# Sticky  DISCUSS | Megatalls of the past, present and future



## DubaiM

General Megatall discussion thread!

Hi there, 


I created a discussion thread about Megatalls! Since all of the threads here are dedicated to an individual Megatall, there's no place to talk generally about the ongoing projects without getting off topic. 
It would therefore provide a great opportunity to start general Megatall discussions! :cheers:

If I should add an up to date Megatall list to the first post, you can just tell me and I'll add it here. :cheers: Pictures are very welcome too 

Anyway, feel free to discuss about completed, U/C, proposed or visionary projects! 

I hope you like the idea!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Kyll.Ing.

*Those that made it - completed projects*
- Dubai | Burj Khalifa | 828 m | Completed 2010
- Shanghai | Shanghai Tower | 632 m | Completed 2015
- Makkah | Abraj Al-Bait Tower | 601 m | Completed 2012

- Tokyo | Tokyo Skytree | 634 m | Completed 2012
- Guangzhou | Canton Tower | 604 m | Completed 2010

*Under construction*
- Kuala Lumpur | Merdeka PNB118 | 656 m | U/C

*Ongoing (prep, pre-prep) work on tower site*
- Shenzen | Shenzhen-Hong Kong International Centre | 655 m | Prep machinery on site as of April 2019 _A nationwide height restriction of 500 m is rumoured, but unconfirmed, to have taken effect in China_

As far as I can tell, those three are the Megatall skyscrapers we have (plus two observation towers), and we can reasonably expect four one, maybe two more to be around the corner. One of them might not turn out Megatall, but that hasn't been confirmed yet.

*On Hold - but not yet cancelled*
- Dubai | Dubai Creek Tower | 1300 m | Foundations finished in May 2018. No news since.
- Jeddah | Jeddah Tower | 1007 m | No work on tower since 2018, developer in prison, no official news.
- Suzhou | Zhongnan Center | 729 m | Piling completed, but construction stopped in 2015. _Downscaled renders (630 m) have been shown, but no news given._
- Kuala Lumpur | Tower M KLCC | 700 m | Construction postponed until "after 2030".
- Bangkok | Grand Rama 9 Tower | 615 m | New developer has taken over the project, likely to cancel or downsize tower (February 2019)


*Concept proposals - Towers that exist on ongoing masterplans*
- Shenzhen | Hubei Old Village Redevelopment | 700m | Masterplan shown in December 2018.
- Shenzhen | Buji Towers | 680 m | Proposed in October 2017, no formal news since
- Xi'an| Jinmao – Maike | 666 m | Proposed in December 2018, no formal news since
- Shenzhen | Baishizhou Redevelopment | 600 m | Developed in phases, phase one being smaller towers, no news in the Megatalls thread since March 2016

Note that masterplans are subject to change and may be very long term. 


*Long term proposals - No news for a while, but cancellation or downscaling can't be assumed just yet*
- Kuala Lumpur | Tradewinds Square | 775 m | No concrete news since before 2017
- Dubai | Dubai One | 711 m | Mall construction well underway as of May 2019, but the tower is nowhere to be seen for now
- Wuhan | Hanzheng Jie Project | 666 m | No news since August 2014
- Dubai | Uptown Tower 1/Burj 2020 | 660 m | Site for the cluster under prep, but the location of the megatall is taken by the site office. No news of the megatall for now.
- Shenzhen | Shenzhen Tower | 642 m | Renders released in January 2019. Has undergone several height revisions. No statements or site updates since 2016.
- Jakarta | Signature Tower Jakarta | 638 m | Parent company of developer going through restructuring. Tower project on hold because of an oversupply in office space for rent in Jakarta (July 2018)
- Seoul | Yongsan IBD Tower | 621 m | Still on concept/masterplan level. Plan put on hold as of May 2018, no news since.


*Stale proposals - serious proposals, but further news shouldn't be expected any time soon*
- Wuhan | Hua's International Plaza | 707 m | Demolition in January 2017, _reduction to 502 m rumoured, no news since_
- San Luis | Solar Wind Energy Tower | 686 m | No news since April 2015
- Shijiazhuang | Taihang Pearl Tower | 600 m | No news since August 2012
- Shenzhen | Evergrande Center | 600 m | Concept render shown in May 2017, no news since
- Jeddah | Free Trade City | 600 m | No news since April 2011

*Visions - Towers that weren't labeled as such, but probably should be*
- Baku | Azerbaijan Tower | 1050 m | Was apparently canceled in late 2015, when its developer was sent to prison.
- Kuwait City | Burj Mubarak Al Kabir | 1001 m | Plans have been flouted for more than a decade, no serious news of the tower in recent years.
- Karachi | (no name) | 800 m | Fancy renders shown in March 2014, no news since
- Mumbai | Mumbai Port Waterfront Redevelopment | 800 m | No news since OP in 2017
- Dubai | Weightless Skyscraper | 800 m | No news since OP in September 2017. Actually, no posts at all in thread (except those bumping to respond to comments) since four days after OP.
- Shenzhen | Future City Project | 700 m | No news for several years. A mall supposed to be demolished for this project is still standing.
- Hanoi | VTV Tower | 636 m | No news since OP in March 2015
- Changchun | Changchun World Trade Center | 631 m | No news since OP in July 2017
- Colombo | World Capital Centre | 625 m | No land, no funding, unclear ownership, no faith in project from anyone in thread. Latest news July 2017.
- Quezon City | Philippine Diamond Tower | 612 m | Little news since OP in June 2014. Apparently held up in legal troubles too.
- Riyadh | The Blade | 610 m | No news since OP in July 2016

*Downscaled - Towers that saw a height reduction, but weren't (formally, yet) cancelled*
- Shenzhen | Caiwuwei Center | 693 m (other proposals: 760 m, 666 m) | Downscaled and upscaled several times, most recently to 500 m in April 2019. _Still on proposal stage._
- Shenzhen | Shenwan Station Towers | 680 m | The Civil Aviation Administration of China has ordered a maximum height ceiling of 400 m ASL (2017). Downscaling not yet formally confirmed. 
- Chengdu | Tianfu Center | 677 m | Height reduction to 488 m shown in November 2019, but not yet formally confirmed.
- Wuhan | Wuhan Chow Tai Fook Centre | 648 m | Downscaled to 475 m in January 2019. _Still on proposal stage._
- Shenzhen | Ping An International Finance Centre | 655 m | Lost its spire and was completed at 599 m to appease aviation authorities
- Wuhan | Greenland Centre | 636 m | Ordered to be capped out at 472 m as a license to build taller apparently wasn't in order.
- Wuhan | Fanhai Centre | 600 m | Downscaled to 477 m in October 2019.

*Cancelled - Formally cancelled towers*
- Dubai | Nakheel Tower | 1000 m | Cancelled following the 2009 financial crisis
- Changsha | Sky City | 838 m | Cancelled 2016
- Mumbai | India Tower | 720 m | Cancelled 2015
- Seoul | Seoul Lite DMC Tower | 640 m | Seoul failed to find a buyer to develop a tower on the plot, something else seems to be built there instead, no news since December 2017.
- Moscow | Russia Tower | 612 m | Cancelled 2009
- Chicago | Chicago Spire | 610 m | Construction suspended in 2008, formally cancelled in 2014
- Hyderabad | Lanco Hills Signature Tower | 604 m | Developer went bankrupt in 2017


----------



## Suburbanist

I was wondering how much extra usable space a 600m building has compared to a 300m one. I know the usable space marginal gain falls quite dramatically once total loads and wind twist become a concern, and express elevators are needed (I read somewhere a while ago that a 'standard' boxy 300m building would have only 55% more usable space than a 150m one... due to space losses to express lifts, machine floors etc).

How does this play with megatalls? I know some of them are improper references since they are 'hollow' or conical (like Burj Kahlifa). If we were to build a boxy megatall, though, what could we reasonable expect? 40% more space than a 300m?


----------



## Ch.W

That's a good question. To clarify it would help to have the usable floor space of each megatall already build and u/c. And as far as available the data from all other projects in the megatall section.
Without knowing this we can only speculate.
Further every building in the league is so different that a comparison of usuable floor space in relation to the hight is problematic.
I will try to find exact data^^


----------



## Ch.W

CTBUH has data about the gross floor area (GFA). Theese includes room for staircases, elevators, mechinery rooms, lobby and so on...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_area_(building)
More meaningful would be the net internal area (NIA), but data about this are rare.
So i made a list to compare (interesting to know in generally) the megatalls. 
Not added = no data
*- Jeddah Tower - 1000m - 243,866 m²
- Burj Khalifa - 828m - 309,473 m²
- Suzhou Zhongnan Center - 729m - 500,000 m²
- Wuhan Greenland Center - 636m - 303,275 m²
- Shanghai Tower - 632m - 420,000 m²
- Merdeka PNB118 - 630m - 292,000 m²
- Rama IX Super Tower - 615m - 360,000 m²
- Makkah Royal Clock Tower - 601m - 310,638 m²*
It's funny, just the tallest one has the least GFA:nuts:

And now some buildings less than 600m
*- Lotte World Tower - 555m - 304,081 m²
- One World Trade Center - 546m - 325,279 m² 
- Guangzhou CTF - 530m - 398,000 m²
- Tianjin CTF Binhai Center - 530m - 252,144 m²
- China Zun Tower - 528m - 437,000 m²
- Guizhou Culture Plaza Tower - 521m - 290,000 m²
- Dalian Greenland Center - 518m -287,000 m²
- Taipei 101 - 508m - 198,347 m²*
This lists shows in particular one thing: the GFA in relation to the hight vary extremly. In these hights a comparison isn't reasonable. You can't even say the higher the more space. 
And proofs another thing: It's more a question of reputation, building landmarks and the race for the highest building as it has an economic sense.
But to come back to the question here are 5 supertalls about 300m
*- Cayan Tower - 306m - 111,000 m²
- The Shard - 306m - 127,489 m²
- Two Prudential Plaza- 303m - 130,063 m² 
- Wells Fargo Plaza - 302m - 170,362 m²
- Torre Costanera - 300m - 110,000 m²*
And now making an average value for megatalls and compare this for the same average value of buildings about 300m.
The result:
*Megatalls ~ 342,000 m² vs. 300m ~ 129,000 m²*
I know this construct is very theoretical, but when someone find out the NIA for each building we could make an exact comparison. To sum up i can say that it seens reasonable to build 600m instead of 300m but only when you take a look at the floor space. But not necessarilly to increase the height from 600m to 1000m to have more space.


----------



## BEE2

Good catch!


----------



## M235

Sears Tower - 442m 416,000 m²


----------



## Ch.W

Former Sears Tower aka Willis Tower is another good example. Not even half the hight of JT but much more space^^


----------



## hunser

New York:
- 55 Water Street (209m): 341,000 m²


----------



## DubaiM

Funny that Kingdom Tower has the smallest floor area, even though it's twice as tall as some of it's competitors :nuts:


----------



## alley cat

Where India Tower?


----------



## Ch.W

alley cat said:


> Where India Tower?


India Tower is cancelled


----------



## SMCYB

I find myself going to the megatall threads more often now that they have a section of their own. Thanks for creating it!


----------



## M235

I wonder when the next "super-tower" that is tall not because tall, but because the massive density is necessary/cost effective, will be built. We see some of it the super high/low unit towers in NYC.

Costs will have to come down a lot. 3D printed concrete?


----------



## Arzonz

The reason KT has so much less space than others is because of its Gigantic spire, and its big Core. (The Spire is almost one third the building's height!)


----------



## Ch.W

Yes KT is the King of spire:tiasd:


----------



## Gabriel900

I don't want anyone to understand me wrong but Jeddah Tower is not meant to be usable in anyway .. it is nothing more than a slender version of Burj Khalifa and it adds nothing but a record breaking height to the record books, which I don't mind :lol:

I got one question in mind, am I wrong or Burj Khalifa was the first ever tower built with a buttressed core? or there was others before it?


----------



## Ch.W

Gabriel900 said:


> I got one question in mind, am I wrong or Burj Khalifa was the first ever tower built with a buttressed core? or there was others before it?


Indeed, Burj Khalifa was the first buttdress core tower. At least when you can trust wikipedia.
William F. Baker was the structural engineer of BK and has invented this princip to make new hight records possible.
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Baker


----------



## scalziand

There's the humble Ryugyong Hotel tower which has a buttressed core.


----------



## Gattberserk

Wow, I thought a megatall thread is just all talk and nothing much.


It exist!!


And to see so many mega tall save me alot of time searching what are the tallest projects ongoing currently.



Its the good start to the right direction.


----------



## Meehoowk666

Ch.W said:


> CTBUH has data about the gross floor area (GFA). Theese includes room for staircases, elevators, mechinery rooms, lobby and so on...
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_area_(building)
> More meaningful would be the net internal area (NIA), but data about this are rare.
> So i made a list to compare (interesting to know in generally) the megatalls.
> Not added = no data
> *- Jeddah Tower - 1000m - 243,866 m²
> - Burj Khalifa - 828m - 309,473 m²
> - Suzhou Zhongnan Center - 729m - 500,000 m²
> - Wuhan Greenland Center - 636m - 303,275 m²
> - Shanghai Tower - 632m - 420,000 m²
> - Merdeka PNB118 - 630m - 292,000 m²
> - Rama IX Super Tower - 615m - 360,000 m²
> - Makkah Royal Clock Tower - 601m - 310,638 m²*
> It's funny, just the tallest one has the least GFA:nuts:
> 
> And now some buildings less than 600m
> *- Lotte World Tower - 555m - 304,081 m²
> - One World Trade Center - 546m - 325,279 m²
> - Guangzhou CTF - 530m - 398,000 m²
> - Tianjin CTF Binhai Center - 530m - 252,144 m²
> - China Zun Tower - 528m - 437,000 m²
> - Guizhou Culture Plaza Tower - 521m - 290,000 m²
> - Dalian Greenland Center - 518m -287,000 m²
> - Taipei 101 - 508m - 198,347 m²*
> This lists shows in particular one thing: the GFA in relation to the hight vary extremly. In these hights a comparison isn't reasonable. You can't even say the higher the more space.
> And proofs another thing: It's more a question of reputation, building landmarks and the race for the highest building as it has an economic sense.
> But to come back to the question here are 5 supertalls about 300m
> *- Cayan Tower - 306m - 111,000 m²
> - The Shard - 306m - 127,489 m²
> - Two Prudential Plaza- 303m - 130,063 m²
> - Wells Fargo Plaza - 302m - 170,362 m²
> - Torre Costanera - 300m - 110,000 m²*
> And now making an average value for megatalls and compare this for the same average value of buildings about 300m.
> The result:
> *Megatalls ~ 342,000 m² vs. 300m ~ 129,000 m²*
> I know this construct is very theoretical, but when someone find out the NIA for each building we could make an exact comparison. To sum up i can say that it seens reasonable to build 600m instead of 300m but only when you take a look at the floor space. But not necessarilly to increase the height from 600m to 1000m to have more space.


Yeah, i addressed that fact somewhere last year i guess on the Pingan IFC thread, but sadly i was ignored...

I posted the Willis Tower's GFA of 416.000m² by CTBUH and asked a question why the english wiki page states the Keangnam Hanoi Landmark Tower to have 609.673m² Floor area...they state it's of the single building!? And CTBUH has no information! That would be the most spacious supertall, by far. (in the wiki list of the worlds largest buildings by floor area it is stated to have 580,000 m²)

And also, if you look at ICC of Hongkong and SWFC of Shanghai, while almost having the same tip height, ICC has a square shape till the top while SWFCs edges are cut off to the top...and also it has a big hole there, so ICC should have more volume, but some internal space is lost apparently (381.600m² GFA of SWFC v 274.064m² GFA of ICC)

So until now Ping An IFC of Shenzhen should be GFA King with 459.525m² by CTBUH (but another source states 385.918m²) with Shanghai Tower in 2nd and Willis Tower in 3d Place (and the old 1 & 2 WTC in historical 3d with 418.500m² GFA)
China Zun Tower will soon take the 2nd (or first) place with its 437.000m² GFA


----------



## INFERNAL ELF

i Have to agree with "hella good" that Frank Lloyd Wright`s Vision of the Illinois classicaly knows as the Mile high tower. Is the First True tought up Megatall. Frank Loyd was a mastermind and took alot of stuff into consideration when he made the proposal he even made complete drawing of all the floors. And it was envisoned with floor space double that of the The Venetian
Macau ,China wich is very hard to pull through but is actually sensible when it comes to saving space. Burj khalifah and Kingdom tower as mentioned is mostly core and unusable space in the top

And now days his vision is becoming very close to Reality. Both Burj Khalifah and Kingdom tower is Very similar to his original vision.


----------



## bartboy

Ivan the Immigrant said:


> On the other hand...
> 
> Tower of Babel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://enlightenedequine.com/2015/03/09/the-hoof-landings-tower-of-babel/


Wow, this is amazing! Never knew that.


----------



## trustevil

So the tower of babel was never complete but if it was not as tall as the pyramids in Egypt why would God intervene? So that post about it being over 8000 ft tall might seem more true because that's the size of a small mountain.


----------



## Gabriel900

trustevil said:


> So the tower of babel was never complete but if it was not as tall as the pyramids in Egypt why would God intervene? So that post about it being over 8000 ft tall might seem more true because that's the size of a small mountain.


Ok this is soooooo much out of topic but according to the Bible, God intervened not because of how high the tower was but bcz for what the tower stood for back then, so it could have been 200 feet or 2000 feet it didn't matter.

Anyway back to topic


----------



## GulfArabia

I'd love a modern tower of babel, like in the pic above u'd be ablle to walk to the top, a large structure thats not a hotel or an office building..


----------



## trustevil

Gabriel900 said:


> Ok this is soooooo much out of topic but according to the Bible, God intervened not because of how high the tower was but bcz for what the tower stood for back then, so it could have been 200 feet or 2000 feet it didn't matter.
> 
> Anyway back to topic


Right it stood for something that he didn't like but that place I read was worked on 40 years by some 600000 ppl day and night not just the tower But the whole city itself. I'm sure 40 years of labor had to produce something large there.


----------



## KillerZavatar

GulfArabia said:


> I'd love a modern tower of babel, like in the pic above u'd be ablle to walk to the top, a large structure thats not a hotel or an office building..


if the income it will generate is not higher than the construction and regularly maintenance costs, it will be hard to find investors though. unless a rich sheikh decides it is a good idea.



trustevil said:


> Right it stood for something that he didn't like but that place I read was worked on 40 years by some 600000 ppl day and night not just the tower But the whole city itself. I'm sure 40 years of labor had to produce something large there.


the whole city of Babylon had maybe a population of fourth the labor force that you talk about by the time. the tower that probably was referenced was 91m in height. you can download a nice model of the city and the tower here. the bible is hardly a reliable source, the tower didn't exist the way it was described, same way as the flood or adam and eve, a result of exaggeration and imagination.


----------



## Gabriel900

Let's not go into religion now please!! its enough what religion is causing of bloodshed and wars in today's world no need to start one here on the forum 

Talking about a modern tower of Babel I think we did have one proposed but sadly put on hold 

I just hope Nakheel (developer) will wake up from their coma and continue this beauty they started


----------



## Gabriel900

Sorry for this double post but I did a fast photoshop of Burj 2020 into the pic and voila 2 beautiful megatalls next to each other (I oversized burj 2020 so imagine it shorter lol) :drool:


----------



## KillerZavatar

:drool: side by side


----------



## Ch.W

Nakheel Tower was also my favorite. Not a box, no setbacks and not a thin spire at the top. A perfect model of a megatall, really unique. Perhaps we will have luck and they build it in the future


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
Nakheel Tower stopping construction will forever be one of the most memorable moments in SSC history to me. Just that one post of Imre with the dead palm broke my heart in a heartbeat and changed me from an optimist to a realist in terms of urban development.


----------



## Gabriel900

^^ Since they already started piling so who knows they might decide to resume it! I very much believe the project is not dead in fact non of the big projects that were put on hold because of the 2008 crisis are dead and some of them already is restarting so in the future (near or far) this tower will see the light of the day as well as the Arabian Canal that was supposed to pass by it, fingers crossed.


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
and as long Nakheel owns the site no one else can build on it. If Burj 2020 starts, this project might get a new chance, since the area will become more developed. I could imagine a shorter version being built as well. In short term Nakheel might be more interested in saving it's off shore developments though.


----------



## DubaiM

You're right... Nakheel Tower was such a unique development that was almost about to be realised... Well, as far as we know it was never really cancelled either.. Maybe, one day, it's going to be built :drool:


----------



## Miami High Rise

mitchelljb said:


> The system of classification does reflect the era. It has evolved to include a new and necessary category - megatall. Supertall has a recognised meaning and can't be changed by a minority opinion on this forum. It's absurd. As absurd as redefining 6 foot 6 inches as the new 6 foot because 6 foot used to be really tall for a man.


I like that this subforum was created, even if it is near threadbare, because anything in this category is in a league of it's own, virtually guaranteed to exceed 100 floors and with exceptional engineering and likely great architecture as well.


----------



## Tupac96

The best ever mega tall simply love it ! Burns me to know that it's cancelled ! Does anyone know anything about this anyway?


----------



## Atmosphere

Ch.W said:


> There was really a tower of babel. In 1913 the fundament structure was found.
> It measures about 92m x 92m and the height was calculated with approximately 91m.
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel
> It was very likely a ziggurat building like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Building "the tower of babel" is until today a phrase for a extrem huge construction, often used to describe unprofitable and pointless projects with also extreme costs.
> It's interesting because the babel tower was the maximum of hight in those ancient times. The first in modern language megatall! The egypt pyramids were build a bit later...and higher^^
> So the question comes to mind: *how tall can we build today?*


A difficult question. I think we can build really tall if economics and floorspace wouldn't play a role. At least 5 kilometers maybe more if we use new experimental materials like nanotubes and transparant steel. The base would need to be incredibly wide though. 

When economics come into play, it would be a totally different story. a 5km tower would require so many elevators. And the top floors would need to be pressurised like an airplane.


----------



## GulfArabia

Did u guys see this !

http://www.abudhabi2.com/uae-mulls-man-made-mountain-in-bid-to-improve-rainfall/


UAE to build artificial mountain to improve rainfall


> The UAE is currently in the first stage of a man-made mountain development project as the country mulls different approaches to maximising rainfall.
> Experts from the US-based University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), which manages the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) are in the “detailed modelling study” phase, as per NCAR scientist and lead researcher Roelof Bruintjes.
> 
> “What we are looking at is basically evaluating the effects on weather through the type of mountain, how high it should be and how the slopes should be,” said Bruintjes. “We will have a report of the first phase this summer as an initial step.”
> In collaboration with the National Center of Meteorology & Seismology (NCMS), the UCAR received a fund of $400,000 in February last year to propose a “detailed modelling study evaluating the effects of building a mountain on the weather”.
> 
> The presence of mountains forces air to rise, creating clouds that can then be seeded, Bruintjes said.
> Cloud seeding, a weather modification process designed to increase the amount of rainfall produced from clouds, has a permanent unit at the NCMS’s meteorological department, which conducts operations across the UAE.
> 
> The department recently revealed $558,000 was spent on UAE cloud-seeding last year.
> “Building a mountain is not a simple thing,” added Bruintjes. “We are still busy finalising assimilation, so we are doing a spread of all kinds of heights, widths and locations [as we simultaneously] look at the local climatology.”
> 
> The specific location has not yet been determined as the NCAR experts are still testing out different sites across the UAE.
> “If [the project] is too expensive for [the government], logically the project won’t go through, but this gives them an idea of what kind of alternatives there are for the long-term future,” Bruintjes said. “If it goes through, the second phase would be to go to an engineering company and decide whether it is possible or not.”
> Mountains play an important role in influencing global and regional climates and weather conditions. By intercepting the global circulation of air, they have a decisive effect on wind, precipitation and temperature patterns, according to a Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2011 report.


----------



## Miami High Rise

It's written without a hint of irony but cannot possibly be serious.


----------



## Gabriel900

GulfArabia said:


> Did u guys see this !
> 
> http://www.abudhabi2.com/uae-mulls-man-made-mountain-in-bid-to-improve-rainfall/
> 
> 
> UAE to build artificial mountain to improve rainfall


It is all over the news! But I doubt the mountain will be a megatall if ever built :lol:



Miami High Rise said:


> It's written without a hint of irony but cannot possibly be serious.


It is the UAE .. anything is possible here :crazy:


----------



## erbse

GulfArabia said:


> Did u guys see this !
> 
> http://www.abudhabi2.com/uae-mulls-man-made-mountain-in-bid-to-improve-rainfall/
> 
> UAE to build artificial mountain to improve rainfall


That picture shows "*The Berg*" project of *Berlin Tempelhof* though. :troll:


----------



## Atmosphere

erbse said:


> That picture shows "*The Berg*" project of *Berlin Tempelhof* though. :troll:


It was also proposed for The Netherlands. Seems like the creator of this plan is trying a new location every year. :lol: It's funny how the weather change was actually a down side in the plan for the Netherlands, but a selling point for the same plan in the UAE.


----------



## ZZ-II

Tupac96 said:


> The best ever mega tall simply love it ! Burns me to know that it's cancelled ! Does anyone know anything about this anyway?


This and Nakheel Tower were my favourite Megatall-Proposals ever :drool:


----------



## KillerZavatar

today i realized this section is not yet available on the phone app.

edit: to clarify, it is on Samsung S3


----------



## ZZ-II

KillerZavatar said:


> today i realized this section is not yet available on the phone app.


On the SSC app on my iPhone i can see the Megatallsection.


----------



## Gabriel900

^^ As well as on my Sony Xperia (Android) I can see it!


----------



## INFERNAL ELF

Art vision of how Dubai may look couple of decades from now. This is the best Dubai art vision i have seen yet. Most buildings of today is in the vision too in the right spots.


image ru

Source 

http://www.politics.ie/forum/kerry/246794-tralee-pale-moon-rising-above-citys-skyline.html


----------



## Gabriel900

^^ I def see something similar in the future of Dubai!


----------



## DubaiM

Funny how the Burj actually looks like one of these future vision towers of 2080, even though it's already completed  
My god, when I see all these future skylines, I wish I'd be immortal to experience them myself :drool:


----------



## Ch.W

Oh yeah me too^^
But i have the strong feeling that no one of us will live forever...
So the solution is: enyoing the present. I'm 34 and it makes me happy to see all the supertalls and megatalls rising. I can remember the time as Willis Tower was the highest skyscraper. In those "ancient" times a 600m+ building was nothing more than a vision. And a 300m+ new supertall was an extraordinary event. Nowadays we're talking about 1000m+:drool:
And 300m are nothing special anymore in terms of the hight...


----------



## tim1807

Great visual, I even see a tiny CN Tower (totally unnecessary)
But it would be nice if these megatalls would have more diverse cladding instead of glass only.


----------



## Scion

The orgasmic dream


----------



## Ch.W

Great visualizationkay:
This would be a true timeless and multicultural metropolis


----------



## Arzonz

I wish the world island in dubai would of been that instead of lots of crappy small islands making the shape of the world...


----------



## tim1807

I literally can tell every structure in that pic except the most right one.


----------



## Ch.W

tim1807 said:


> I literally can tell every structure in that pic except the most right one.


I don't know? But i'm missing dutch and german worldknown "buildings"....I nominate:
- A german Sauerkraut plantations
- And a dutch weed field
:lol::lol:


----------



## DubaiM

tim1807 said:


> I literally can tell every structure in that pic except the most right one.


Same here  :nuts: I don't know the tower to the right too though... I'd guess it's located in an american city, about as big as Dallas..


----------



## Arzonz

I just noticed there is 2 Address hotels in that pic... 

Also, think of the amount of effort went into that to make such a beautiful picture... :nuts:


----------



## noms78

Orgasmic nightmare


----------



## francais22

INFERNAL ELF said:


> Art vision of how Dubai may look couple of decades from now. This is the best Dubai art vision i have seen yet. Most buildings of today is in the vision too in the right spots.
> 
> 
> image ru
> 
> Source
> 
> http://www.politics.ie/forum/kerry/246794-tralee-pale-moon-rising-above-citys-skyline.html


I'm pretty sure that future megatall buildings won't look like this. These drawings represent the future, as people imagine it one century ago. 


























As you can see, all those drawings are not very similar to our present ; it looks to the past. We can't imagine the future : we can only extrapolate the present. I bet that Dubai will become very different from this photo in a hundred years (or less !)


----------



## Ch.W

*god bless that this future isn't our past:lol:what the hell is he doing???:lol::lol:*











francais22 said:


> We can't imagine the future : *we can only extrapolate the present.* I bet that Dubai will become very different from this photo in a hundred years (or less !)


That's the point. The future will come for sure, but always with big surprises. 
Btw i like those past future drawings very much. If someone had more of it, please post. I'm very satisfied we have this new section and especially this thread. This is the right place we needed for such discussionskay:


----------



## DubaiM

^^


----------



## Gabriel900

Well I don't know why but this reminds me so much of tallest block in Dubai marina 



















And that last pic posted by DubaiM reminds me of an old fashioned version of Sheikh Zayed Road :lol:


----------



## Ch.W

Hey thanks DubaiM those illustrations have something that i'm missing today in most renders: charme and atmosphere.


----------



## pteranodon

Ch.W said:


> *god bless that this future isn't our past:lol:what the hell is he doing???:lol::lol:*


Angry wife ordered him to jump. Hold tight!


----------



## Ch.W

erbse said:


> Where did you measure that exactly?


I went to the location on google maps, used the measuring tool, and counted the diameter. If the diameter is the largest distance beetween two points of a circle, and the hole is a circle, than i did it right. 
Such easy^^
You can also read it in wiki:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Spire


----------



## Fotografer

Some of those old visions is actual true, while others are outdated.

I believe that in the future will create new super-materials (lightweight, resistant, morphic) mass-produced, and construction and logistics will take care of automatic / or remotely controlled machinery. 

For management of buildings and structures will be responsible smart grid computer sensors.
Therefore, I hope to fulfill the vision of a multi-miles towers.


----------



## Ch.W

I hope you're right and we will witness a tower with more than 2000m. 
There's one candidate that will surpass every future tower due to it's purpose:
*the space elevator with 35,800km*








Today it's still a vision but as you said with new materials (carbon nanotubes) it could be true someday in the future.


----------



## Arzonz

There's already a material which is coming called Graphene. (Its already here but only 1 atom thick). I've heard its around 206 times stronger than iron... could be steel... don't remember.

EDIT: Nevermind... i don't think thats a material good for Buildings.


----------



## Doomlord_uk

To build such a space elevator, the force sustained would put a stress of around 98% of the strength of a carbon-carbon bond - ie this would be on the outer limits of theoretical material science just to support itself. The centre-of-mass would be at an orbit of 38,000kms - geostationary orbit being the only orbit usable for this. The force needed to carry meaningful loads upwards, as well as resist vibrations and oscillations, would likely cause the material to be overloaded. It's a nice idea, but I think it will stay firmly in the realm of science fiction.


----------



## seb.nl

Wouldn't it be possible to make such a building practically weightless? By balancing out gravity and centrifugal forces.


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
well yeah, but getting to that point won't be weightless.


----------



## Arzonz

Get temporary Supports.


----------



## Gwathanaur

seb.nl said:


> Wouldn't it be possible to make such a building practically weightless? By balancing out gravity and centrifugal forces.


That is called orbiting, and the very goal of the space elevator is that the top of it is orbiting. But the thing is, the elevator is not just an orbiting dot (that's called a satellite), but a line from ground to orbit. And all those parts between the ground and the orbiting height, well, they are not weightless.



> a material which is coming called Graphene. (Its already here but only 1 atom thick)


 By definition, graphene is a one atom thick sheet. When it's thicker it is called graphite and is used to make pencils.


----------



## Saltovka

I suppose that a blooming of true megatalls will be possible only after 3-D printing implantation for such structures.


----------



## Gabriel900

*"Dubai to get a new sewage system in coming five years" *

*"UAE sets up firm to operate first nuclear power plants"*

Will this be the first domino in a series of events that will eventually lead to the rebirth of Nakheel Tower and Harbour!?










Before I explain my reasoning, first let me introduce the planning of Dubai Marina and its surroundings.










As you can see in the above pic, Nakheel Tower is located to the south of JLT, Burj 2020 and Dubai Marina, just on the other side of SZR on the opposite of DEWA (Dubai Electricity and Water Authority).

That being said, building a mega tower or a district so close to an industrial area is very unfavorable and because of the 2008 crash, Nakheel tower was put to sleep after some major ground works.

Then there is the rise of the new icon, DubaiEye on the Bluewaters Island, just to the north of DEWA which is again very undesirable for residents of the Marina or tourists strolling in the area.

*But could this change very soon?*

This month Dubai Municipality announced a new project related to the sewage system in Dubai and I quote "The emirate of Dubai will get a new deep tunnel sewerage system costing Dh12.5 billion in the next *five years* to *replace *more than 121 sewage pumping stations"

Part of DEWA close to Nakheel tower and marina is related to sewage and that's not all, They are planning on building a Nuclear Power Plant and "The Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park, the largest single-site strategic renewable energy project of its kind in the world" which I am guessing will eliminate any smaller power plants in Dubai, like the one near the marina.

So what I am trying to say, the area in Red and named DEWA will most probably be eliminated within the coming 5 years, and we all know what a seafront plot means for Dubai, more development which will raise the land value on this land where I predict will work as an extension to the Marina and not only that, it will most probably spark Nakheel Tower masterplan which will be resumed. Add to that by getting rid of DEWA, it will make it easier to dig the canal that was in the original masterplan.

Finally there is many signs that Nakheel Tower is not dead, first the metro station (Blue Circle) nearby is still called Nakheel Harbour & Tower Metro Station (which wasn't changed with the recent renaming of some of the stations in Dubai) and there is the area meant for the tower and its canal is still untouched and undeveloped.

I hope I wasn't too annoying and it wasn't too long for you guys.

This is my humble prediction and where I think things are heading, Dominos started to collapse and it is about time before Nakheel Tower wakes up 

Great things are ahead :cheers:

http://gulfnews.com/news/uae/govern...-sewage-system-in-coming-five-years-1.1828229
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/uae-...nuclear-power-plants-632003.html#.V0hw4fl97IU
http://www.emirates247.com/news/solar-energy-in-dubai-sun-is-our-limit-2016-05-08-1.629446


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
i think it is too early to jump on a hypetrain yet, but that's a really interesting analysis anyways. Nakheel still owns the site and part of construction is already done, so even if they redesign, they will built something there sooner or later,


----------



## AnOldBlackMarble

francais22 said:


> I'm pretty sure that future megatall buildings won't look like this. These drawings represent the future, as people imagine it one century ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, all those drawings are not very similar to our present ; it looks to the past. We can't imagine the future : we can only extrapolate the present. I bet that Dubai will become very different from this photo in a hundred years (or less !)



Actually they look exactly like this. The top looks just like New York, and the bottom like parts of Dubai.


----------



## AnOldBlackMarble

Doomlord_uk said:


> To build such a space elevator, the force sustained would put a stress of around 98% of the strength of a carbon-carbon bond - ie this would be on the outer limits of theoretical material science just to support itself. The centre-of-mass would be at an orbit of 38,000kms - geostationary orbit being the only orbit usable for this. The force needed to carry meaningful loads upwards, as well as resist vibrations and oscillations, would likely cause the material to be overloaded. It's a nice idea, but I think it will stay firmly in the realm of science fiction.


Agreed. I'm certain by the time we have the technology to build something like that, more than likely we will have developed some form of heavy lift propulsion beyond our simple rocket systems of today. Rockets are still just "giant firecrackers". It's a thousand year old concept made from modern materials. That's why space flight is still so dangerous, and difficult today. Once someone discovers/invents some other form of propulsion that is more advanced than essentially, "burning a fire"aka rocket power, going to space will become routine, and building a space elevator, pointless. 

I think the tallest structure on earth will still be a building. But there will be a limit. I think one building will become the tallest ever, with none taller. Maybe a few kilometers tall, but not even as tall as Everest. Oxygen is too thin that high, and very cold. What would be the point of such a tall building? Ultimately it has to make economic and logistical sense. Even if building it becomes cheap, the logistics of moving around in it would become an issue. In my opinion at the 1 and 2km mark, we're getting to the highest point buildings will ever reach. Beyond that it becomes more of a problem than a solution. And all buildings are "solutions" on how to "house" our "industry".


----------



## AnOldBlackMarble

Saltovka said:


> 3d-printing would accelerate megatall construction very much. This is the future.


In a way it already exists and has existed for 2000 years. Concrete. Concrete is similar to 3d printing by pouring a liquid into a mold to form a rock into any shape we want. Quicker and easier than sculpting natural stone. Stronger too.


----------



## KillerZavatar

Fotografer said:


> "Billionaire Broad Group CEO Zhang still adamant that* 838 meter tall Skycity* skyscraper *will be built*."
> _
> "Construction is one of the most polluting of all industries but I can make the most environmentally sound buildings for half the price and 10 times the speed of anyone else," Mr. Zhang says._
> http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/11/billionaire-broad-group-ceo-still.html


they should build tons of 200m structures instead until they have more expertise to get into crazy heights.


----------



## droneriot

They continue to build highrises under this forum's radar, dunno why they don't go for the 200m mark.


----------



## Kplay87

Tallest skyscrapers in 2045


----------



## DubaiM

You can never make assumptions of the tallest towers in 2045. There will be sooo many new projects above 1000m+ until this time that we can't predict anything 3 decades before


----------



## A Chicagoan

Judging from what we've seen in the past, I wouldn't be surprised if by 2045 we're building floating skyscrapers and racing to build the "highest skyscraper" (skyscraper that's floating the highest above ground).


----------



## Cadaeib

*Which future for megatalls ?*

I've made this graphic with CTBUH database. Since 1980', skyscrapers are build circa 10m taller every year. If the trend continues, we should see 1km skyscrapers becoming common in 2050 even if higher skyscrapers could be built in the arab countries before. 

However I think that a financial crisis will happends in Asia soon. Ten years after this crisis, if there is no war or disaster, we should see Africa booming with several megatalls build in the main cities. :banana:

And by the end of the century, Antartica could become the new megatalls continent (if skyscrapers are still usefull).

Here are my predictions ... See you in 2050, and in 2100 ! :cheers:


----------



## AP Design

Kplay87 said:


> Tallest skyscrapers in 2045


Such a strange name for it - "2045" :nuts: Removing just one tower would make it 2021, and would be much more realistic.


----------



## droneriot

From another thread:



AP Design said:


> ^^ Honestly, I'm not aware of any. If you know, I will be glad to learn. I can only assume you mean some observation decks in mountains.


You assume correctly. That they aren't on man-made structures is not relevant in this case, since I brought them up to counter your "all you see is a map"-statement. I've been on a number of those, and the experience quite definitely differs from looking at a map. 

It depends on the surroundings of course. In Dubai (this post is in response to a discussion in a Dubai thread, for those who don't know) you'll see vast plains of yellow no matter if you're at 300m or 3000m. Most skyscraper/supertall cities that could build such structures however have far more scenic surroundings, New York State/New Jersey or the Pearl River Delta certainly aren't the dullest areas to behold from above.


----------



## ballom

Cadaeib said:


> And by the end of the century, Antartica could become the new megatalls continent (if skyscrapers are still usefull).


That's an extremely light prediction.

You do realise there is litteraly nobody outside few scientific and adventurers there?

And even IF in the future people start moving to antartica, let's say gobal warming melt a lot of ice revealing more land and making antartica more livable.

Even if this happen , antartica will have to grow his culture (as there is no native population to begin with , unlike dubai ) and economy (well mayeb oil if it's still as important in 2100 ?)


If this actually happen , let's better to hope for a supertall than plenty of megatall, because it's unlikely antartica will yet need such construction (unless it goes middle east style, just for the contest of the biggest )

Unless for whatever reason antartica became the new superpower with at least dozens of millions of new and rich habitants


----------



## Cadaeib

^^
You're right ! It's more a scenario than a prediction, because it's clearly uncertain. I know that currently no ones lives full-time in Antartica.
Antarctic Treaty will end in 2048. If there are resources in Antartica (and there are) we could see some part of Antartica colonized by people from countries all over the world (particularly by climate refugee) like America in the 19th century.
At this period, construction should be cheaper and faster than now due to the use of 3D printing. I imagine that cities would be quite dense because of the climate, so everything could be done without going out.
Even if this scenario seems unrealistic, I think it's quite possible that it happens.


----------



## SkyscraperLover2K16

*A Scenario for a City with So Many Megatalls*

Before reading, feel free to call me crazy and stuff like that but no insults or bullying, also feel free to ask me questions about this if you can, so here's the vision:

This is a vision that I have for a city if it were to be built on Mars, and this city is called New Athens, and in this city, there will be millions of skyscrapers that are at least 100 meters or above, but what's interesting is that there will be thousands of megatalls, and hundreds of them will be 5,000 meters, and one of those buildings will be 15,000 meters, and that building will be the tallest in the city of New Athens.


----------



## pinoytv88

*Pinoytv*

They continue to build highrises under this forum's radar, dunno why they don't go for the 200m mark.
*pinoytv*


----------



## ballom

SkyscraperLover2K16 said:


> Before reading, feel free to call me crazy and stuff like that but no insults or bullying, also feel free to ask me questions about this if you can, so here's the vision:
> 
> This is a vision that I have for a city if it were to be built on Mars, and this city is called New Athens, and in this city, there will be millions of skyscrapers that are at least 100 meters or above, but what's interesting is that there will be thousands of megatalls, and hundreds of them will be 5,000 meters, and one of those buildings will be 15,000 meters, and that building will be the tallest in the city of New Athens.



you're cazry.
You pulled a random idea either from your imagination or from a fiction novel.

Wow you already know the city name, you must be able to predict the future hno:hno:hno:hno:




When? in 10 years? 50 years? 9000 years?


The only "correct point" is that once there is a colonny that can live normaly like on earth, construction can effectively be taller as mars gravity is weaker.


----------



## SkyscraperLover2K16

ballom said:


> you're cazry.
> You pulled a random idea either from your imagination or from a fiction novel.
> 
> Wow you already know the city name, you must be able to predict the future hno:hno:hno:hno:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When? in 10 years? 50 years? 9000 years?
> 
> 
> The only "correct point" is that once there is a colonny that can live normaly like on earth, construction can effectively be taller as mars gravity is weaker.


I really can't predict the future cause nobody really knows what the future would be like, so it's just a prediction, so probably in 100-150 years at least, could be much longer, we'll just see as we move into Mars and establish colonies and stuff like that.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

On Mars, you'd want to build _down_, not up. The surface is bathed in too much radiation to be suitable for long-term habitation. The dust storms would also mean you'd occasionally lose the view from a skyscraper for years on end. And ideally, you'd want more than one wall/window between your apartment and the near-vacuum of the Martian atmosphere.

The surface might be useful for things like greenhouses or solar farms (but again, the dust storms, so probably not), but Martian cities in general would be built underground more than above it. Any spaceports would inevitably have to be on the surface, though.


----------



## Cadaeib

Now there is just one "true" megatall skyscraper really UC .. Wuhan Greenland Center  I hope ... I hope others will be U/C soon


----------



## Sportsx

Kyll.Ing. said:


> On Mars, you'd want to build _down_, not up. The surface is bathed in too much radiation to be suitable for long-term habitation. The dust storms would also mean you'd occasionally lose the view from a skyscraper for years on end. And ideally, you'd want more than one wall/window between your apartment and the near-vacuum of the Martian atmosphere.
> 
> The surface might be useful for things like greenhouses or solar farms (but again, the dust storms, so probably not), but Martian cities in general would be built underground more than above it. Any spaceports would inevitably have to be on the surface, though.


Just like that reverse skyscraper they wanted built in Mexico City a few years ago?


----------



## ALBERT SOLER

I think that the actual competition all over the world for who has the tallest tower, it seems the competition between several men about who has the largest...well, you know the part of the body I´m talking about.


----------



## IBeMo.

Kyll.Ing. said:


> On Mars, you'd want to build _down_, not up. The surface is bathed in too much radiation to be suitable for long-term habitation. The dust storms would also mean you'd occasionally lose the view from a skyscraper for years on end. And ideally, you'd want more than one wall/window between your apartment and the near-vacuum of the Martian atmosphere.
> 
> The surface might be useful for things like greenhouses or solar farms (but again, the dust storms, so probably not), but Martian cities in general would be built underground more than above it. Any spaceports would inevitably have to be on the surface, though.


Just like this (?) :nuts: :nuts:


----------



## Torry Cox

Awkward_Engineer said:


> That's pretty cool but who the hell would want to work or live down there


Agree. How to live there?


----------



## m6b7n

ilovecoffee said:


> there was a thread on here under megatalls; a tower that was suspended from an asteriod or something like that and i cant find it, was it removed? can anyone tell me the name of it?


I think "Analemma Tower" is what you mean.


----------



## abdulwahab1

*‘UAE’s artificial mountain’ not such a preposterous idea*



GulfArabia said:


> Did u guys see this !
> 
> http://www.abudhabi2.com/uae-mulls-man-made-mountain-in-bid-to-improve-rainfall/
> 
> 
> UAE to build artificial mountain to improve rainfall


It was an idea so extreme that it could have been published as an April Fool’s Day joke, albeit a month late.

The story that the UAE was looking at the possibility of building an artificial mountain in the desert to encourage more rain first surfaced in Arabian Business on May 1.

It was quickly picked up by western media, agog at the prospect of another spectacular construction first from the home of offshore palms and the world’s tallest building.


It’s a measure of the credibility capital amassed by the UAE’s extreme construction record that even The Wall Street Journal reported the story.

But if it was a spoof, like all good ones this one was laced with elements of truth. After widespread international coverage of the country’s cloud-seeding programme, everyone knew the UAE was going to great lengths to conjure up water from the sky.


----------



## A Chicagoan

I think we already have enough megatalls for at least another decade. No need to get all excited over this new natural phenomenon.


----------



## Cadaeib

François Garas (1866-1925) La Mort (The Death), 1901
An underrated french architect and painter ... 












Temple à la pensée, dédié à Beethoven, circa 1900


----------



## perheps

This is mega tall but I decided noticed this place for people want reading 
478,700,000 skyscrapers around the world about 9.6% have skyscrapers in earth
50 years from now could reach 1,170,000,000 skyscrapers could 48 mega tall
Supertall more than 27,000 in 2067 but now 2,574 with construction approvals and proposed also Hype tall may be five over 1,200 metre in 2067


----------



## OptomistOne

While a part of me will be really disappointed, the rational part tells me that Dubai Creek Tower may well be the tallest tower ever built. I only say that because history seems to be saying that everything man made at some point reaches its peak.

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/08/25/a380-retirement

http://maritime-connector.com/worlds-largest-ships/

So, it seems that the world has already built, for practical purposes the biggest aircraft, which now seems uneconomic and the world's largest ship - long since scrapped. So maybe mega talls too have their peak limit which might not be that far away. I hope not, but I am guessing that it will be a very long time before anything taller than 1300 metres is built. 

Sure, I have no doubt that much taller buildings will be proposed but fantasy and economic reality are too very different things. Time will tell.


----------



## Gwellbeing

Latest rendering of 838m megatall from BSB Changsha


----------



## Georgius

I think the Chinesse can do much better than a more angular copy of Burj Khalifa.


----------



## DJaCoNdA

Georgius said:


> I think the Chinesse can do much better than a more angular copy of Burj Khalifa.


Chinese copy everything, they have zero vision/innovation mentality.


----------



## Gwellbeing

Model of Sky City Changsha


----------



## city of the future

DJaCoNdA said:


> Chinese copy everything, they have zero vision/innovation mentality.




Yet they have probable the best looking supertall, megatalls, looks at Shanghai tower, a tower that rivals the best architecture, most ME countries outsource their design to western and Asian architecture firms. BK designed by SOM, Jeddah tower by Adrian Gordon and gill. Greenland tower in Shenzhen is probably my favourite megatall next to burj Khalifa


----------



## KillerZavatar

city of the future said:


> Greenland tower in Shenzhen is probably my favourite megatall next to burj Khalifa


Do you mean Greenland Tower in Wuhan? Or did I miss a major announcement! :cheers:


----------



## pteranodon

del


----------



## RickLW

Still Shanghai Tower the best. Come on Shanghai, keep these little places down!!


----------



## Rosa Green

It turns out that Shanghai Tower is the world’s second tallest building which is also the tallest skyscraper in China.


----------



## Orbiting

Man this section has been dead lately.


----------



## Hudson11

Orbiting said:


> Man this section has been dead lately.


IMO it was too early to start a megatalls section. That superlative is still too elusive. More and more cities are building supertalls, some cities over a dozen, but megatalls are a rarity, despite all of the proposals that may never see the light of day. Humanity collectively has one building under construction destined to be taller than 600m, and even that tower utilizes a spire to reach that height.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Bumping this just to agree with the post above. That's the TL;DR at least, but I'll give a little more reasoning. Hopefully, there's no such thing as bumping a stickied thread.

Anyway, it seems like megatall skyscrapers aren't going to be as common as it seemed when this section was created a few years ago. As far as I can remember, there were three completed megatalls back then, a handful under construction, and even more who were just about to get off the ground. Today, we still have three completed megatalls, one under construction (with a roof height well below 500 m), and those waiting to get off the ground are still waiting. Ping An IFC had its spire cut, Wuhan Greenland Center was cut off rather abruptly, work stopped on Jeddah Tower, and others who seemed to be just around the corner have sunk into a quagmire of perpetual delays. Grand Rama 9 Tower, Signature Tower Jakarta, Suzhou Zhongnan Center, Dubai One... 

However, the existing three megatalls - and the sub-megatalls above 500 m, of which there are a tiny handful - prove that megatall skyscrapers are technologically feasible, so proposals keep getting made to build them. If money can be found, megatalls can be built. And so new threads keep popping up. But finding the money is a lot more difficult than making a proposal, so most megatall proposals are dead on arrival, if they were even serious in the first place. That is reflected in the threads too. This section has 53 tower threads in it (and two discussion threads). Of those, one is for a tower under construction, four are for towers On Hold, and one is for a completed tower. The remaining 47 never got anywhere. 

All that makes me want to ask: *Is it worth having a dedicated Megatalls section at all?*

The reason why I bring this up now is a handful of recent comments in threads in this section, suggesting it should be acknowledged that most threads in here aren't likely to make it to completion. Some suggest a separate place for visions, others want stale proposals to be singled out. But it all comes down to accepting the futility of the futile projects. And that label fits most of the threads, really. Apart from the KL118 thread, all threads show little but delays, cancellations and fancy new renders that never seem to translate into any construction progress. The megatalls section is, essentially, the forum of pipe dreams and unrealistic proposals. Perhaps that ought to be acknowledged.

If I may put up a bold suggestion for general consideration, and for discussion, I'd say to change the title of this forum to Proposed Megatalls and have it as a subforum of Supertalls. The threads for which there is ongoing construction can be put in the Supertalls forum, possibly stickied (since there is only one of those threads at the moment). The Proposed Megatalls section would essentially function exactly like the current Megatalls section does, but its name and subforum status would show more acceptance of the fact that most of its threads won't ever make it to the construction stage. The actual U/C towers would have their threads among the other U/C supertalls, in the subforum dedicated to towers with activity on site.

What do you think? And may I ask the mods whether the issue has been raised among themselves?


----------



## city of the future

I fully agree with this, and there seems to be some tensions for just having the section alone, like discussions about cheating spires etc. I liked it before when they were stickied thread in the SUPERTALLS section.


----------



## Hudson11

well, you already know my opinion  I think all of the visions need to go somewhere though. Maybe another subforum under General Developments, separate from the archives?


----------



## ArchGuy1

*Kingdom Tower in Jeddah as Tourist Destination*

Do you think that the Kingdom Tower in Jeddah will become a major tourist attraction like the Burj Khalifa in Dubai and the Empire State Building in New York as it will be the world's tallest building when completed. Also, do you think that the Jeddah Tower will help make Jeddah and Saudi Arabia as a whole become a big tourist destination like the Burj Khalifa did for Dubai and the United Arab Emirates and the Petronas Towers did for Kuala Lumpur and Malaysia.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

ArchGuy1 said:


> Do you think that the Kingdom Tower in Jeddah will become a major tourist attraction like the Burj Khalifa in Dubai and the Empire State Building in New York as it will be the world's tallest building when completed. Also, do you think that the Jeddah Tower will help make Jeddah and Saudi Arabia as a whole become a big tourist destination like the Burj Khalifa did for Dubai and the United Arab Emirates and the Petronas Towers did for Kuala Lumpur and Malaysia.


Even if it ever gets completed (and that's a big if), it's still miles away from anything else in Jeddah, and Saudi Arabia is still Saudi Arabia, so a big no on all points.


----------



## ArchGuy1

Why is construction on the Kingdom Tower in Jeddah on hold.


----------



## Hudson11

ArchGuy1 said:


> Why is construction on the Kingdom Tower in Jeddah on hold.


Because there's nobody working on the tower itself. There might be scattered work on utilities in the surrounding desert, but nothing to warrant calling the tower itself under construction. They need a source of capital before continuing work on the tower. Either a loan, or as they previously had, Royal funding.


----------



## tallmark

Hudson11 said:


> Because there's nobody working on the tower itself. There might be scattered work on utilities in the surrounding desert, but nothing to warrant calling the tower itself under construction. They need a source of capital before continuing work on the tower. Either a loan, or as they previously had, Royal funding.


@Hudson11 is right. Add to that also the lack of a political/prestige value to construct this "flagpole" when there are winds of war blowing in the neighborhood. The saud dynasty cannot justify spending money on such prestige travesties as this at present


----------



## bluesky3000

Ch.W said:


> CTBUH has data about the gross floor area (GFA). Theese includes room for staircases, elevators, mechinery rooms, lobby and so on...
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_area_(building)
> More meaningful would be the net internal area (NIA), but data about this are rare.
> So i made a list to compare (interesting to know in generally) the megatalls.
> Not added = no data
> *- Jeddah Tower - 1000m - 243,866 m²
> - Burj Khalifa - 828m - 309,473 m²
> - Suzhou Zhongnan Center - 729m - 500,000 m²
> - Wuhan Greenland Center - 636m - 303,275 m²
> - Shanghai Tower - 632m - 420,000 m²
> - Merdeka PNB118 - 630m - 292,000 m²
> - Rama IX Super Tower - 615m - 360,000 m²
> - Makkah Royal Clock Tower - 601m - 310,638 m²*
> It's funny, just the tallest one has the least GFA:nuts:
> 
> And now some buildings less than 600m
> *- Lotte World Tower - 555m - 304,081 m²
> - One World Trade Center - 546m - 325,279 m²
> - Guangzhou CTF - 530m - 398,000 m²
> - Tianjin CTF Binhai Center - 530m - 252,144 m²
> - China Zun Tower - 528m - 437,000 m²
> - Guizhou Culture Plaza Tower - 521m - 290,000 m²
> - Dalian Greenland Center - 518m -287,000 m²
> - Taipei 101 - 508m - 198,347 m²*
> This lists shows in particular one thing: the GFA in relation to the hight vary extremly. In these hights a comparison isn't reasonable. You can't even say the higher the more space.
> And proofs another thing: It's more a question of reputation, building landmarks and the race for the highest building as it has an economic sense.
> But to come back to the question here are 5 supertalls about 300m
> *- Cayan Tower - 306m - 111,000 m²
> - The Shard - 306m - 127,489 m²
> - Two Prudential Plaza- 303m - 130,063 m²
> - Wells Fargo Plaza - 302m - 170,362 m²
> - Torre Costanera - 300m - 110,000 m²*
> And now making an average value for megatalls and compare this for the same average value of buildings about 300m.
> The result:
> *Megatalls ~ 342,000 m² vs. 300m ~ 129,000 m²*
> I know this construct is very theoretical, but when someone find out the NIA for each building we could make an exact comparison. To sum up i can say that it seens reasonable to build 600m instead of 300m but only when you take a look at the floor space. But not necessarilly to increase the height from 600m to 1000m to have more space.


amazing! Didnt know some of this specs!


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Since I found myself with some time to spare this Saturday evening, I'd like to try out a little project I've been thinking of for some time. Looking over the Megatalls in this section and try to see what became of them. I know some projects were downscaled and moved to other subforums, those will have to be recited from memory. If others would be so kind as to reminding me of those I forgot, this list could be edited to become even more complete. And I even found a snazzy title for the project:

*Tallying the talls - what happened to them all?*

I've gone through this forum and the CTBUH list (and Wikipedia, although that helped diddly squat) and found a total of 51 Megatall proposals dating between 2005 and today, excluding those marked as Visions. These are all their fates, as best as I could determine them. They are sorted primarily by category and secondarily by height.

Please note that the heights are given as absolute numbers, so I could sort them in my spreadsheet. Many of them might have plusses, minuses or ranges associated with them, but that would have been a hassle to keep track of.

The categories are also given by me, and they are not perfect. I had to separate "no news but news will probably come" from "no news and there probably never will be" somehow. At times, these estimates may be very subjective. I'm pretty sure some towers are sorted in the wrong category, but I'm not sure where else to put them. In some cases, the categories might contradict SSC thread tags.

I haven't combed through the regional subforums, there might be newer information buried there, but finding and sorting it would be more of a hassle than I have time for.

_Latest update: March 3, 2021._

*Those that made it - completed projects*

Dubai | Burj Khalifa | 828 m | Completed 2010
Shanghai | Shanghai Tower | 632 m | Completed 2015
Makkah | Abraj Al-Bait Tower | 601 m | Completed 2012


Tokyo | Tokyo Skytree | 634 m | Completed 2012
Guangzhou | Canton Tower | 604 m | Completed 2010
*Under construction*

Kuala Lumpur | Merdeka PNB118 | 656 m | U/C

*Ongoing (prep, pre-prep) work on tower site*
_(none)_

As far as I can tell, those three are the Megatall skyscrapers we have (plus two observation towers), and we can reasonably expect four one, maybe two a slim chance of one no more to be around the corner. Given the enormous expense and questionable profitability of Megatalls, few developers ever wanted to take the chance with them, at least outside China, where national building codes have since imposed what effectively amounts to a ban on Megatalls. As of September 2020, Merdeka PNB118 remains the only Megatall in progress worldwide, and also the only tower taller than 500 meters actively under construction.

Well, those are the Megatalls that are currently with us. Below, the following lists present the towers that no longer are:

*On Hold - but not yet cancelled*

Dubai | Dubai Creek Tower | 1300 m | Foundations finished in May 2018. No news or apparent construction progress followed for two years until it was formally put on hold during the Covid-19 pandemic. Current height: ~0 m.
Jeddah | Jeddah Tower | 1007 m | No work on tower since early 2018, developer in prison, no official news. Current height: ~270 m
Bangkok | Grand Rama 9 Tower | 615 m | New developer has taken over the project, likely to cancel or downsize tower (February 2019). The tower has not broken ground yet.
*Concept proposals - Towers that exist on ongoing masterplans*

Shenzhen | Hubei Old Village Redevelopment | 700m | Masterplan shown in December 2018.
Shenzhen | Buji Towers | 680 m | Proposed in October 2017, no formal news since
Xi'an| Jinmao – Maike | 666 m | Proposed in December 2018, no formal news since
Shenzhen | Baishizhou Redevelopment | 600 m | Developed in phases, phase one being smaller towers, no news in the Megatalls thread since March 2016
Note that masterplans are subject to change and may be very long term. _A nationwide height restriction of is stated to have taken effect in China_, where all of the above towers are located.

*Long term proposals - No news for a while, but cancellation or downscaling can't be assumed just yet*

Kuala Lumpur | Tradewinds Square | 775 m | No concrete news since before 2017
Dubai | Dubai One | 711 m | Mall construction well underway as of May 2019 stalled in 2019. The tower is nowhere to be seen for now.
Kuala Lumpur | Tower M KLCC | 700 m | Construction postponed until "after 2030", according to an August 2019 article.
Wuhan | Hanzheng Jie Project | 666 m | No news since August 2014
Dubai | Uptown Tower 1/Burj 2020 | 660 m | A supertall, the second tallest tower in the cluster, is under construction, but the location of the megatall is taken up by the site office. No news of the megatall for now.
Shenzhen | Shenzhen Tower | 642 m | Renders released in January 2019. Has undergone several height revisions. No statements or site updates since 2016.
Jakarta | Signature Tower Jakarta | 638 m | Parent company of developer going through restructuring. Tower project on hold because of an oversupply in office space for rent in Jakarta (July 2018)
Seoul | Yongsan IBD Tower | 621 m | Still on concept/masterplan level. Plan put on hold as of May 2018, no news since.
*Stale proposals - serious proposals, but further news shouldn't be expected any time soon*

Wuhan | Hua's International Plaza | 707 m | Demolition in January 2017, _reduction to 502 m rumoured, no news since_
San Luis | Solar Wind Energy Tower | 686 m | No news since April 2015
Shijiazhuang | Taihang Pearl Tower | 600 m | No news since August 2012
Shenzhen | Evergrande Center | 600 m | Concept render shown in May 2017, no news since
Jeddah | Free Trade City | 600 m | No news since April 2011
*Visions - Towers that weren't labeled as such, but probably should be*

Karachi | (no name) | 800 m | Fancy renders shown in March 2014, no news since
Mumbai | Mumbai Port Waterfront Redevelopment | 800 m | No news since OP in 2017
Dubai | Weightless Skyscraper | 800 m | No news since OP in September 2017. Actually, no posts at all in thread (except those bumping to respond to comments) since four days after OP.
Shenzhen | Future City Project | 700 m | No news for several years. A mall supposed to be demolished for this project is still standing.
Hanoi | VTV Tower | 636 m | No news since OP in March 2015
Changchun | Changchun World Trade Center | 631 m | No news since OP in July 2017
Colombo | World Capital Centre | 625 m | No land, no funding, unclear ownership, no faith in project from anyone in thread. Latest news July 2017.
Quezon City | Philippine Diamond Tower | 612 m | Little news since OP in June 2014. Apparently held up in legal troubles too.
Riyadh | The Blade | 610 m | No news since OP in July 2016
*Downscaled - Towers that saw a height reduction, but weren't (necessarily) cancelled*

Suzhou | Zhongnan Center | 729 m | Piling completed, but construction stopped in 2015. Plans downscaled to 499 meters as of February 2020.
Shenzhen | Caiwuwei Center | 693 m (other proposals: 760 m, 666 m) | Downscaled and upscaled several times, most recently to 500 m in April 2019. _Still on proposal stage._
Shenzhen | Shenwan Station Towers | 680 m | The Civil Aviation Administration of China has ordered a maximum height ceiling of 400 m ASL (2017). Downscaling not yet formally confirmed.
Chengdu | Tianfu Center | 677 m | Height reduction to 488 m shown in November 2019, but not yet formally confirmed.
Shenzen | Shenzhen-Hong Kong International Centre | 655 m | Name changed to Shimano-Shenkong International Center and downscaling to ~500 m confirmed in September 2020. Was rumoured to have been downscaled for quite some time when the confirmation arrived.
Wuhan | Wuhan Chow Tai Fook Centre | 648 m | Downscaled to 475 m in January 2019. _Still on proposal stage._
Shenzhen | Ping An International Finance Centre | 655 m | Lost its spire and was completed at 599 m to appease aviation authorities
Wuhan | Greenland Centre | 636 m | Ordered to be capped out at 472 m as a license to build taller apparently wasn't in order.
Wuhan | Fanhai Centre | 600 m | Downscaled to 477 m in October 2019.
*Cancelled - Formally cancelled towers*

Baku | Azerbaijan Tower | 1050 m | Was apparently canceled in late 2015, when its developer was sent to prison.
Kuwait City | Burj Mubarak Al Kabir | 1001 m | Labelled as Cancelled by CTBUH in early 2021, after the tower had spent 15 years on the proposal stage.
Dubai | Nakheel Tower | 1000 m | Cancelled following the 2009 financial crisis
Changsha | Sky City | 838 m | Cancelled 2016
Mumbai | India Tower | 720 m | Cancelled 2015
Seoul | Seoul Lite DMC Tower | 640 m | Seoul failed to find a buyer to develop a tower on the plot, something else seems to be built there instead, no news since December 2017.
Moscow | Russia Tower | 612 m | Cancelled 2009
Chicago | Chicago Spire | 610 m | Construction suspended in 2008, formally cancelled in 2014
Hyderabad | Lanco Hills Signature Tower | 604 m | Developer went bankrupt in 2017
That should be good enough for a first round, at least. There probably are some errors or towers that I missed, as the Megatalls forum was my primary source of information. There are dozens upon dozens of Megatall visions out there, some of them might have been credible enough proposals to put in the list, but for various reasons I chose not to.

Please tell me if you have any suggestions to change anything! As I have said several times already, my own flawed judgment was used to determine the category in most cases here, so if you think your source is better, it probably is.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Edit: Might as well use the double post (seriously, screw those database errors) to discuss some implications of the list above.

The completion rate for Megatalls is, evidently, pretty abysmal. Only three have been completed, one of which barely inches above the threshold. The fourth one, currently under construction, will reach megatall height only by means of a very tall spire. Its roof height is well below 500 meters, that is, below the highest occupied floor of supertalls such as Lotte World Tower or China Zun Tower. 

We also see that Megatalls that were U/C and seemed certain to join the ranks of the Big Three had their heights cut far into the construction stage. Both Ping An IFC and Wuhan CTF Centre were more than 400 meters tall when it was determined that they wouldn't reach the 600 m mark. Even being in advanced stages of construction is no guarantee that a Megatall will actually become a Megatall.

Surprisingly few Megatalls have been formally cancelled, however. Only five of the seven in the Cancelled category have actually seen publicly acknowledged cancellation (to be fair, the fate of the remaining two appears to be sealed as well) and only four had their height cut. Among a grand total of 51 proposals, it is strange to see only 11 be cancelled and seven to be underway. That still leaves 33 towers in various degrees of limbo if we go by official sources. 

Of course, many of these 33 seem dead on arrival while others are merely waiting to be abandoned. Some might be kicked down the road for decades before their eventual fate is determined. By then, other proposals will probably have joined the ranks. In my spreadsheet I also noted when the towers were first proposed (as represented by the date of their thread's opening post) and I see that quite a lot of them were proposed recently, with many entries in 2017. Of course, most of those are found in the "not likely that anything happens soon" categories, but it shows that proposals are still being made. And again I must reiterate, the oldest of those proposals is from 2005 (Chicago Spire). A lot can happen in 15 years. That is, a lot of what will be proposed in the next 15 years won't go anywhere, but after all, we have seen three completed towers rise above 600 meters as well. Even if the remaining 48 end up below the magic limit, or go nowhere, there were still three megatalls springing out of the proposals. There probably will be more of them coming.


----------



## A Chicagoan

Hudson11 said:


> Because there's nobody working on the tower itself. There might be scattered work on utilities in the surrounding desert, but nothing to warrant calling the tower itself under construction. They need a source of capital before continuing work on the tower. Either a loan, or as they previously had, Royal funding.


I had been wondering why there weren't any new pictures of the Jeddah Tower.

Also, I must comment on the interesting title. "Megatalls of the *past*"? The oldest megatall is only as old as a third-grader.


----------



## PenangLion

The only problem now, that the highest occupied floor in any skyscrapers never even surpassed the 600th meter mark. Cheating spires or not, let me give you some examples:
Burj Khalifa (1st placed) 584.5 meters (1918ft) has a massive spire over 250m.
Shanghai Tower (2nd placed) 583 meters has ONLY a 40m gap between the actual architectural tip. 
PNB 118 (future 2nd placing) appro. 500 meters, a spire of 140m
KLCC (1st placed 1998-2003) appro. 375 meters, a spire of around 80m
1WTC (9th placed) appro. 386 m, a spire of around 160m

See the difference?

BURJ KHALIFA (1st) Spire: 250m

SHANGHAI TOWER (2nd) Spire: none, a gap of 40m between highest occupied floor and the architectural tip.

250 ---- 40!???

Consider this, does it mean that Burj Khalifa cheat all the way to the top, with the ridiculously high spire?

In fact, no skyscraper had actually go through the way to the megatall level. All of them just basically cheat the way to the top. The only serious contender is the Shanghai Tower. If the Chinese are the guys with no innovations or even breakthrough, well they did not cheat. 

I hate people saying Burj Khalifa is a good building. It just cheated the way to the top.


----------



## PenangLion

The Jeddah Tower is a disasterous project. They tried to build a city within no where but expecting people to move there. There are no increase in height for over 2 years, but the construction firm clearly stated that the construction is underway (building toilets, constructing interiors , etc.)


----------



## ZZ-II

PenangLion said:


> I hate people saying Burj Khalifa is a good building. It just cheated the way to the top.


No, it doesn't just cheat. Burj Khalifa is not only a tall tower with a spire on top.

The spire is integrated in the overall design, which makes the tower with it's spire one unity. 
That's a big difference to towers wich have a flat roof with spire on top. 

I still love the Burj Khalifa!


----------



## PenangLion

Yes, the Burj is big and beautiful. But i just hate people criticizing our PNB 118 too "ugly" and compared the Burj with it.


----------



## Scion

I would like to contrast PenangLion by arguing that "the end of the highest occupied floor" is *not* automatically "the start of the spire" for Burj Khalifa. There is a section inbetween the highest floor and the spire; the correct terminology for that is a *crown*, which is also the term that should be used for his "gap" description on Shanghai Tower.

The crown of the Burj Khalifa starts from the ceiling of the highest occupied floor, currently it is The Lounge at 585m. Note this is the highest occupied floor publicly acknowledged by Emaar, we don't know if there are still floors above 585m that are confidentially occupied.

Inside Burj Khalifa's crown; the building's reinforced concrete core, with reinforced concrete floor slabs, with service elevator access; goes all the way up to the ceiling height of 630m. I would definitely *not* classify 585m to 630m as "spire"

From 630m to 701m are a series of steel framed mechanical floors that house operation and maintenance equipments for the building. The top building maintenance unit (BMU) is housed at the floor slab on 682m.

Starting from 701m onwards, is Burj Khalifa's spire.

For reference:


----------



## oscillation

Building like TGF 597m. is not megatall, but it has the highest area on the top 45x45 meters. That area is going to be, if I am not wrong, a helipad, according the drawings. :crazy::tiasd:


----------



## KillerZavatar

Kyll.Ing. said:


> snip - amazing list that everyone should check out right now! - snip


AMAZING work. would be nice if this could be put on the first post or somewhere so it won't get burried deep in the thread.

comments:
- you included Towers in the stages of limbo, so maybe you should also add Tokyo sky tree and canton tower just for completions sake.
- not sure if you mentioned Caiwuwei Center. There were two proposals in Shenzhen next to Kingkey in Caiwuwei area. One was Shenzhen Center and one was Caiwuwei and they both were over 600m when proposed first.
- I don't see that Chicago Post office redevelopment that was canceled.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

KillerZavatar said:


> AMAZING work. would be nice if this could be put on the first post or somewhere so it won't get burried deep in the thread.
> 
> comments:
> - you included Towers in the stages of limbo, so maybe you should also add Tokyo sky tree and canton tower just for completions sake.
> - not sure if you mentioned Caiwuwei Center. There were two proposals in Shenzhen next to Kingkey in Caiwuwei area. One was Shenzhen Center and one was Caiwuwei and they both were over 600m when proposed first.
> - I don't see that Chicago Post office redevelopment that was canceled.


Thanks for the feedback!

- I added Tokyo Skytree and Canton Tower. Other towers such as Weightless Tower and Dubai Creek Tower in Dubai are included, so these two should be too. They are placed separately from the other two, however.
- Caiwuwei Center added. This was one of the towers that transitioned from Megatall to Supertall at some point, which made it kind of difficult to find. I'm pretty sure there has to be others somewhat like it.
- The Chicago post office redevelopment thing was hard to classify. I was uncertain whether to include it since it had no developer, no architect and no name, if I recall correctly. Was it ever a concrete proposal?


----------



## kanye

KillerZavatar said:


> AMAZING work. would be nice if this could be put on the first post or somewhere so it won't get burried deep in the thread.


I agree, there you go)


----------



## gabrielbabb

Amazing how some towers have a relatively small area compared to its height. The area of several towers are a lot smaller than even the mexican WTC with a height of just 207m and an area of 239,000 m2.


----------



## PenangLion

There are so many megatalls that are proposed for construction, but it only seems that the Merdeka 118 is the real one still in actual construction (its already around 350m+ at least in height). 

The Wuhan Greenland Centre permits to build over 600m+ are rejected, so they could only scale down the tower to around 450m+. 

Meanwhile, the Jeddah Tower is still ongoing, as some unknown reports indicates that the current construction is only limited to interior construction, not on the exteriors (increasing the height). So yeah, its a shame when megatalls are constructed, only a couple of them are really truly finished. The others are either plagued by permits, or having insufficient funds to advance in the constructions. 

To be honest, Jeddah Tower is kind of a "failed project" in my perspective, like really? Building a 1km high skyscraper in the middle of nowhere? Unless the Saudis really want to devote this project, and be determined to finish it, otherwise it would be another failed project like many others.

So in conclusion, the Malaysians know best in constructing megatall skyscrapers! (its gonna complete in 2021, so check it out)


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

I made some minor updates to my list of (non-Vision) Megatalls quoted in the OP. Tower M KLCC has been stated to resume construction "after 2030", which I think is enough to label it as on hold for now. Tianfu Center in Chengdu also seems to have got a height cut to 488 meters, although we don't have official confirmation. To be fair, official confirmation is pretty sparse throughout the entire list, as developers tend not to speak loudly about projects when they aren't progressing. The list is made to be a little more dynamic and easier to update than the thread tags in this forum, where there are stricter requirements (and moderator approval is required) to change anything. Hence, the list also has disclaimers about potential subjectivity all over the place.

But anyway, it seems like the state of Megatall construction worldwide isn't that hot right now. From four ongoing projects, we're down to two, one of which might be subject to height cuts while the other only reaches Megatall height by means of a very tall spire. It's a shame, really. A few years ago, it seemed like a wave of Megatall skyscrapers was upon us, but for various reasons most of them seem to have been downscaled or canceled. Then again, we know the technology to build them is there (as demonstrated), so it's unlikely that we won't see any new ones be built in the next decade or so. But right now, Megatalls really seem to be out of fashion.


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
my hope is still on ropeless elevator technology. There are tests and it is on the horizon. More capacity on elevator shafts, makes tall buildings much much more reasonable and cost effective. I hope the next 5 years will show this technology to be viable and projects might show up again. I am moderately optimistic that we might see another building similar to Nakheel Tower or Al Burj start construction before 2030. And very optimistic that we see something over 1000m start before 2035. And this is just talking about a new world's tallest. 600m buildings should pop up a lot more again as well, especially when countries like India catch up.


----------



## Speechless.♥

Decade f skyscraper mania is over... It was great tmes... 
Since 2010 - 2019 we could enjoy 1 building over 800m + 2 buildigs over 600m + 7 buildings over 500m. In the next decade probbly no buildigs over 500m will be topped out (maybe Jeddah tower, Crek tower and certinly Merdka ). World financial crise is comming now. But 10´s will always stay as a decde of super-mega talls in our heart


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^ less megatalls certainly, but anything under 500m has no sign of slowing down.

According to skyscrapercenter.com, This year will see the most completions:

> 450m (3, tied with 2010,2018),
> 400m (6, next biggest is 4),
> 350m (11, next biggest is 6),
> 300m (26, next biggest is 18),
> 250m (62, next biggest is 45).

So, yes, we have a slowdown of megatalls, but year after year we have more and more skyscraper projects. There was a time when I knew every supertall in the world, now i can't even remember all supertalls in Shenzhen. Of course there is frustration in not being able to follow a new World's Tallest Building being constructed after all the promises in the last decade, I am sad about it as well, but I do not like the overall negative sentiment here, we should be celebrating that every year more and more skyscrapers are coming. That being said, yes I think there is an economic slowdown coming as well, but it won't be a very hard hit overall I think. Less vanity projects over 600m, but I don't think the overall trend stops soon. Many countries are bound to have a skyscraper boom sooner or later even when China slows down, and new technology such as the ropeless elevator will have a big impact and may make megatalls an economically viable option again.


----------



## Hudson11




----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
yeah, had the video in my subscriptions as well. Good rundown on the whole dilemma and agree on all points. Some points to add though: The hotel in the upper floors of Shanghai Tower was not finished last time i was in Shanghai, so that's the reason the floors don't light up I think. I also think, he could have mentioned the whole China thing (although as we know there aren't official sources, so that might be the reason to not mention it), mentioning that the 800m design for the plot in Suzhou was the same company as the one in Changsha. And I still think the whole ropeless elevator thing will be a game-changer in the future, making megatalls economically feasible, but this is still off 10-20 years, so mentioning that could have been a nice way to end on a positive note.

the channel is great btw, I recommend subscribing.


----------



## mowaten

Hudson11 said:


>


Glad to see that people from SCC are also following the B1M! one of the greatest youtube channels. I'll include Wendover productions too even though its more about economics than architecture


----------



## A Chicagoan

^^ Wendover had a few videos about skyscrapers, but he's definitely more knowledgeable about airplanes than architecture.


----------



## Jay

PenangLion said:


> So in conclusion, the Malaysians know best in constructing megatall skyscrapers! (its gonna complete in 2021, so check it out)


I guess? Roof/occupied matters most to me and while it's very tall, it's not a legit 600+ meters, just like how One WTC is not a legit 500+ meter building, only structurally.

My prediction is that Burj Khalifa will remain the tallest for a long time.


----------



## RickLW

SHANGHAI TOWER still the best in a gigantic city not the desert.


----------



## perheps

This is 2020s would be few megatalls probably five of them (including Jeddah Tower) if beginning construction between late 2022 to mid 2024 then would be two megatall over 600 metre skyscrapers mid or late 2028 or early 2029 then 700 metre tall would be opening mid 2029
Meanwhile would be second building 800 metre tall early 2030 since Burj Khalifa 
Could be first 1 kilometres tall opening 2032 if beginning 2024 more likely in Middle East some reports 
Jeddah Tower remains uncertain future rumours would be left them for 5 years once settled down first resuming them again open 2030 more likely


----------



## Hudson11

my idea moving forward is to archive any project without news after 3 years (kind of arbitrary, but 2 years seems too soon to me) A lot of threads on the page have been sitting inactive since 2017. If there's a rendering it'll go to the rate our visions section, if not, to the archives. Sound reasonable?


----------



## Architecture lover

Some might agree: the world's most beautiful megatall so far. 

Shanghai Tower | *上海中心大厦* | 2016

*Gensler* 
632 meters - 128 story megatall skyscraper 











Source








Source​


----------



## ZZ-II

I really like the Burj Khalifa but the Shanghai Tower is definitely my favourite tower on earth :cheers:


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Hudson11 said:


> my idea moving forward is to archive any project without news after 3 years (kind of arbitrary, but 2 years seems too soon to me) A lot of threads on the page have been sitting inactive since 2017. If there's a rendering it'll go to the rate our visions section, if not, to the archives. Sound reasonable?


Sounds reasonable indeed. We know already that most Megatall projects never end up materializing, but quite a few of them keep being proposed still. Paying artists to draw a Megatall is, after all, quite a bit cheaper than paying somebody to build the thing. And proposing something ludicrous is a good way to generate publicity for a project/district/city/company, even if it isn't intended to be built, so many Megatalls are proposed for that reason as well - doomed to fall to the wayside from the very start. 

I think we should make an exception for towers that made it to the U/C stage, though, and keep the thread in here until the final fate of the tower is cleared (or at least for a few more years than the mere proposals). For instance, Jeddah Tower has been standing still with no official news for almost two years already, and it's reasonable to assume it will remain like that for another year. But that's too early to archive the thread, as it still sees regular activity and people can walk over and take pictures of the half-built tower. Likewise for Dubai Creek Tower, whose foundations were completed a year and a half ago and whose continuation is nowhere in sight. But as long as there is a site, there should be a thread, at least for a while. If either building ends up in a Plaza Rakyat situation, where the site is abandoned for several decades, I would consider moving it, but until that unlikely situation manifests itself (decades from now in any case) I'd keep the thread open.


----------



## ssoott

Kyll.Ing. said:


> But as long as there is a site, there should be a thread, at least for a while. If either building ends up in a Plaza Rakyat situation, where the site is abandoned for several decades, I would consider moving it, but until that unlikely situation manifests itself (decades from now in any case) I'd keep the thread open.


This is probably the best gauge to determine whether a thread should be allowed to stay or not. No site = no thread. Or else the board will be filled with hollow visions and empty dreams because anyone can do that. But by securing a physical site, only a serious developer can do it.


----------



## KillerZavatar

Posting it here, as the Jeddah thread is closed and it might disappear behind other threads in a few days again. Gabriel just had some interesting remarks on Jeddah Tower... For those who do not know, Gabriel often "predicts" events happening before they actually happen, as he has inside information that he cannot go into details to. He can just make little teasers like this one to keep us informed while protecting his sources and not actually announcing anything the public is not supposed to know yet.



Gabriel9000 said:


> Very good news is coming very soon!


So we can discuss here what this might mean. The following post is from 2 months ago:



kalim shekh said:


> Jeddah Economic Co., owner of the proposed world's tallest building, *plans to restart the tower's construction in a few months*, said Antony Wood, executive director of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, at the CTBUH's Tenth World Congress, *Oct. 28-30*, in Chicago. JEC halted work on the structural concrete job in January 2018, when the core had reached a height of 256 meters. Main contractor Saudi Bin Laden Group was originally scheduled to complete the building this year. Only time will tell whether the project will hit its design height of more than 1 kilometer. If it does, it will be at least 172 m taller than the current record-holder, the 828-m Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture designed the tapered megatower with three wings and no columns. Throughout each floor plate is a series of 85-MPa reinforced-concrete walls, interconnected by link beams, according to the structure's designer, Thornton Tomasetti.


sources (second-hand information): [1], [2]

An announcement and construction continuing shortly after would just be amazing! Let us all hope! This is a big deal. This might also put pressure on Dubai Creek again. I can really just hope that 2020 will see old dreams resurrected. So I, at least, will now be cautiously optimistic.


----------



## ZZ-II

Lets hope the best. Would be great to see at least the Kingdom Tower to be completed!


----------



## A Chicagoan

^^ It's 2020 now. Two years ago, I expected that there would be a new world's tallest building this year. Guess I'll just have to wait some more. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't restart construction or it doesn't hit its original height, in which case Burj Khalifa might last as long as the Sears Tower did.


----------



## RickLW

SHANGHAI TOWER. Still the best.


----------



## Io-Diegetic

I guess so but this really still annoys me. Sucks that nothing taller is getting built. Jeddah tower has been on hold for over two years and Dubai creek tower is a structure not an actual building. Maybe one day something might happen like in 10 years ☹.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Io-Diegetic said:


> Sucks that nothing taller is getting built. Jeddah tower has been on hold for over two years and Dubai creek tower is a structure not an actual building.


It's almost two years since work happened on Dubai Creek Tower as well. 

I try to keep a somewhat updated list of Megatall projects in the general discussion thread, and with the recent (likely) height cut to Shenzhen-Hong Kong International Centre, the pipeline for upcoming Megatalls seems to be very dry. That one was the last to have made it to the Prep stage, and the four that have appeared on development masterplans are all in China and we haven't heard from either in almost a year and a half (before the nationwide 500 m height limit was instated). There are eight more Megatalls that were featured in serious plans as well, but they're in various grades of abandonment, legal limbo, or China. That's actually true of all the other proposed Megatalls too, come to think of it. Disregarding obvious visions/pipe dreams, Chinese proposals (with that national height limit of theirs), or countries that aren't doing too hot economically right now, there's nada on the horizon. Looping back to Dubai Creek Tower, it might be the most feasible Megatall in the world at the moment, and that's saying a lot.


----------



## Io-Diegetic

I don’t know why the ctbuh even has a megatall category. There are only 3 buildings and one more under construction. It sucks that this is happening. The only one that will probably make it is pnb118. As soon as that one completes we might not get another megatall for a while. In the future megatalls should become more feasible than now. But it will take a while who knows how long it will be. Pnb 118 might be the last in a while to reach above 600meters ☹.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

I think it's understandable why they made that category. A few years ago there were seven Megatalls completed or under construction, with a whole slew of others in the serious planning stages and about to break ground. It really looked like they were about to become a lot more common. Just consider the number of threads in the Megatalls section. Then a couple of years later, only one is left (which only reaches Megatall height by means of a very tall spire), while the others have been shortened, put on hold, had their plans scaled back or outright cancelled. I think we should keep the Megatalls section around for a while after PNB118 is completed, but maybe put it as a subforum of Supertalls unless any others begin construction.


----------



## KillerZavatar

^^
this is the original 2012article where the term megatall was coined: https://global.ctbuh.org/resources/...-in-2020-entering-the-era-of-the-megatall.pdf
CTBUH recently also published a comparison to what was expected to happen in 2020 to what actually happened here: https://global.ctbuh.org/resources/papers/download/4304-the-tallest-20-in-2020-then-and-now.pdf


----------



## A Chicagoan

Io-Diegetic said:


> I don’t know why the ctbuh even has a megatall category. There are only 3 buildings and one more under construction.


True, but the three that do exist are so tall that lumping them with lowly regular supertalls would be illogical. Without a megatall category, these two would both be considered supertalls.


----------



## Hudson11

A Chicagoan said:


> True, but the three that do exist are so tall that lumping them with lowly regular supertalls would be illogical. Without a megatall category, these two would both be considered supertalls.


You could go sillier than that


----------



## A Chicagoan

Hudson11 said:


> You could go sillier than that


Well, I wanted to choose "average" examples for megatalls and supertalls, but if we want to do silly supertalls and megatalls, I think we can do better than that.


----------



## davidwsk

What make you guys think so? Pls don’t assume. More mega tall will be built in China, Malaysia and Dubai.


----------



## davidwsk

Instead we should delete this silly thread. Why is it here to begin with and so unnecessary.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

davidwsk said:


> What make you guys think so? Pls don’t assume. More mega tall will be built in China, Malaysia and Dubai.


In what way is that not an assumption too, and what makes you assume so? China has instated a national rule against towers taller than 500 metres, Malaysia has one megatall under construction and one postponed until after 2030, and Dubai hasn't been in the financial shape to build megatalls for more than a decade. If any of them are to build more Megatalls, it won't be anytime soon.

Fact of the matter is, apart from PNB118, there are currently three categories of Megatalls out there: those already completed, those we know for a certain to be cancelled, and those we haven't heard from in a long, long time. If you have concrete news suggesting otherwise, please post them here instead of whining that the thread should be deleted.


----------



## davidwsk

Kyll.Ing. said:


> In what way is that not an assumption too, and what makes you assume so? China has instated a national rule against towers taller than 500 metres, Malaysia has one megatall under construction and one postponed until after 2030, and Dubai hasn't been in the financial shape to build megatalls for more than a decade. If any of them are to build more Megatalls, it won't be anytime soon.
> 
> Fact of the matter is, apart from PNB118, there are currently three categories of Megatalls out there: those already completed, those we know for a certain to be cancelled, and those we haven't heard from in a long, long time. If you have concrete news suggesting otherwise, please post them here instead of whining that the thread should be deleted.


Wow.. you sound like a crystal ball that can predict what will happen tomorrow or even next year.


----------



## A Chicagoan

So do you. "More mega tall will be built in China, Malaysia and Dubai."


----------



## RyukyuRhymer

ugh, i hope he is not the mod of that section


----------



## davidwsk

Why? I just suggest this thread should be deleted. As it doesn’t serve any purpose except for funny people to post random tower comparison and cause more problems.


----------



## Hudson11

we need an overspill thread so these kinds of discussion don't clog up other threads.


----------



## A Chicagoan

davidwsk said:


> Why? I just suggest this thread should be deleted. As it doesn’t serve any purpose


The thread starter clearly stated the purpose of this thread, and the local mods decided it was a good idea and even stickied it.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

davidwsk said:


> Wow.. you sound like a crystal ball that can predict what will happen tomorrow or even next year.


No, I'm commenting on the situation _today_. There is one Megatall under construction, a couple are on hold, a whole lot are being canceled or downscaled, and if serious plans exist for others, we do not know about them. That's the current situation. If you have reason to believe otherwise, please bring sources.


----------



## davidwsk

Hudson11 said:


> we need an overspill thread so these kinds of discussion don't clog up other threads.


Alritey. Just for those extra overspill beans then. Will just ignore it.  they must be very free.


----------



## KillerZavatar

First of, I am against the deletion of any threads that have discussions in them. If the thread would have to be discontinued it should be unstickied and closed or moved to the archive, not deleted.

Secondly, I think most of the thread is still on topic, discussing possible re-openings of on hold construction sites, talking about visions in the near and far future, talking about what could have been, and talking about statistics seems appropriate to have in one thread and not cluttering other threads. If this thread is here or in the general skyscraper discussions sub-forum then wouldn't really change much.

So, I suggest if the thread is a nuisance in the eyes of the mods, move it to the general skyscraper discussion forum (World Forums), if not, leave it here as is.


----------



## PenangLion

Megatalls aren't feasible by this point, especially when the economy in in horrifying ruins. PNB118 is the only megatall we will see for a long time. Somebody commented that the Shanghai Tower is a failure, due to the fact that it cannot attract commercial investment. I want to say is that the fact that it isn't a commercial failure. The Empire State was known as the Empty State at one point (mostly unoccupied for 2 decades, till the 1960s), while the original WTC buildings aren't fully occupied well until the 1980s.

Malaysia isn't a rich nation like US or China. Even if we want to remain optimistic as possible, as a Malaysian myself, we had to think of other aspects when we are dealing with the construction of a behemoth like this. There is no point in deleting this thread, I want to state that. 

To be honest, I am convinced that the Jeddah Tower project is long gone from it's heyday. Economics will prove that. Besides, the construction has remained stagnant for nearly 3 years. The location where it is built is another major problem. They wanted to create a new city from the project, but it seems to me, that it won't be a success for the short term (who knows for the long shot?). China has recently imposed restrictions. They knew that mega talls aren't a viable option for sustainability. In fact, depending on what type of economy the world has right now, building a mega tall is not viable, not logical, and unpractical.

Sorry to disappoint architectural fans, but this are the facts.


----------



## davidwsk

2001/2002: Global recession
2003: economy pick up
2004: Burj Khalifa start its construction

So why people need to predict what will happen tomorrow? Very silly and short-sighted.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

davidwsk said:


> So why people need to predict what will happen tomorrow? Very silly and short-sighted.


Oh, the irony. Don't you see that blind predictions is EXACTLY what you are doing here?

We're saying that *today* there is no sign of any Megatalls to come. You call that a short-sighted prediction, then go around to basically say that a Megatall could begin construction tomorrow - making another short-sighted prediction yourself.


----------



## PenangLion

The 2001/2002 recession isn't even a recession. Get the facts straight. It only caused the entire tech stock markets (and tech companies like Pets.com and Cars.com) to collapse. It didn't cause an entire "recession". Remember, UAE is a nation based on petroleum, not the tech industries. Besides, during the early 2000s the world suffered a major spike in oil prices, which caused the Arabians to amass huge amounts of wealth. That's why the Burj Khalifa megaproject could be conceived.

The real recession is the 2008 Recession, where everybody, from the banking industries, sport industries, tech industries, etc failed. By that point, the Burj Khalifa is already 75 percent completed, impossible to stop it's construction and cancel it.

If I'm an optimist, I have to still admit that building a megatall is just a hard thing to do right now.
But I'm not an optimist, I'm a realist. To be honest, a megatall is impossible to be conceived right now. It's just only possible on paper, not real life.

PNB118 was proposed during the early 2010s, way before the 2020 Recession happened. Even worse, this is not a small recession, it's the worst economic disaster since The Great Depression of 1929. What happened during the Great Depression? Multiple supertall projects got cancelled, effectively killing off the entire Skyscraper Race that was booming in the 1920s. In fact, the only major project that was constructed back then was the Rockefeller Center (yes, 40 Wall Street was built in 1929, Chrysler in 1930, and Empire State in 1931, but the real knockout effect didn't happen until 1932 onwards, which major supertall projects starting from 1932 are effectively doomed and cancelled).

There is an interesting model I saw during a Chinese documentary about the economics of a skyscraper. It lists out that once a "world's tallest building" is built anywhere in the world, that particular region will hit an exceptionally big economy crisis. The effects are obvious after the 1920s.

1908 - Singer Building in NYC was completed, crowning the first true "world's tallest skyscraper" title. During the same period (when the building was in construction), around September 1907, the Panic of 1907 occurred, featuring a spectacular crash of the New York Exchange by more than 50 percent, effective damaging the American economy which was not recovered until the late 1910s.

1929 - 40 Wall Street in NYC was completed, becoming the newest "world's tallest skyscraper", albeit only holding the title for 2 months. Great Depression happened after, killing major skyscraper projects without proper financial backing.

1930 and 1931 - Chrysler and Empire State Building. No need to state that. All of the projects are planned before the Great Depression, thus no major effects happened on both of the supertalls.

1973 - The completion of the World Trade Centre complex and the Willis Tower happens when the Recession of the 70s happened. Western countries, notably UK and America had their currency inflation spiking up, while the unemployment rate soared.

1998 - Petronas Towers in Malaysia is completed. At the same year, Asia suffered one of their worst economy crisis in history - the Asian Financial Crisis. Malaysia's economy crashed by nearly 20 percent while their currency inflation to unprecedented levels.

2003 - Taipei 101 happened right after the end of the Dot Com bubble. In my opinion, the tower remained unscathed from any "curses".

2008 - Burj Khalifa is completed, when at the same time the Great Recession occurred. Effectively killed nearly all of the proposed supertall and megatall projects of that era. Dubai hit hard, check the Pentominium project, it's one of the victims.

2020 - The supposed date of the completion of the Jeddah Tower. 2020 Recession occurred. Worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Jeddah Tower was never completed. The project is already stagnant for years.

Building a massive structure doesn't just depend on "how much money and effort" you put on the planning, it's "how the world economy would go". Even if you had extremely good backing at first, if the economy situation turns bad, well the projects will just get killed off one-by-one.

Megatall projects are in fact already a thing of the past. It could only be possible if there is a massive shortage of office spaces. In Kuala Lumpur, it's an oversupply of offices. Right now there's another recession. That's even worse. I'm not against extravaganzas, but just try and be realistic.


----------



## PenangLion

davidwsk said:


> 2001/2002: Global recession
> 2003: economy pick up
> 2004: Burj Khalifa start its construction
> 
> So why people need to predict what will happen tomorrow? Very silly and short-sighted.


Why? Then I want to ask you, why shouldn't we predict what will happen tomorrow?
If we can predict what the economy will go in the long-term, we can evaluate whether it is profitable from building a certain megaproject. Remember, humans never built skyscrapers for the sake of engineering and architecture. They built it for profitability. Even if you have the best technology available to build the "world's most amazing" skyscraper, when there's no profit to crunch out from that project, don't even think of building it. Engineering and architecture are just the 2nd option. It's like comparing a topic with a sub-topic.

And no, it's not silly. And no, it's not tomorrow's stuff. The Recession probably has arrived for, well 2 months? 36 million people in the US has already lost their jobs. If your telling me that we should build a 600+ m tall skyscraper during these times then the only thing I could do is just laugh.

2003: economy pick up?

You can never recover a lost economy in a year. The web industry, which is the main sufferer from the Dot Com bubble, never recovered to it's pristine state until 2014. Look at the NASDAQ Index. In 2000, it peaked at 5000 points, then it crashed during the year after (2001). The 5000 point feat was never surpassed until 2013. And this isn't the entire economy, it's just the tech field. So picking up? No.

The economy never truly recovered after the Lost Decade of the 90s. We're just living on borrowed time before than.


----------



## davidwsk

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Oh, the irony. Don't you see that blind predictions is EXACTLY what you are doing here?
> 
> We're saying that *today* there is no sign of any Megatalls to come. You call that a short-sighted prediction, then go around to basically say that a Megatall could begin construction tomorrow - making another short-sighted prediction yourself.


You must have mixed up the prediction and planning.


----------



## PenangLion

Prediction is a part of planning.


----------



## davidwsk

PenangLion said:


> The real recession is the 2008 Recession, where everybody, from the banking industries, sport industries, tech industries, etc failed. By that point, the Burj Khalifa is already 75 percent completed, impossible to stop it's construction and cancel it.


Exactly! So nothing can stop if a country want to build it.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

davidwsk said:


> Exactly! So nothing can stop if a country want to build it.


Yes, but when a recession comes, a country generally tends to stop wanting to build vanity projects. Look at the scores of huge, cancelled projects in Dubai. They didn't stop building them because they suddenly realized they didn't want the buildings anymore, it was because the question "how are we going to pay for all this?" suddenly got a lot harder to answer. Burj Khalifa was so near completion that it would be a waste to not complete it (although it did require a loan from Abu Dhabi, hence the last-minute name change), but a lot of other towers would be a waste to continue building. Hence why many of them were quietly abandoned, with cranes swinging in the wind and lights still on at night.

Right now, every known Megatall project out there apart from PNB188 has stalled or been downscaled, cancelled, or postponed. A Megatall is a hugely expensive project, so there are only a handful of cities where it would make sense to build them in the first place, and right now none of these cities have anything in the pipeline. Sure, there are fancy renders, maybe even models, and lofty plans could still be floated around every now and then, but as for actual construction, PNB118 stands alone, and it's likely to do so for quite some time. Even if a developer came out tomorrow and said it would build a Megatall, there would still be years of planning, design, and possibly government approval, before actual construction began. And as time has shown, only a measly few percent of Megatalls ever announced have made it to the construction stage (and only half or so of those were actually completed as Megatalls). This subforum has 25 construction threads in it, of which *one* concerns a tower that's actually being constructed. 

What I'm saying is, the idea that Megatalls are struggling right now isn't picked out of thin air. There is a trend in the data. We have seen the fate of many cancelled Megatalls over the past few years. We can see that there have been fewer announcements in 2019 and 2020 than in the years before. We can even see that the Megatalls that do exist, struggle to make their money back. At this point, predicting that another Megatall is right around the corner would be going against the observations. Sure, it's not impossible, but it's completely fair to say that it's very, very unlikely for the foreseeable future.

Of course, at some point, things will turn around again and more Megatalls will probably be built, but the way the situation is now, it's not going to happen any time soon. Take my word for that.


----------



## PenangLion

On the short term, it won't be logical to construct one. The probable time I expect the megatall skyscrapers to revive might be in a decade or two. The economy now needs heavy restructuring. The case of the Burj during the Great Recession is now happening again for the PNB118 in the 2020 Crash. It's too expensive to demolish or stop, since you can't cancel the project like Plaza Rakyat in 1997. The height of the structure is over 500m, so it's a definite completion for the skyscraper.


----------



## Roger0440

Lots of skyscrapers over 600m are cancelled due to financial difficulties or issues over design or where it will be, also limits to how tall a building can be had prevented skyscrapers from being built in some cities. But which cancelled or stale proposed ones would you like to see be built ? .


----------



## Roger0440

Kyll.Ing. said:


> In what way is that not an assumption too, and what makes you assume so? China has instated a national rule against towers taller than 500 metres, Malaysia has one megatall under construction and one postponed until after 2030, and Dubai hasn't been in the financial shape to build megatalls for more than a decade. If any of them are to build more Megatalls, it won't be anytime soon.
> 
> Fact of the matter is, apart from PNB118, there are currently three categories of Megatalls out there: those already completed, those we know for a certain to be cancelled, and those we haven't heard from in a long, long time. If you have concrete news suggesting otherwise, please post them here instead of whining that the thread should be deleted.


Only a few of China's skyscrapers will be going over 500M. There 500M rule is probably very strict seeing as they don't see the need for towers over 500m since the Shanghai tower is only half lit up at night. I think any China skyscraper over 500 meters could be forced to reduce its height.


----------



## Roger0440

A Chicagoan said:


> True, but the three that do exist are so tall that lumping them with lowly regular supertalls would be illogical. Without a megatall category, these two would both be considered supertalls.


This might be a silly question and it's a bit unrelated to thread. But is the website you got that image from skyscraperpage.com and if so how did you manage to compare a Pacific two buildings ? I've been trying to do that for a while now.
Thanks for any response


----------



## A Chicagoan

Roger0440 said:


> This might be a silly question and it's a bit unrelated to thread. But is the website you got that image from skyscraperpage.com and if so how did you manage to compare a Pacific two buildings ? I've been trying to do that for a while now.
> Thanks for any response


Yes, the diagram is from SkyscraperPage. If you go to skyscraperpage.com/diagrams, at the bottom of the page you can customize the parameters to create a diagram.


----------



## Roger0440

A Chicagoan said:


> Yes, the diagram is from SkyscraperPage. If you go to skyscraperpage.com/diagrams, at the bottom of the page you can customize the parameters to create a diagram.


Thank you very much.


----------



## KillerZavatar

there is actually a better way to compare specific buildings with each other, you can click on a building and get an url like:

"http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?buildingID=1",

If you check the page for each building you want to compare and copy the building ID, you can just use a comma seperated url like this:

"http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?buildingID=1,2,3,4,5"

with the buildings you want to compare.


------------------------------------------------​
Any information whatsoever on Dubai Creek Tower and Jeddah Tower? I am feeling really sad with both projects on hold. Any sign of life would make my day.


----------



## Gelato

Thanks for the recent update


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

KillerZavatar said:


> Any information whatsoever on Dubai Creek Tower and Jeddah Tower? I am feeling really sad with both projects on hold. Any sign of life would make my day.


Information, maybe. Sign of life, unlikely. To X-post from the Dubai Creek Tower thread in the local section:



Kyll.Ing. said:


> Not sure if this is much of an update, but there are no longer any renders or mentions of Dubai Creek Tower on Emaar's Dubai Creek Harbour website. The tower featured prominently in the background on the main page as recently as a month ago. It does not appear in the background of renders in any of the project sub-pages either. I'm not sure if I'm navigating their website correctly, but I can't find any references to Dubai Creek outside the Harbour itself.
> 
> The Creek Beach website linked above is still live and still lists the tower and a few other projects, but these aren't linked to from Emaar's main website. One gets the impression they have scaled down the entire Dubai Creek plan to only Dubai Creek Harbour for the foreseeable future. As the tower is on the mainland, it's not being worked on.
> 
> For the record, Reuters reported back in April that work on the tower was being suspended. Emaar's chairman, Mohamed Alabbar, responded that it wasn't, but his reply was one of the most childish, ranting, and non-substantial I have ever seen. If that sort of response was given on these forums, he'd have gotten warning points over it.
> 
> So yeah, it seems like Emaar themselves are publicly denouncing any rumours that the tower isn't being built, but quietly removing any mentions of it from their website and refusing to speak of it when asked.


There are links embedded in the text, but they are hard to spot without mousing over, at least in my version of Chrome.


----------



## KillerZavatar

thanks, yeah looking quite grim... So not even on hold and waiting, but looks like it might end up similar to Nakheel Tower.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

KillerZavatar said:


> thanks, yeah looking quite grim... So not even on hold and waiting, but looks like it might end up similar to Nakheel Tower.


And Pentominium, and Entisar Tower, and Dubai One, and Burj al Alam, and Burj Jumeirah, and Uptown Tower 1, and Alpha Tower, and SRG tower, and ...

... point is, Dubai has a bit of a history with over-promising and under-delivering when it comes to very tall skyscrapers. Hence why I'm so skeptical whenever a new big tower is announced there to great fanfare.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

I know it isnt a megatall but Goldin Finance 117 is so close to that height that I have to mention it. It will more than likely be Chinas last 500m+ skyscraper and it only has that going for it since its literally been topped out for nearly 3 years and even then construction is going at a snails pace. Its even listed as On-Hold by the CTBUH. If it hadn't already topped out, it wouldve looked like this:








Its sad to say megatalls and 500m+ buildings are too unrealistic at this moment in history. 10 years ago the CTBUH thought the sky's the limit but its just too impractical. Its disappointing, but its reality


----------



## EightFive

ctbuh is a shit org. They still list jeddah tower as under construction. They are not a valid source for anything.




__





Jeddah Tower - The Skyscraper Center







www.skyscrapercenter.com


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

EightFive said:


> ctbuh is a shit org. They still list jeddah tower as under construction. They are not a valid source for anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeddah Tower - The Skyscraper Center
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skyscrapercenter.com


True


----------



## LivinAWestLife

EightFive said:


> ctbuh is a shit org. They still list jeddah tower as under construction. They are not a valid source for anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeddah Tower - The Skyscraper Center
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skyscrapercenter.com


They may be missing a lot of buildings but the information they have is actually quite accurate. (Plus, we need it to promote skyscraper building worldwide). I think we can all agree the Jeddah Tower is not under construction, though.


----------



## KillerZavatar

They are a good website for information generally, but suffer from appeasing developers. Jeddah Tower being U/C is due to the developers not wanting CTBUH to put it on hold and not because of CTBUH not having the information.


----------



## rivla

Evolution of Tallest Building




evolution


----------



## gerardpique

Everything that goes up must come down. I bet people in the Middle Ages/Renaissance thought cathedrals would keep getting bigger and bigger. To date the last great cathedral built is St Peter's in Rome. 

What I mean is maybe Burj will remain the biggest Megatall for centuries to come. Or not only time will tell.


----------



## morrit

Hello, are the works on: Jeddah Tower and Dubai Creek Tower stopped?
I can't write to the threads. They are closed.


----------



## Hudson11

morrit said:


> Hello, are the works on: Jeddah Tower and Dubai Creek Tower stopped?
> I can't write to the threads. They are closed.


yes, they are currently stopped.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

morrit said:


> Hello, are the works on: Jeddah Tower and Dubai Creek Tower stopped?
> I can't write to the threads. They are closed.


The threads about them in the regional subforums are still open, but the International section threads have been locked.


----------



## KillerZavatar

Saw a Azerbaijan Tower knockoff on an advertisement yesterday.


----------



## A Chicagoan

KillerZavatar said:


> Saw a Azerbaijan Tower knockoff on an advertisement yesterday.


Cool! Where was it?


----------



## KillerZavatar

Zhujiang New Town Metro Exit.


----------



## Kadzman

Some thoughts on the three potentially tallest structures in the world.


----------



## PenangLion

Knock on dead for those skyscrapers. Trust me, the PNB will be the last of the mighty "megatalls" to fully crown it's roof by this decade. There's simply no more motivation to build more and more, and China, the source of one the largest skyscraper races in the world, has stopped it's approach on height and has turned into more logical terms by building smaller offices. We're on the time where the only true beauties are the ones that will only conceive on paper, not reality.


----------



## KillerZavatar

Assuming you mean the decade that starts in 2020, i think we still have chances for more tall buildings. My hope still lies in the new elevator technologies making taller buildings much more efficient.


----------



## Shai360

PenangLion said:


> Knock on dead for those skyscrapers. Trust me, the PNB will be the last of the mighty "megatalls" to fully crown it's roof by this decade. There's simply no more motivation to build more and more, and China, the source of one the largest skyscraper races in the world, has stopped it's approach on height and has turned into more logical terms by building smaller offices. We're on the time where the only true beauties are the ones that will only conceive on paper, not reality.


I really am not sure about that...
True you will probably not see so much from places like the West, the Middle East or China, but the moment that either India (which would actually have a use for them) or one of the dictatorial African regimes gets in on the action you could see new heights reached... It is only a matter of time before a Mumbai, a Jakarta or a Lagos megatall rises in my opinion
I imagine the 2030s and/or 2040s will see a new golden age for skyscrapers, with the difference being that they would be more focused on residential and experiences instead of offices


----------



## Shai360

gerardpique said:


> Everything that goes up must come down. I bet people in the Middle Ages/Renaissance thought cathedrals would keep getting bigger and bigger. To date the last great cathedral built is St Peter's in Rome.
> 
> What I mean is maybe Burj will remain the biggest Megatall for centuries to come. Or not only time will tell.


That is a logical fallacy bro, the only reason no great cathedrals were built is because the world became less Catholic...
Masjid Al-Haram is almost 100 times the size of St. Peter's Cathedral and is it's true successor


----------



## PenangLion

We don't build megatalls simply we wanted to, but to solve the office shortages and demands required. 
Even dictatorial regimes in Africa would not build a 600+m skyscraper in the middle of no where, the closest in being was Egypt and Morocco's plans to build supertalls, and that is only just a singled project. 
Supply and demand, Africa can't even have the supply, so why the demand to build more?
My opinion is for pure-skyscrapers only. There might still be a possibility that sight-seeing observation towers / freestanding structures will dominate the future "megatall" skyline in the world.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Has the model been put up again somewhere? Last I heard, it was removed from Dubai Mall.


----------



## A Chicagoan

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Has the model been put up again somewhere? Last I heard, it was removed from Dubai Mall.


That photo is from December 2020, so it's probably the old one.


----------



## L.cass

Was looking at Instagram and this image below came to my suggestions, but right now 0 info about it, besides what's on the image, brand-new post by the way.










So apparently, it's 2km tall, mixed-use, and has a rocket launch pad on the top .

I did not find anything about "AnFur", "TriT" or "NGB program", probably just a concept thing, why create an Instagram with 0 info with a release date?/launch date?, no idea, but the description said "more info SOON", so i guess i need to wait. Does anyone know something?

by analyzing it, it does seem a very rough/not ready concept, not unusual I've lost count on how many designs were presented with basically 50% of the actual thing.

But i brought this because it's a very intriguing thing, don't you think?, imagine how crazy would be a rocket launch system in the top of a building (i don't think is even possible, but let's dream right?)


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

L.cass said:


> But i brought this because it's a very intriguing thing, don't you think?, imagine how crazy would be a rocket launch system in the top of a building (i don't think is even possible, but let's dream right?)


It is a common fallacy to think that launching a rocket from up high helps save fuel. In reality, the fuel-consuming part of rocketry isn't going up, it's going sideways fast enough that you don't fall down. If you have a dozen minutes to spare, the excellent Youtuber Scott Manley explains it well in this video:





Also, rocket launches are noisy and cause a lot of vibrations, plus being a fire safety hazard, and you don't want to launch them during high winds - or assemble them during high winds, for that matter - which there will be aplenty on top of such a tall building. You might as well put a weapons testing facility up there as far as safety goes.

All in all, the project doesn't seem well-researched in the slightest, and I would think that anybody with the money to build a 2 km tall building would do a bit of research before going forwards with it. In all likelihood, you've just stumbled across somebody's hobby project.


----------



## A Chicagoan

I don't think launching rockets from the roof will be healthy for the mixed-use portion underneath...


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

Off the top of my head I can think of at least 6 reasons why a rocket launchpad is bad for literally any skyscraper:
1. A lot of smoke is emitted from a rocket, if you want to open the window in your office right before it lifts off, life’s not gonna be very kind to you
2. Rockets are heavy, the landing pad might collapse and we got ourselves a irreparable tower
3. Fire hazards galore
4. Although chances are small, if the rocket blows up, it’s taking 1/3 of the building with it
5. How would you even get the rocket up a 2 Km high skyscraper?
6. All the tenants better be provided with free ear protection or none would want to work there


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> Off the top of my head I can think of at least 6 reasons why a rocket launchpad is bad for literally any skyscraper:
> 1. A lot of smoke is emitted from a rocket, if you want to open the window in your office right before it lifts off, life’s not gonna be very kind to you
> 2. Rockets are heavy, the landing pad might collapse and we got ourselves a irreparable tower
> 3. Fire hazards galore
> 4. Although chances are small, if the rocket blows up, it’s taking 1/3 of the building with it
> 5. How would you even get the rocket up a 2 Km high skyscraper?
> 6. All the tenants better be provided with free ear protection or none would want to work there


Never mind the ear protection and smoke thing. Launch pads have a very wide evacuation zone, so you'd have to empty the building completely in the hours surrounding a launch. You would want to double check that your windows are closed before leaving, though. 

Likewise, the weight of the launch pad isn't really a problem. Weights can be designed for if you know them in advance. The vibrations would be a hassle and a half, though. The required support structure would also have to support itself to a height of 2 km, requiring very large columns and bracing, which leaves very little room for any livable space. Most of it would be taken up by the elevator, I would think. There certainly wouldn't be any real estate suitable for habitation above the 1 km mark, possibly lower. Look at Burj Khalifa, whose uppermost floor is 250 meters below the top of the spire, and that spire only has to carry its own weight.

There are other fun factors too. To protect launch pads from the heat and vibration as a rocket takes off, it is usually equipped with a deluge system. Enormous torrents of water are released from nearby tanks to flood the launch pad as the engines are turned on. Where would they keep such water tanks, and where would they send all the water?

Speaking of tanks, a rocket launch pad is usually surrounded by them. Fuel and oxidizer needs to be pumped in from somewhere, there are various other gases loaded on (nitrogen or helium to pressurize the fuel tanks when the fuel drains, for instance), and a fire extinguishing system. Where is the room for all of those? Putting them right next to the launch pad would be a hilariously bad idea, since the tanks may not be fully drained and scrubbed before the rocket takes off.

So yeah, the project doesn't seem realistic in the slightest. I'd go so far as to say we've finally found a Megatall more stupid than the Zumba dance tower.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Never mind the ear protection and smoke thing. Launch pads have a very wide evacuation zone, so you'd have to empty the building completely in the hours surrounding a launch. You would want to double check that your windows are closed before leaving, though.
> 
> Likewise, the weight of the launch pad isn't really a problem. Weights can be designed for if you know them in advance. The vibrations would be a hassle and a half, though. The required support structure would also have to support itself to a height of 2 km, requiring very large columns and bracing, which leaves very little room for any livable space. Most of it would be taken up by the elevator, I would think. There certainly wouldn't be any real estate suitable for habitation above the 1 km mark, possibly lower. Look at Burj Khalifa, whose uppermost floor is 250 meters below the top of the spire, and that spire only has to carry its own weight.
> 
> There are other fun factors too. To protect launch pads from the heat and vibration as a rocket takes off, it is usually equipped with a deluge system. Enormous torrents of water are released from nearby tanks to flood the launch pad as the engines are turned on. Where would they keep such water tanks, and where would they send all the water?
> 
> Speaking of tanks, a rocket launch pad is usually surrounded by them. Fuel and oxidizer needs to be pumped in from somewhere, there are various other gases loaded on (nitrogen or helium to pressurize the fuel tanks when the fuel drains, for instance), and a fire extinguishing system. Where is the room for all of those? Putting them right next to the launch pad would be a hilariously bad idea, since the tanks may not be fully drained and scrubbed before the rocket takes off.
> 
> So yeah, the project doesn't seem realistic in the slightest. I'd go so far as to say we've finally found a Megatall more stupid than the Zumba dance tower.


Why is that Zumba tower still even in the proposed section?


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> Why is that Zumba tower still even in the proposed section?


I guess it has just slipped the attention of the moderators. It looks sort of like a legitimate proposal at first glance, and perhaps they don't want this section to become too empty by deleting everything.

Either way, I suspect it will be moved one day soon enough. As the years go by without further news (which I think is quite inevitable), there's less and less of a reason to keep it here.


----------



## Faruk...

Road roller


----------



## Faruk...

After seeing this photo I can say with the expectation that the work on Jeddah Tower may start in 2022.


----------



## Cristy312

Faruk... said:


>


Wait a second what
Is JT going back into the circuit???


----------



## Faruk...

.....


----------



## Lincolnlover2005




----------



## Lincolnlover2005

I have 2 outlandish theories for why JT is taking forever to continue construction:

The Boring Theory: Jeddah Tower was intentionally put on hold to build up hype

The Fun Theory: The CTBUH was correct and JT has been under construction this whole time, but every night when workers leave, small elves hired by Emaar appear and disassemble the newly constructed floors so that JT stays at 276 meters


----------



## ssoott

Spaceship launchpad on top of a building? What kind of drugs are they smoking now?


----------



## Peter Skawinsky




----------



## Lincolnlover2005

Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture will be releasing a megatall book in 2022, I'm not much of a reader but I can make an exception 








Supertall | Megatall How High Can We Go?


Drawing from the unique design experience at Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture (AS+GG) as architects of the next world’s tallest tower and...




www.archdaily.com


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear…


















JEDDAH l ON HOLD l Jeddah Tower (170F) (1000M+)


As far as I can tell, the contract referred to on the board is for electrical infrastructure. The contract sum is around 64 million Riyal, or 17 million USD. It seems to be related to construction activity in Kingdom City, but I can't see any relation to the Tower itself. I see your point ...




www.skyscrapercity.com


----------



## NanoRay

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear…
> View attachment 2509118
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JEDDAH l ON HOLD l Jeddah Tower (170F) (1000M+)
> 
> 
> As far as I can tell, the contract referred to on the board is for electrical infrastructure. The contract sum is around 64 million Riyal, or 17 million USD. It seems to be related to construction activity in Kingdom City, but I can't see any relation to the Tower itself. I see your point ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skyscrapercity.com


It looks the same but I don’t notice anything…


----------



## NanoRay

I got some interesting question for you, how far can you see Jeddah Tower from the distance (such as Burj Khalifa or Mecca Clock Tower) if it’s completed?


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

NanoRay said:


> I got some interesting question for you, how far can you see Jeddah Tower from the distance (such as Burj Khalifa or Mecca Clock Tower) if it’s completed?


I seem to recall this discussion in the Jeddah Tower thread several years ago. The consensus was that you can't see either tower from the top of the other two due to the curvature of the Earth (and in Mecca's case, mountains).


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

NanoRay said:


> It looks the same but I don’t notice anything…


The roads…


----------



## Faruk...

*A comparison of the surroundings - (January 2018 & October 2021):









*


----------



## NanoRay

Looks like Jeddah Tower might be completed by 2030…








Source: Google Earth

Found this on Google Earth using the Street View, but the street views are kind of rare, especially when you’re much closer to Jeddah Tower. Don’t know when this view was taken. Credit to the photographer who took this.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

NanoRay said:


> Don’t know when this view was taken.


Hard to tell, because the tower has been looking pretty much the same since work stopped, almost four years ago.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Hard to tell, because the tower has been looking pretty much the same since work stopped, almost four years ago.


But the road layout of JEC is looking pretty alive rn. It shouldn’t be too bold to assume that plans for this thing to be completed are still going forward


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> But the road layout of JEC is looking pretty alive rn. It shouldn’t be too bold to assume that plans for this thing to be completed are still going forward


Question remains, though: completed as planned or capped off? The economic case for its construction has always been questionable. Jeddah Economic City was planned for a million inhabitants, and from the looks of things they were looking for well-educated professionals, primarily from abroad, willing to resettle permanently to the Gulf countries (albeit without gaining citizenship, it seems) and long-distance tourists. That's a market Dubai already swallowed up, and it was nowhere as big as they had hoped for as evident by its massive oversupply problem. Would Jeddah really be able to lure in that many new people without running into the same oversupply issues, or potentially worsening them for both locations? And that's before you notice that seemingly every major city in the region aims to build similar "expat/tourism hubs". Are there really enough expats/tourists to go around to sustain even half of them?


----------



## Peter Skawinsky

^^^
Maybe the croesuses NWO move their companies and headquarters here to escape from the responsibility for the economic covidian global financial crisis. They have the money to build such an empire quite quick.🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Arabian_Gulf_Neom




----------



## NanoRay

So that means Jeddah Tower will resume next year? I doubted that might happen since COVID is getting much worse… 
But the road is the sign for just that?


----------



## DeaconG

NanoRay said:


> So that means Jeddah Tower will resume next year? I doubted that might happen since COVID is getting much worse…
> But the road is the sign for just that?


It could be...or maybe not. There's more than a few places in the US where roads were built for businesses that didn't come, or didn't come immediately. More than a few planned communities have done this (Viera in my neck of the woods comes to mind), but it's not a guarantee of future growth, just to insure that there will be a facility to accommodate it.

It's not just COVID, but the entire financial system is under severe strain as the Keynesians have put themselves in the place that John Maynard Keynes said don't put yourself in (turn securities into a free for all casino). Between the real estate and derivative issues (see the LIBOR derivative conversion fiasco)(EDIT: and now REAL inflation because of a trashed supply chain on top of the fiat), they aren't going to be in the place to continue to finance grand projects for some time to come.

What this tower needs is the real estate equivalent of Elon Musk.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

I've updated my Sketchup model of the Abraj Al-Bait! Quite frankly it's one of my best ones!





Abraj Al-Bait | 3D Warehouse


The Abraj Al-Bait (Arabic: أبراج البيت, "Towers of the House") is a government-owned complex of seven skyscraper hotels in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. These towers are a part of the King Abdulaziz Endowment Project that aims to modernize the city in catering to its pilgrims. The central hotel tower...




3dwarehouse.sketchup.com


----------



## DeaconG

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> I've updated my Sketchup model of the Abraj Al-Bait! Quite frankly it's one of my best ones!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abraj Al-Bait | 3D Warehouse
> 
> 
> The Abraj Al-Bait (Arabic: أبراج البيت, "Towers of the House") is a government-owned complex of seven skyscraper hotels in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. These towers are a part of the King Abdulaziz Endowment Project that aims to modernize the city in catering to its pilgrims. The central hotel tower...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3dwarehouse.sketchup.com


Schweet! Are they still butt-hurt over the proximity of this to the Grand Mosque? (I know there were issues with the nearby springs, IIRC).


----------



## Faruk...

saleh mohammed said:


> GOOD NEWS FOR JEDDAH TOWER FANS
> FRENCH COMPANY GET CONTRACTS FOR DEVELOP JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY
> MORE DETAILS ON instagram.com/jeddahchannel





saleh mohammed said:


> GO TO
> twitter.com/naifsaudi4
> JEDDAH TOWER CONSTRUCTION WILL STARTED IN 3RD QUARTER 2022
> FRENCH COMPANY GETS CONTRACT





saleh mohammed said:


> JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY MODEL PHOTO SHARE BY FRENCH COMPANY
> View attachment 2624560





saleh mohammed said:


> JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY MODEL PHOTO SHARE BY FRENCH CONTRACTOR
> COMPANY SAID WORKS STARTED IN OCTOBER 2022
> View attachment 2624570





saleh mohammed said:


> JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY UNDER DEVELOPMENTS
> ROADS - FOOTPATH AND 2 BRIDGES UNDER CONSTRUCTIONS
> LED STREETS LIGHTS INSALLED HIM
> View attachment 2627995





saleh mohammed said:


> FRENCH DELEGATION TEAM VISITED JEDDAH TOWER ON 12-01-2022
> _
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/CYqk_XNJsPk/


----------



## Faruk...

JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY MODEL PHOTO SHARE BY FRENCH CONTRACTOR
COMPANY SAID WORKS STARTED IN OCTOBER 2022


----------



## KillerZavatar

We have had our hopes crushed over and over with Jeddah Tower, so I'll cheers on that when there is actual work on the project being done again.


----------



## NanoRay

I know that NYC actually have a megatall proposal. This time, it’s in Roosevelt Island, just outside east of Manhattan. It will be built by 2050. Or maybe it just a vision.









Futuristic tower proposed for Roosevelt Island is 2,400 feet and covered in 10,000+ plants


In response to the idea of the “city of tomorrow,” one that will become carbon neutral by 2050, French architecture firm Rescubika created a proposal for a 2,418-foot tower on Roosevelt Island. With wood construction materials, 36 wind turbines, 8,300 shrubs, 1,600 tress, 83,000 square feet of...




archinect.com


----------



## Hudson11

Roosevelt Island?


----------



## NanoRay

Probably but it has some organic design on it to make it look organic and not tipping over to sink the island like the Affirmation Tower. But for me, how can an island build such a gigantic structure that is the same size of the island itself?


----------



## DeaconG

Faruk... said:


> JEDDAH ECONOMIC CITY MODEL PHOTO SHARE BY FRENCH CONTRACTOR
> COMPANY SAID WORKS STARTED IN OCTOBER 2022


Do you have anything else for us to work with? I just came back from the Jeddah Economic Company webpage and there's been no new information since late 2014 and the site hasn't been updated since 2015. Purty graphics, but scant current information. Wikipedia is shooting blanks too.
Current links would be helpful; at least the name of the contractor.





Jeddah Economic Company | Home


Tollest Tower in the world Tollest Tower in the world




jec.sa


----------



## NanoRay

DeaconG said:


> Do you have anything else for us to work with? I just came back from the Jeddah Economic Company webpage and there's been no new information since late 2014 and the site hasn't been updated since 2015. Purty graphics, but scant current information. Wikipedia is shooting blanks too.
> Current links would be helpful; at least the name of the contractor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeddah Economic Company | Home
> 
> 
> Tollest Tower in the world Tollest Tower in the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jec.sa


The name of the contractor is very likely Rescubika, the French architectural firm.


----------



## Faruk...

DeaconG said:


> Do you have anything else for us to work with? I just came back from the Jeddah Economic Company webpage and there's been no new information since late 2014 and the site hasn't been updated since 2015. Purty graphics, but scant current information. Wikipedia is shooting blanks too.
> Current links would be helpful; at least the name of the contractor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeddah Economic Company | Home
> 
> 
> Tollest Tower in the world Tollest Tower in the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jec.sa


The news is available in twitter and Instagram on official news channel pages


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

NanoRay said:


> The name of the contractor is very likely Rescubika, the French architectural firm.


Rescubika is a company specializing in architectural visualizations. They don't serve as a contractor, which has the role of assembling the building.

Then again, they might be hired in to produce more pretty drawings to drum up PR and bait investors while absolutely nothing happens on site. I wouldn't find that unlikely.



Faruk... said:


> The news is available in twitter and Instagram on official news channel pages


If a contract was finally awarded, surely they would have announced it through more formal channels than Twitter and Instagram? What about a press release or some official statement? Or at least an update to the project website?

Moreover, what official Twitter and Instagram pages are you referring to? The tower's Instagram account has closed (and none of the accounts masquerading as the official page have been updated for years) and their Twitter account has been inactive for two years as well. Their last post that wasn't a retweet is from 2018.

If you consider "Jeddahchannel" an official source (why?), let's have a look at the two posts it made about the tower recently:








Added by @jeddahchannel Instagram post ‏⁧‫#برج_المملكة‬⁩ (برج ⁦‪جدة‬⁩) الذي يعد أطول برج في العالم عند اكتمال انشائة في أحدث صورة له. ‏ يتم الانتهاء من العمل فيه في نهاية 2022 وفق المخطط له. (المدينة) - Picuki.com


Instagram post added by jeddahchannel ‏⁧‫#برج_المملكة‬⁩ (برج ⁦‪جدة‬⁩) الذي يعد أطول برج في العالم عند اكتمال انشائة في أحدث صورة له. ‏ يتم الانتهاء من العمل فيه في نهاية 2022 وفق المخطط له. (المدينة) - Picuki.com




www.picuki.com




"Kingdom Tower (Jeddah Tower), which is the tallest tower in the world when its construction is completed in its latest image. Work on it will be completed by the end of 2022 as planned. (City)"









Added by @jeddahchannel Instagram post السفير الفرنسي لدى ⁧‫#السعودية‬⁩ : اثناء زيارتة لمشروع #برج_جدة ‏ هذا المشروع الطموح الذي تساهم فيه شركات فرنسية ، يهدف إلى بناء أطول ⁦‪برج‬⁩ في العالم، في حي جديد في عاصمة البحر الأحمر 🇸🇦😍 - Picuki.com


Instagram post added by jeddahchannel السفير الفرنسي لدى ⁧‫#السعودية‬⁩ : اثناء زيارتة لمشروع #برج_جدة ‏ هذا المشروع الطموح الذي تساهم فيه شركات فرنسية ، يهدف إلى بناء أطول ⁦‪برج‬⁩ في العالم، في حي جديد في عاصمة البحر الأحمر 🇸🇦😍 - Picuki.com




www.picuki.com




The French ambassador to #Saudi Arabia : During his visit to the #Jeddah Tower project, this ambitious project, in which French companies contribute, aims to build the tallest tower in the world, in a new neighborhood in the capital of the Red Sea 🇸🇦😍 

The first one is referring to the original plans to complete the tower by 2022. Nowhere does it say that construction is resuming. And even if it was, it would take much more than a year from today to complete it.

The second merely refers to the fact that French companies "contribute" to the project. Not that they have taken over as a contractor. They are likely referring to Rescubika's involvement in making pretty drawings.

So yeah, unless a more official source starts repeating the good news very soon, I think I'm gonna call this a misunderstanding. Yes, the French ambassador visited the tower. No, that doesn't mean work is restarting.


----------



## paulps99

NanoRay said:


> Probably but it has some organic design on it to make it look organic and not tipping over to sink the island like the Affirmation Tower. But for me, how can an island build such a gigantic structure that is the same size of the island itself?


Easy, just excavate to solid rock & build from there. The question is why would you do it? It's so ugly & unliveable. Might as well just live on a cruise ship. Any plans would surely involve outside parks, greeneries, walkways etc.


----------



## DeaconG

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Rescubika is a company specializing in architectural visualizations. They don't serve as a contractor, which has the role of assembling the building.
> 
> Then again, they might be hired in to produce more pretty drawings to drum up PR and bait investors while absolutely nothing happens on site. I wouldn't find that unlikely.
> 
> 
> If a contract was finally awarded, surely they would have announced it through more formal channels than Twitter and Instagram? What about a press release or some official statement? Or at least an update to the project website?
> 
> Moreover, what official Twitter and Instagram pages are you referring to? The tower's Instagram account has closed (and none of the accounts masquerading as the official page have been updated for years) and their Twitter account has been inactive for two years as well. Their last post that wasn't a retweet is from 2018.
> 
> If you consider "Jeddahchannel" an official source (why?), let's have a look at the two posts it made about the tower recently:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Added by @jeddahchannel Instagram post ‏⁧‫#برج_المملكة‬⁩ (برج ⁦‪جدة‬⁩) الذي يعد أطول برج في العالم عند اكتمال انشائة في أحدث صورة له. ‏ يتم الانتهاء من العمل فيه في نهاية 2022 وفق المخطط له. (المدينة) - Picuki.com
> 
> 
> Instagram post added by jeddahchannel ‏⁧‫#برج_المملكة‬⁩ (برج ⁦‪جدة‬⁩) الذي يعد أطول برج في العالم عند اكتمال انشائة في أحدث صورة له. ‏ يتم الانتهاء من العمل فيه في نهاية 2022 وفق المخطط له. (المدينة) - Picuki.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.picuki.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Kingdom Tower (Jeddah Tower), which is the tallest tower in the world when its construction is completed in its latest image. Work on it will be completed by the end of 2022 as planned. (City)"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Added by @jeddahchannel Instagram post السفير الفرنسي لدى ⁧‫#السعودية‬⁩ : اثناء زيارتة لمشروع #برج_جدة ‏ هذا المشروع الطموح الذي تساهم فيه شركات فرنسية ، يهدف إلى بناء أطول ⁦‪برج‬⁩ في العالم، في حي جديد في عاصمة البحر الأحمر 🇸🇦😍 - Picuki.com
> 
> 
> Instagram post added by jeddahchannel السفير الفرنسي لدى ⁧‫#السعودية‬⁩ : اثناء زيارتة لمشروع #برج_جدة ‏ هذا المشروع الطموح الذي تساهم فيه شركات فرنسية ، يهدف إلى بناء أطول ⁦‪برج‬⁩ في العالم، في حي جديد في عاصمة البحر الأحمر 🇸🇦😍 - Picuki.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.picuki.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The French ambassador to #Saudi Arabia : During his visit to the #Jeddah Tower project, this ambitious project, in which French companies contribute, aims to build the tallest tower in the world, in a new neighborhood in the capital of the Red Sea 🇸🇦😍
> 
> The first one is referring to the original plans to complete the tower by 2022. Nowhere does it say that construction is resuming. And even if it was, it would take much more than a year from today to complete it.
> 
> The second merely refers to the fact that French companies "contribute" to the project. Not that they have taken over as a contractor. They are likely referring to Rescubika's involvement in making pretty drawings.
> 
> So yeah, unless a more official source starts repeating the good news very soon, I think I'm gonna call this a misunderstanding. Yes, the French ambassador visited the tower. No, that doesn't mean work is restarting.


That's all I was trying to get across. The first thing that popped into my head when a French contractor was mentioned was the botched I-69 construction in Indiana three years ago with Isolux Corsan-what a mess! Get a third of the way through the project, stop paying your subs and when INDOT goes "Why did you stop paying the subs? We gave you $300M-do you know what technical default is?", they started using the "dog ate my homework" excuse. So now, INDOT has to take over the construction while they give Isolux Corsan a full year to come up with an excuse and...crickets. Technical default incoming! Needless to say, their shares hit the bricks when that came out...Let's not go there!


----------



## timmycapello11

Maybe once (and if) Jeddah Tower construction is resumed this fall, 1km+ projects will be in play again? Dubai Creek Tower, this one, others... It's like everyone's waiting for others to finish their megatall projects to finish their own.


----------



## NanoRay

timmycapello11 said:


> Maybe once (and if) Jeddah Tower construction is resumed this fall, 1km+ projects will be in play again? Dubai Creek Tower, this one, others... It's like everyone's waiting for others to finish their megatall projects to finish their own.


Yeah. Like the Azerbaijan Tower, the Bride Tower and the Burj Mubarak Al-Kabir


----------



## Lithios

Dick towers require certain conditions. 
Low wages/construction costs.
Authoritarian government with inferiority complex. 
Massive funds from resource extraction/money laundering.


----------



## Kadzman

Lithios said:


> Dick towers require certain conditions.
> Low wages/construction costs.
> Authoritarian government with inferiority complex.
> Massive funds from resource extraction/money laundering.


And maybe too buyers for such towers built without the criteria mentioned above have massive funds from resource extraction/money laundering to pay for the otherwise unaffordable normal folks?


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

thestealthyartist said:


> Going back on topic, how likely do you think this tower will actually be built?


Pretty much zero. Most Megatalls ever proposed - and there have been many dozens at this point - have failed on the proposal stage. They simply aren't economically feasible to build.


----------



## NanoRay

If megatalls reached 1,000 meters, then it should be called “KILOTALL”. Jeddah Tower could be the first of its kind to be over 1,000 meters.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

NanoRay said:


> If megatalls reached 1,000 meters, then it should be called “KILOTALL”. Jeddah Tower could be the first of its kind to be over 1,000 meters.


I’m thinking that every 300 meters, the name changes
300m: Supertall
600m: Megatall
900m: ???tall

I’m thinking 900 meters should be classified as either Ultratall or Hypertall


----------



## NanoRay

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> I’m thinking that every 300 meters, the name changes
> 300m: Supertall
> 600m: Megatall
> 900m: ???tall
> 
> I’m thinking 900 meters should be classified as either Ultratall or Hypertall


Do you notice the category doubles? Skyscraper: 150m | Supertall: 300m | Megatall: 600m | Ultratall: 1200m


----------



## thestealthyartist

Cool!

I think maybe this would be a clean layout:

100-Highrise
200-Skyscraper
400-Supertall
600-Megatall
800-Ultratall
1000-Kilotall
1608 (a mile)-Hypertall


----------



## MisterDae

I’ll be amazed if a hyper-tall gets built this century. That would be twice the height of the Burj Khalifa. Interestingly though I think 4-5 of these would provide enough space to build a city by themselves.


----------



## thestealthyartist

That's not possible, I think.

Burj was a one-time thing. The closest to that right now are individual wonders by certain Asian countries, or a few by China, which are now banned.

It's probably gonna be an ESB situation. Nothing is topping Khalifa's Tower in the next 15-20 years.

I can't see the gap being too big though, with technology advancing so quickly it's bound to happen quite soon compared to the ESB scenario.


----------



## ZZ-II

NanoRay said:


> Do you notice the category doubles? Skyscraper: 150m | Supertall: 300m | Megatall: 600m | Ultratall: 1200m


True. But wouldn't double the 600m for the next category because it would be a bit too much i think. The next big mark should be the 1000m...and after that 1600m (1 Mile).


----------



## minymina

It's defiantly possible and economically feasible in a highly dense metropolis like NYC or Hong Kung.
China's ban is temporary to stabilise their real estate market following the Evergrande fiasco. Once it's lifted, I can see Ultratalls happen. Especially with the ever-growing need for housing in large cities. They'll be built-to-rent.

Basically like the buildings in Dredd but hopefully a lot less dystopian.


----------



## Lithios

That ban came before evergrande. and now venke is teetering...

To make these economical for the normal person, construction costs would have to be like 10% of current.


----------



## A Chicagoan

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> I’m thinking that every 300 meters, the name changes
> 300m: Supertall
> 600m: Megatall
> 900m: ???tall
> 
> I’m thinking 900 meters should be classified as either Ultratall or Hypertall


My head canon has been ultratall at 1000 meters. 900 is really close to 1000, so I think the next category should start at 1000 to make it clean.


----------



## NanoRay

A Chicagoan said:


> My head canon has been ultratall at 1000 meters. 900 is really close to 1000, so I think the next category should start at 1000 to make it clean.


Yeah. Jeddah Tower was about to do that but stuck for now.


----------



## minymina

Lithios said:


> That ban came before evergrande. and now venke is teetering...
> 
> To make these economical for the normal person, construction costs would have to be like 10% of current.


The writing was on the wall in regards to Evergrande since 2020. The ban was issued in 2021.
That said, the ban itself is limited only to smaller cities that have no need for Megatalls. Large cities can still build big.

See here:


> *China has restricted smaller cities in the country from building "super high-rise buildings", as part of a larger bid to crack down on vanity projects.
> 
> China limits construction of 'super high-rise buildings' - BBC News*


As I previously stated, if Ultratalls ever happen, they will be build-to-rent only. The model investors/developers are using now is to rent and not sell. A sad reality of our generation.
Furthermore, apartments in Ultratalls won't be bigger than 50-60sqm. Shitboxes that will rent out for $1,200-$1,500 a month. Now multiply that by say 1k apartments in a single Ultratall and you're talking about $1.2m-$1.5m a month or $14,400,000-$1,800,0000 a year.

Keep in mind that I'm really lowballing at $1,200-$1,500. Currently, the average apartment rent in Manhattan is $4,140. So $4,140,000 per month or $49,680,000 yearly.

It's only a matter of time until an asset management fund like Blackrock or Vanguard fund an Ultratall.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

minymina said:


> The writing was on the wall in regards to Evergrande since 2020. The ban was issued in 2021.
> That said, the ban itself is limited only to smaller cities that have no need for Megatalls. Large cities can still build big.
> 
> See here:
> 
> 
> As I previously stated, if Ultratalls ever happen, they will be build-to-rent only. The model investors/developers are using now is to rent and not sell. A sad reality of our generation.
> Furthermore, apartments in Ultratalls won't be bigger than 50-60sqm. Shitboxes that will rent out for $1,200-$1,500 a month. Now multiply that by say 1k apartments in a single Ultratall and you're talking about $1.2m-$1.5m a month or $14,400,000-$1,800,0000 a year.
> 
> Keep in mind that I'm really lowballing at $1,200-$1,500. Currently, the average apartment rent in Manhattan is $4,140. So $4,140,000 per month or $49,680,000 yearly.
> 
> It's only a matter of time until an asset management fund like Blackrock or Vanguard fund an Ultratall.


So technically megatalls proposed in Shenzhen such as the Shenzhen HK International Centre might actually not get a height cut? I’m assuming Chinas gonna be pretty cranky that their tofu-dreged mega tower is getting beat out by a spire, kinda like a middle finger. Considering the Beijing 2022 Olympics, China always feels the urge to show off. Not to mention Shimao seems financially stable to build it


----------



## minymina

When it comes to infrastructure, I wouldn't say China is showing off. They actually have a need for it.
The exception is obviously the ghost towns in the middle of nowhere. Most of which were built in the 2000s. But all the highrises are needed in big cities like Shenzhen, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Chongqing and Hong Kong. They'll continue building taller and taller within those cities to deal with demand and reduce urban sprawl. It makes sense for them, as does building taller in cities like:

Manhattan
San Fransico
Seattle
San Diego
Sydney
Melbourne
Brisbane
Perth
Vancouver
Toronto
Montreal
So long as we're not talking about historic cities such as Rome, Dublin, London, Cairo and Paris, then they can build as tall as they like.


----------



## thestealthyartist

Lincolnlover2005 said:


> So technically megatalls proposed in Shenzhen such as the Shenzhen HK International Centre might actually not get a height cut? I’m assuming Chinas gonna be pretty cranky that their tofu-dreged mega tower is getting beat out by a spire, kinda like a middle finger. Considering the Beijing 2022 Olympics, China always feels the urge to show off. Not to mention Shimao seems financially stable to build it


I really don't think China would care that much, they have better things to pour money into and I don't think the government is too big on skyscrapers anyway.


----------



## minymina

I'm certain they care. The one-child policy has been abolished and they're currently sitting at 1.402 billion. Cities are getting crowded and more expensive. The only solution, outside of building new cities like Egypt, is to build tall.

Hong Kong’s residents living in 'coffin' homes - YouTube 
Inside Hong Kong’s cage homes - YouTube


----------



## thestealthyartist

It still doesn't warrant building crazy tall stuff, that's just not as practical. Shanghai Tower for all its epicness is still half-empty.


----------



## minymina

The problem with shanghai towers and others like it is the target demographic for which the developers are aiming for. They're solely targeting the ultra-wealthy and businesses. Within the next few decades, you'll start seeing skyscrapers accommodating middle-class apartments in large urban cities where the need for housing is dire. Sure, the apartments are going to be shoeboxes but they'll provide people, mostly single/young people, a place to live until they get married and move to a more affordable town/city.

It's not uncommon to see a software developer, a lawyer or even a doctor living in their cars in the cities I mentioned above. It's only a matter of time with the growing population. You either build cities like Egypt, China and KSA or construct Megatalls and maybe even an Ultratall to deal with the situation. There's no other option other than putting a ban on corporations buying up badly needed housing but who are we kidding, governments the world over would never do that.


----------



## Lincolnlover2005

thestealthyartist said:


> It still doesn't warrant building crazy tall stuff, that's just not as practical. Shanghai Tower for all its epicness is still half-empty.


Shanghai Tower Failed because of its small amount of floor space per floor, not to mention Shenzhen is much more attractive towards businesses than Shanghai. Just look at the Shenzhen Bay Super Headquarters! From what has been shown to us, SSHKIC has the potential to have much more floor space than Shanghai Tower. Call me obsessive over this tower being built at its original height, but it being cut down to 500 meters is a disgrace to such a beautiful tower! If you're gonna ban the construction of 500 meter towers, you might as well go out with one last hurrah


----------



## thestealthyartist

Agreed, they should've let Wuhan Greenland get through and then close the gate on 500+.

Wuhan Greenland getting cut is the biggest tragedy of a skyscraper ever.


----------



## thestealthyartist

minymina said:


> The problem with shanghai towers and others like it is the target demographic for which the developers are aiming for. They're solely targeting the ultra-wealthy and businesses. Within the next few decades, you'll start seeing skyscrapers accommodating middle-class apartments in large urban cities where the need for housing is dire. Sure, the apartments are going to be shoeboxes but they'll provide people, mostly single/young people, a place to live until they get married and move to a more affordable town/city.
> 
> It's not uncommon to see a software developer, a lawyer or even a doctor living in their cars in the cities I mentioned above. It's only a matter of time with the growing population. You either build cities like Egypt, China and KSA or construct Megatalls and maybe even an Ultratall to deal with the situation. There's no other option other than putting a ban on corporations buying up badly needed housing but who are we kidding, governments the world over would never do that.
> 
> Lmao. I think the mods got sick of us talking about this on the


I guess it is, but for now we don't need megatalls. A ton of supertalls is for the most part enough. I guess time will tell.


----------



## Cadaeib

Thanks to the combination of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing, new materials will be invented with interesting properties for high buildings.
Also technologies like 3D printing and robotics could drastically cut the cost for very tall skyscrapers.
It's totally possible than before the end of the Century, after the relative slowdown we're passing through, Burj Khalifa will be dwarfed away due to the construction of hypertalls in emerging part of the World, probably south eastern Asia or the awakening Africa.

About their design : new materials and lower cost will allow architects to experiment things that were previously not possible. The tendance of rejecting simple forms from the international style which started in the 80' will continue, in the inside too ; big atriums or indoor parks will be a lot more commons as well as exterior terraces.
The mobility sector will also maybe see the long awaited flying vehicles slowly taking a bigger part in the traffic due to ameliorations in electric battery capacity. This could lead to suitable designs with multiple exterior (retractable ?) platforms.


----------



## KillerZavatar

we don't need a new word after megatall, as long as there are less buildings over 600m than between 300m and 600m, i don't think another word is needed, it'll be a small group of buildings for the forseeable future, so no need to split this small group further up.


----------



## thestealthyartist

In the event that they become common, though...


----------



## KillerZavatar

thestealthyartist said:


> In the event that they become common, though...


In the best of cases, that's decades away. If you do consider a sci-fi setting though, it makes sense yeah. For example, for a couple of weeks now, I've been brain storming a city builder game that would go into the 2200s where arcologies and the like are very feasible and I am keeping these things in mind as well.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

minymina said:


> The problem with shanghai towers and others like it is the target demographic for which the developers are aiming for. They're solely targeting the ultra-wealthy and businesses. Within the next few decades, you'll start seeing skyscrapers accommodating middle-class apartments in large urban cities where the need for housing is dire. Sure, the apartments are going to be shoeboxes but they'll provide people, mostly single/young people, a place to live until they get married and move to a more affordable town/city.


Even in that situation, it will never make sense to build anything Megatall instead of a smaller number of lower skyscrapers.

One fundamental rule of a skyscraper is that the infrastructure servicing each floor will pass through every floor below it. The implication of this is that each floor will also contain the infrastructure servicing every floor above it. That is, the structural system, electric cables, plumbing, telecom, and most notably, elevators shafts and fire escapes.

These things eat into the real estate of each floor quite quickly when there are a lot of floors above. The taller you build, the more space you have to devote _on every floor_ to stuff that services the upper floors. As such, diminishing returns will start becoming an issue quite quickly.

Consider the case of a single 600 m building vs. two 300 m buildings. The lower half of a 600 m building is like a 300 m building in itself, but it also has to contain all the stuff that goes into _another_ 300 m building on top of it, _and _be reinforced to carry its weight. With two separate 300 m buildings, both can service themselves separately, saving a crapton of space and cost. Those savings will far exceed the cost of doubling the building's footprint. Land isn't _that_ expensive anywhere.

There's also the fact that density can be achieved quite comfortably without building skyscrapers. Certain districts in Lagos, Nigeria, have a population density above 150,000 people per square kilometer (7.5 times that of Paris). The city barely has buildings above five stories tall. Or take Yorkville, NYC. 30,000 people per square kilometers, and it looks like this:








Some skyscrapers, sure, but plenty of medium-density buildings too. Or take the even denser 11th Arrondissement of Paris, at 40,000 people per square kilometer. No skyscrapers. Unless you somehow need to multiply that density by 10 or so, midrises will serve just fine, at a fraction of the cost of a Megatall.

The reason why the supertall residential towers aim for a luxury clientele, is that charging exorbitant sums per square meter is the only way to recoup the construction costs. Building tall is fiendishly expensive compared to building medium-tall. Unless the land value is ridiculously high to justify high-rent tenants, building above 350 m or so just won't be economical.


----------



## minymina

Kyll.Ing. said:


> Even in that situation, it will never make sense to build anything Megatall instead of a smaller number of lower skyscrapers.
> 
> One fundamental rule of a skyscraper is that the infrastructure servicing each floor will pass through every floor below it. The implication of this is that each floor will also contain the infrastructure servicing every floor above it. That is, the structural system, electric cables, plumbing, telecom, and most notably, elevators shafts and fire escapes.
> 
> These things eat into the real estate of each floor quite quickly when there are a lot of floors above. The taller you build, the more space you have to devote _on every floor_ to stuff that services the upper floors. As such, diminishing returns will start becoming an issue quite quickly.
> 
> Consider the case of a single 600 m building vs. two 300 m buildings. The lower half of a 600 m building is like a 300 m building in itself, but it also has to contain all the stuff that goes into _another_ 300 m building on top of it, _and _be reinforced to carry its weight. With two separate 300 m buildings, both can service themselves separately, saving a crapton of space and cost. Those savings will far exceed the cost of doubling the building's footprint. Land isn't _that_ expensive anywhere.
> 
> There's also the fact that density can be achieved quite comfortably without building skyscrapers. Certain districts in Lagos, Nigeria, have a population density above 150,000 people per square kilometer (7.5 times that of Paris). The city barely has buildings above five stories tall. Or take Yorkville, NYC. 30,000 people per square kilometers, and it looks like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some skyscrapers, sure, but plenty of medium-density buildings too. Or take the even denser 11th Arrondissement of Paris, at 40,000 people per square kilometer. No skyscrapers. Unless you somehow need to multiply that density by 10 or so, midrises will serve just fine, at a fraction of the cost of a Megatall.
> 
> The reason why the supertall residential towers aim for a luxury clientele, is that charging exorbitant sums per square meter is the only way to recoup the construction costs. Building tall is fiendishly expensive compared to building medium-tall. Unless the land value is ridiculously high to justify high-rent tenants, building above 350 m or so just won't be economical.


In NYC and Pairs, the prices for rent or purchase are aesthetical and seem to be only getting higher. I think at some point it won't be an option, they'll have to build taller and taller. The land is also too scarce in big cities such as NYC. In Hong Kong, a plot of land was sold for $2.2billion back in 2018 and has since gone up in price.

The point I'm getting at here is that skyscrapers are necessary to bring down the cost as you're selling more units per plot of land. Yes, there are expenses attached to building a taller skyscraper than a few midsized ones but if the land is selling for over a hundred million then you have no other option than to build tall and make the units smaller in order to fit more per floor.

It's simply not a matter of "if" but "when" we start seeing Ultratalls. They're going to happen at some point in the next 20 years. Unless of course, a big crash happens. The government can lower demand and increase supply by rezoning nearby land for high density and giving tax breaks to corporations that go fully remote.

I personally despise big modern cities. I much prefer cities like Vienna or Barcelona but demand is too high in certain places.

Note that I'm not just talking about residential units here but office space too. Remote working is a pipe dream. As soon as countries started opening up employers began asking employees back into the office.


----------



## Kadzman

I think for the time being, the number of floors will not break 150-200 levels even if there's someone willing to do it. They'll just add crowns, spires or whatever contraptions to bring the total height into the megatall territory.


----------



## KillerZavatar

There is new elevator technology that can move several elevators independently inside the same shaft and also go sideways or on diagonals. When talking about future technology, it is to assume that those technologies are available. Elevators are the most efficient form of rapid transit that we have, a somewhat cubic building would probably be the most efficient use of land, that said the challenges we face are that building taller is so much more expensive, and people usually care about having windows and the like, so true arcologies are still a long way off. Besides that you would need a situation of a lot of people and very limited space for it to make sense. What I would like to see in the future is a thick megatall, using interior space for retail and entertainment, atriums and gardens and the outer space for traditional mixed use, such as offices, hotel and residential. In a couple of months if I am working more seriously on my game idea (city builder on an island with high immigration and the like going from early colonists to ecumenopolis style density over the course of a few centuries) I might make a thread with my future tech tree and what I imagine technologies to be like to get some feedback.


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

minymina said:


> The point I'm getting at here is that skyscrapers are necessary to bring down the cost as you're selling more units per plot of land. Yes, there are expenses attached to building a taller skyscraper than a few midsized ones but if the land is selling for over a hundred million then you have no other option than to build tall and make the units smaller in order to fit more per floor.


No, beyond a certain size (certainly _way_ smaller than "ultratall"), the costs of building taller will be much higher than simply building somewhere else. It will usually be cheaper to acquire land elsewhere in the city and build another skyscraper there, than putting another skyscraper on top of your first skyscraper where the land is the most expensive. 

The construction costs for a Megatall building are mind-bogglingly huge, and they come on top of high land costs. For that venture to be profitable, the building needs to sell/lease space at high enough prices to cover both those expenses. There will inevitably only be a limited number of square meters of space to sell/lease, so it needs to charge a high price per square meter. That means luxury real estate, because once you start making units smaller, you also make them less attractive, and thus people would be willing to pay less for them. Consider the exorbitant cost of an apartment in one of the towers on Billionaire's Row in New York, for instance. The median selling price in 432 Park Avenue is $18.4 million. Do you think people would be willing to pay one quarter of that price for an apartment one quarter the size? For $4.6 million you can get a pretty fine apartment elsewhere in New York, instead of a tiny one in 432 PA. 

Another example from the same building: the penthouse on the 95th floor had an asking price of $82 million, but went unsold. It was thus split into two smaller apartments. Each was sold for $30 million. The size of the apartment is part of what makes it attractive, so the two halves will be less worth than one combined unit. 

Megatall residential buildings only make sense in an unrealistically tight housing market where people are willing to pay fortunes even for tiny apartments. If the land is selling for over a hundred million, and you spend a billion on constructing a building, then you need to sell its combined real estate for more than 1.1 billion to make your money back. At 100 floors (and getting a 100-floor building for a billion is an absolute bargain), that's 11 million per floor. If you split each floor into ten apartments, you will need people to be willing to pay over 1.1 million for an apartment of one-tenth of the floorspace (minus all the space reserved for elevators, stairs, hallways, interior walls, and so on). Once again using 432 Park Avenue as an example: you'd end up with apartments about 60 m2, most of which would have windows on only one wall, no parking, and with neighbours on all sides. Would that be worth paying 1.1 million for? Compared to what you get for 1.1 million elsewhere in the city? And this price assumes the building is practically run as a charity, with apartments sold for the cost of land and (unrealistically cheap) construction and nothing more. Realistically our apartments would be priced at twice that at the very least. But you'd be hard pressed to find buyers at that price.

There's a reason why residential buildings are of a limited size even in Hong Kong. Beyond a certain point, it gets cheaper to acquire another plot of land than building any taller. Especially if you build low-cost housing, where buyers won't have the budget to throw tens of thousands of dollars per square meter of space. The only venture to fetch such ludicrous prices is luxury real estate in a _very_ high-end location. And that's the sort of price you need to claw back the expenses of building that tall. Skyscrapers are hellishly expensive, but building a low-rise a story or two taller is trivially cheap.

Or put another way: When demand for housing starts to rise, the first thing to happen would be for the cheapest areas to be densified. Doubling the density of the already-dense areas would be vastly more expensive than tripling it in the low-density areas. New York wouldn't start to address a housing problem by building twice as tall on Billionaire's Row. It would add a floor or two on average to new low-rises in outlying areas (Queens, for instance, is mostly single-family homes). That's the low-hanging fruit.

And it will _always_ be cheaper to increase the density of low-density areas than high-density. You would need to have filled _all_ available space with supertall residential buildings before it starts to make sense to build Megatall residential buildings. If you have an infinite number of people in a very finite space, sure, but realistically, cities will never achieve that density. You won't ever have enough people to warrant expanding that much upwards instead of outwards. Certainly not in any Western city in the next 20 years.


----------



## A Chicagoan

If there were so many people as to necessitate megatall residential buildings, I think that would indicate some serious overpopulation problems...


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

A Chicagoan said:


> If there were so many people as to necessitate megatall residential buildings, I think that would indicate some serious overpopulation problems...


Yeah, and we'd be talking hugely serious too. Look at the places that actually are overpopulated out there. West Point in Freetown, Lagos Island in Lagos, Imbabah in Cairo, Dharavi in Mumbai, or San Andres in Manila. Hardly a structure above five floors in sight. The conditions that create such hyper-density tend not to facilitate the construction of large towers, because people with the means to buy big apartments move away for more spacious districts elsewhere. When you have such serious overpopulation, it means ten people share each room in a normal-sized building, not the construction of huge towers. Huge towers require a lot of capital, and if there is a lot of capital, people move away until the density becomes somewhat livable. Huge residential towers are only required if there is nowhere else for anyone to move, even if they have the money. That's a point humanity is never projected to reach.


----------



## KillerZavatar

using the word never is a bit risky, we don't have much of an idea what humanity will look like in a thousand years. What if we have radical life extension, what if we have cloning, what if humans live along side androids, what if most humans live off world, what if most buildings are constructed completely autonomous, what if we have orbital infrastructure that makes living attached to an elevator directly to space or an orbital ring more desirable? it's hard enough to argue for or against such structures even in 50 years future, heck i can see arguments for and against 1km structures within the next 15 years, nakheel tower came close enough and so did Kingdom Tower. For residential towers above 600m we are already getting closer, triumpf tower looks like a real possibility and New York is famous for building tall skinny supertalls for the ultra rich, this is of course a different story than building supertall residential towers for crowded poorer cities, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a 600m tall skinny residential tower in some rich city for some billionaires in the current trend.


----------



## KillerZavatar

another thing to keep in mind is that the word overpopulation only means having a higher population that you can sustain with the available resources, when we talk about society in one or more centuries from now, power shortages and dirtiness might have been solved with fusion and power satellites, food can be produced and imported from orbit and meat would be mostly lab grown anyway, and more dirty industry can be done in larger parts off earth as well, when not already improved or made obsolete by other technologies. In a post scarcity society, or close to post scarcity society, overpopulation isn't that much of a thing anymore, might run into heating problems if human population gets into the trillions on earth, but there are still ways around that as well, and by that point, most of humanity might live off earth in controlled habitats anyway, so a crowded earth might just mean more immigration towards space habitation. And if there are less worries about being able to afford having children, maybe the trend of less children per person is not decreasing anymore, let's say a healthy human life can be hundreds of years, work is not really a requirement for a good life, people might have more children, and even if not, more generations are destined to coincide with each other with people dying so much later, most population models only go into the future 50 years or so and do not consider potential future technologies impact on society. So it's hard to say what the future brings.


----------



## KillerZavatar

and yeah case in point for density, the most populated place on earth that ever existed was kowloon walled city with an estimated 50000 people (many unregistered, so hard to say how many exactly) and a population density of close to 2 million / km^2. At the highest point it only reached like 50m and was 14 floors and most places where 10 or 11 floors. With that density, you would only need the space equal to two Hong Kong to cram the whole world population in (if Hong Kong didn't have mountains). While it is understandable that Kowloon walled city had to be cleared of people and demolished due to fire hazards, i still consider the complete destruction a huge loss and wish more parts would have been kept standing, especially taller parts, they pretty much only kept 1 story parts standing.


----------



## Urban-cat

^^ is this district to be demolished?


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Urban-cat said:


> ^^ is this district to be demolished?


It was, years ago.


----------



## thestealthyartist

They turned it into a park and kept some of the really short buildings.

Honestly I don't really miss the taller ones, they leaned on each other for support anyways so leaving one standing would make it a hazard.


----------



## thestealthyartist

Change of topic here but which country do you think will likely produce the most 500M+ buildings in the near future? China's banned buildings above that height, Dubai doesn't seem rich enough to keep building any more, Jeddah's tower wasn't feasible from the beginning, and Kuala Lumpur likely won't either, from what I've seen so far. 

Maybe the US, even though they don't seem too interested in doing this either? They do have Affirmation Tower proposed and it breaks 500M.


----------



## Cadaeib

thestealthyartist said:


> Change of topic here but which country do you think will likely produce the most 500M+ buildings in the near future? China's banned buildings above that height, Dubai doesn't seem rich enough to keep building any more, Jeddah's tower wasn't feasible from the beginning, and Kuala Lumpur likely won't either, from what I've seen so far.
> 
> Maybe the US, even though they don't seem too interested in doing this either? They do have Affirmation Tower proposed and it breaks 500M.


First I would say that Jeddah Tower was feasible. It would have brought to Saudi Arabia an international prestige that would have benefit to the whole country. Also the prince Al-Walig was rich enough to finish the construction but he was arrested. 

My guess is South East Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia Thailand but also India) in the next years then Africa in about 25 years. 3D Printing, robotic and new materials will allow a drastic reduction in building cost, increasing their economic viability. Some South American cities could also build 500m+ towers in 10 years. I think there will be new projects in United States because I don't see traditionnal skyscrapers cities like New York or Chicago stopping construction. 

In the second part of the century I guess that countries like Nigeria, Cameoun, Egypt, Tan_z_ania and Sudan will lead the construction of megatalls. 
There is an enormous demographic growth in Africa so that would make sense. 

And maybe someday in a far future we'll see megatalls rising in Martian cities  Imagine what would be possible with lower gravity


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

Cadaeib said:


> And maybe someday in a far future we'll see megatalls rising in Martian cities  Imagine what would be possible with lower gravity


A planet without an atmosphere to incinerate falling meteorites, and without a magnetosphere to deflect cosmic radiation. Building tall on the surface might not be the way to go. I think "Megadeeps" would be a more likely prospect for Mars.


----------



## DeaconG

Kyll.Ing. said:


> A planet without an atmosphere to incinerate falling meteorites, and without a magnetosphere to deflect cosmic radiation. Building tall on the surface might not be the way to go. I think "Megadeeps" would be a more likely prospect for Mars.


Most SF stories that were written about Mars makes the conclusion that either domed or subterranean habitats would be the norm. I could definitely see a complex that would extend downward to become an arcology with multiple levels of commercial, residential and habitat space. Eventually you could connect these complexes together and spread out while seeding the planet with comets for oxygen and water, keeping your industrial and mining facilities separate.
Of course, you know Weyland/Yutani will build the Goldin Finance Arcology Borehole and whoopsie...


----------



## KillerZavatar

thestealthyartist said:


> Change of topic here but which country do you think will likely produce the most 500M+ buildings in the near future? China's banned buildings above that height, Dubai doesn't seem rich enough to keep building any more, Jeddah's tower wasn't feasible from the beginning, and Kuala Lumpur likely won't either, from what I've seen so far.
> 
> Maybe the US, even though they don't seem too interested in doing this either? They do have Affirmation Tower proposed and it breaks 500M.


I think this may be the wrong question. Asking about countries when maybe only 1 city actually builds 500m buildings. So it'll probably make more sense to talk about which cities could build these type of buildings. New York certainly has made it's case for ultra skinny 500m buildings for the ultra rich. We have seen office megatalls being quite hard to fill up and a building only servicing under 100 buildings seems to be easier to pull off effectively. This trend might continue, but might not only happen in New York. We saw similar project draw attention in Mexico and Brazil as well, and those projects sell because of the views, so we could see potential buildings like that in many cities that have a high amount of rich people living there. For office buildings the only real contenders are large cities, or cities with serious ambition, however. We have seen time and time again that Kuala Lumpur can punch above it's weight for example.


----------



## ssoott

I'm not comfortable with the idea of going deep instead of tall. Because, you know, maybe someone will start Umbrella Corporation down there... So let's aim high for now.


----------



## KillerZavatar

ssoott said:


> I'm not comfortable with the idea of going deep instead of tall. Because, you know, maybe someone will start Umbrella Corporation down there... So let's aim high for now.


People value windows and a good view, I don't think much residential space will be done under ground, but the way we currently do it, by moving retail space and transportation under ground is very good I think. If you have better transportation spaces, you can remove streets to increase density as well as walkability above ground, and by relocating some of the retail below ground you can also have more green spaces above.


----------



## kenamour

because of I can’t replie in the creek tower thread，I just want to say that creek tower is 828m according to Ctbuh
and it is U/C guys


----------



## Kyll.Ing.

kenamour said:


> because of I can’t replie in the creek tower thread，I just want to say that creek tower is 828m according to Ctbuh
> and it is U/C guys


Yeah, it has been listed as such for a long, long time. 

The listed height is just because that's the only official figure Emaar has quoted: "Taller than Burj Khalifa". The U/C status is probably because Emaar is a CTBUH member that does not want to lose face by admitting that their tower is utter vapourware having some issues.


----------



## Cadaeib




----------



## kenamour

Cadaeib said:


> View attachment 3375937


what this 😂


----------

