 1000 years early. :'(
Shaddorry no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2015, 06:43 PM   #45
jammyrose123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 11
Likes (Received): 1

i dont think we need any more categories, supertall is enough.
__________________

elculo liked this post
jammyrose123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2015, 07:27 PM   #46
Shaddorry
Futurologist
 
Shaddorry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Hofstade-Aalst
Posts: 1,561
Likes (Received): 707

Quote:
Originally Posted by jammyrose123 View Post
i dont think we need any more categories, supertall is enough.
With The Kingdom tower being constructed in Jeddah, over one km high, The term hypertall is considered very normal on its thread.
Shaddorry no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2015, 12:01 AM   #47
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 78,561
Likes (Received): 51005

1 km high is a whole new category, IMO.
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 26th, 2017, 12:31 AM   #48
BrunoMed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3
Likes (Received): 4

Lowrise 0-50 m
Highrise 50-150 m
Tall 150-300 m
Supertall 300-600 m
Megatall 600-1200 m
Ultratall 1200-2400 m
Hypertall 2400+ m

All of these taller than 50 m are skyscrapers and the full name should be "tall skyscraper", "supertall skyscraper", "megatall skyscraper"...

Hypertall sounds more taller than ultratall. It makes more sense that the every next height division is twice the taller than the last one.
__________________

Zaz965, Crowns n' Spires liked this post
BrunoMed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2017, 05:01 AM   #49
A Chicagoan
I Love Chicago!
 
A Chicagoan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,372
Likes (Received): 3285

At least they still look super tall!

Lotte World Tower:

Lotte World Tower, December 2016 [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], by Café Bene (Own work), from Wikimedia Commons
__________________
I'm a Chicagoan and I'm proud of it!
Even though I don't live in Chicago anymore.
A Chicagoan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2019, 04:26 AM   #50
A Chicagoan
I Love Chicago!
 
A Chicagoan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,372
Likes (Received): 3285

Over a year later, no, two years, and still no one has replied to this forum again.

My current opinion: no, they are not super anymore. They're "wow!" at best, and in the right context, they don't even look super.


Franklin Center by Alan Cordova, on Flickr

See that? That's the Franklin Center, a supertall in Chicago. At best, it looks "taller than most" to me.
__________________
I'm a Chicagoan and I'm proud of it!
Even though I don't live in Chicago anymore.
A Chicagoan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2019, 05:11 AM   #51
Jay
It was aliens
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 4,448
Likes (Received): 2226

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Chicagoan View Post
Over a year later, no, two years, and still no one has replied to this forum again.

My current opinion: no, they are not super anymore. They're "wow!" at best, and in the right context, they don't even look super.

See that? That's the Franklin Center, a supertall in Chicago. At best, it looks "taller than most" to me.
The roof is about 270 meters (890 feet) though.

I think the general consensus is that this day in age "supertall" starts somewhere in the 350-400 meter range, not counting pinnacles IMO.

Chicago's second tier skyscrapers after the Sears would be a good starting point for supertall.
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2019, 04:41 AM   #52
A Chicagoan
I Love Chicago!
 
A Chicagoan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,372
Likes (Received): 3285

Perhaps the setting could be taken into consideration. A 1300 foot tall skyscraper wouldn't be the same if it was in Shenzhen, compared to, say, in Midtown Manhattan.
__________________
I'm a Chicagoan and I'm proud of it!
Even though I don't live in Chicago anymore.
A Chicagoan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2019, 05:33 AM   #53
PsyLock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 508

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Chicagoan View Post
Perhaps the setting could be taken into consideration. A 1300 foot tall skyscraper wouldn't be the same if it was in Shenzhen, compared to, say, in Midtown Manhattan.
I don't quite get the comparison. A 1,300 foot tower would look about the same on both cities. Midtown has a couple of bldgs taller than 1300ft constructed and u/c (432 Park Avenue, OneVanderbilt, Central Park Tower, 11 West 57th Street) so a 1,300 foot tall building wouldn't exactly be breaking the skyline although it will have quite a nice presence. Shenzhen on the other hand, a 1300ft bldg would look relatively small next Ping An but it'll be the 3rd tallest building in the city.
PsyLock no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2019, 06:38 PM   #54
Jay
It was aliens
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 4,448
Likes (Received): 2226

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Chicagoan View Post
Perhaps the setting could be taken into consideration. A 1300 foot tall skyscraper wouldn't be the same if it was in Shenzhen, compared to, say, in Midtown Manhattan.
Setting matters, but when I think supertall I think of buildings that are super compared to a person, regardless of how high other buildings get. For me the high 300's starts to feel really tall.

I agree with PsyLock, a 1,300 foot building would be about the same in NY and Shenzhen, which are comparable cities skyscraper wise.
__________________

A Chicagoan liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2019, 04:17 PM   #55
A Chicagoan
I Love Chicago!
 
A Chicagoan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,372
Likes (Received): 3285

Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyLock View Post
I don't quite get the comparison. A 1,300 foot tower would look about the same on both cities. Midtown has a couple of bldgs taller than 1300ft constructed and u/c (432 Park Avenue, OneVanderbilt, Central Park Tower, 11 West 57th Street) so a 1,300 foot tall building wouldn't exactly be breaking the skyline although it will have quite a nice presence. Shenzhen on the other hand, a 1300ft bldg would look relatively small next Ping An but it'll be the 3rd tallest building in the city.
I understand what you mean, didn't really choose great cities for comparison. How about Dubai compared to Chicago?
__________________
I'm a Chicagoan and I'm proud of it!
Even though I don't live in Chicago anymore.
A Chicagoan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2019, 09:52 AM   #56
Scion
Registered User
 
Scion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hong Kong, Shenzhen
Posts: 4,412
Likes (Received): 10206

Dubai, New York City and Shenzhen are in the same league - they are this planet's tier 1. Chicago would be one (or two) league(s) below them (depending if we want to wedge Shanghai, Guangzhou, Hong Kong in between).

The numbers for Dubai that I have tallied myself:
Com and T/O 400m+ buildings = 3
Com and T/O 300-399m buildings = 24
Com and T/O 200-299m buildings = 73

The numbers for Shenzhen that local enthusiasts have tallied:
Com and T/O 400m+ buildings = 2
Com and T/O 300-399m buildings = 14
Com and T/O 200-299m buildings = 104

The same can be done for NYC and Chicago to compare.
Scion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2019, 10:02 AM   #57
ayushi123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Greater Noida
Posts: 1
Likes (Received): 0

American invention of the elevator created the first skyscrapers in Chicago. Now, we are seeing a new type of structure that perfectly embodies the 21st-century age of technical ingenuity and extreme inequality. Buildings over 300 meters / 1,000 feet but it's still allowed to be called a skyscraper Know More
ayushi123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 3rd, 2019, 05:36 AM   #58
A Chicagoan
I Love Chicago!
 
A Chicagoan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,372
Likes (Received): 3285

I'm back for some more comparisons! "Relative height", as I call it, has been a topic that has fascinated me for the past few days, so I'm eager for more discussion.

Personally, I think there should be 100 skyscrapers that can be considered supertall at a time, at most. I don't think 350 meters is a necessary cutoff; 325 meters would work just fine.

However, the height of a building relative to other buildings around it should also be taken into consideration, ideally. This would probably be problematic, though. Maybe some of the people over on the European skylines threads would be able to create a formula?
__________________
I'm a Chicagoan and I'm proud of it!
Even though I don't live in Chicago anymore.
A Chicagoan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2019, 12:15 AM   #59
Crowns n' Spires
Archivar
 
Crowns n' Spires's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 443
Likes (Received): 859

I think a good way, to measure a city, and the impact of a building in a city, would be something similar to all the mesurements used for summits described in the wiki articles to prominance and isolation, such as promintent parent, Line parentage or prominence island parentage. Of course these measurements have to been adapted and tailed to skyscrapers, because buildings are no mountains.

A relative high building would be a building reaching high scores in this respect.
To categorise cities, one could determine how low a high building would score in this measurement.
__________________
Jung, liberal, gutaussehend!

Kadzman liked this post
Crowns n' Spires no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2019, 01:01 PM   #60
Kadzman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 558
Likes (Received): 806

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowns n' Spires View Post
I think a good way, to measure a city, and the impact of a building in a city, would be something similar to all the mesurements used for summits described in the wiki articles to prominance and isolation, such as promintent parent, Line parentage or prominence island parentage. Of course these measurements have to been adapted and tailed to skyscrapers, because buildings are no mountains.

A relative high building would be a building reaching high scores in this respect.
To categorise cities, one could determine how low a high building would score in this measurement.
There's a simple illustration of prominence that can easily be translated into buildings. Imagine a city is flooded. Say water level has risen by 100 metres. How many buildings will still stick out at that level? From there we can assign some values to the buildings left.

The higher the water level, the lesser number of buildings are left, the higher the points they get. Then multiply the number of buildings with the values given by the quantity of buildings. I am sure we can get a formula out of this, just that I am too lazy to rack my brain..
__________________

A Chicagoan liked this post
Kadzman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


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



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us