How high is high

Already the tallest man made structure , when it is completed next year the
Burj Dubai Skyscraper will top out over 1/2 mile high above the Persian gulf
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,414341,00.html
If you happen to work on one of the upper floors you will be able to arrive
just in time to punch out and go home again.

[url][/url]


What is now known as the GE Building , 30 Rockefeller Plaza was completed in 1933.
It has 69 floors and is 259 meters in height. See view from the 70th floor observatory
HERE -> http://www.topoftherocknyc.com/welcome/default.aspx
Use the RED slide bar just below the picture to pan the view

Here is a looming view from it of the neo-gothic Saint Patrick's cathedral below it,
completed in 1878 it's spires rise 100 meters from street level.

[url][/url]

The Burj will be over three times as tall as the Rockefeller building and eight times
taller than the cathedral, which for it's time and all of previous history was as high
as things ever got.
The Great Pyramid of Giza, Pyramid of Cheops or Khufu's Pyramid in Egypt, at 146 meters
original height was the tallest man made structure in the world for over 3,800 years until
the 160 meter tall spire of Lincoln Cathedral was completed in some 60 years at around
1310 A.D., itself the tallest building in the world for over 200 years until it's spire collapsed
in 1549 by what actuaries might describe as an act of god.
The pyramid was constructed over a 20 year period and completed about 2560 B.C.
For comparison the 102 story 381 meter tall empire state building was completed
in 1931 after just 410 days.

The observation that computation speed and capability doubles every 18 months
is known as Moore's law. Can it be there is a similar trend underway in building
construction ? It won't be long before another one steps up to proclaim mine's
bigger than yours.

.

[Edited on 7-9-2008 by franklyn]

Obviously an insufficient man's phallic quest for length. But then, insufficient women's structures would be rounder, taking up more volume but alas failing to meet the same impressive height records.

Tim

Nor is the trend limited to verticle erection, there are also pronounced horizontal exploits
Since it's opening in 2005 the Millau Viaduct has been an instant tourist attraction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct

Click the picture to see the super colossal image


.

Base jumping anyone ?

The earliest skyscrapers date to the first decade of the 20th century which
is a sign of endurance. I was in the Flatiron building also known as the Fuller
building and 23 skidoo, which dates from 1902, and it seemed fine to me.
Those corner offices though are very small, barely big enough for a desk
and side chair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatiron_Building

Click the picture to see the super colossal image




Here is a view of the Faltiron as seen from a webcam on the 55th floor
of the Empire state building
http://empirecam.acronym.com


For reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper#History_of_tallest_s...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_th...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_s...

Whether a construction will last depends to a great deal if it is subjected to
warfare including the unconventional sort. The World Trade Center is now history.
So much was destroyed in the second world war that although much has been
restored none is the original, is it. The Hermitage in Russia dates mostly now
from the post war era. The relics of antiquity can hardly be said to have lasted,
the Coliseum in Rome and the Parthenon in Athens and all the rest in Egypt
are all ruins, Venice is barely holding its own and has markedly degraded in
living memory.

The Millau bridge was designed with a lifespan of 120 years, that's about what
the Brooklyn bridge has lasted, with proper maintenance who knows. I have seen
personally the roman aqueduct at Segovia Spain, that has lasted 1900 years
and it's basically just a pile of stones that are stacked together without mortar.
It has undergone some recent maintenance and to this day still carries water.
But thats Spain for you, the oldest restaurant in Madrid dates from 1725
Fraunces Tavern in New York dates to 1762, although the building is earlier 1719
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqueduct_of_Segovia

Click the picture to see the super colossal image



.

[Edited on 8-9-2008 by franklyn]

Quote:

Originally posted by 12AX7 Obviously an insufficient man's phallic quest for length. But then, insufficient women's structures would be rounder, taking up more volume but alas failing to meet the same impressive height records. Tim

Will this do ya

For grandiosity of scale few can beat Buckminster Fuller's scheme of enveloping cities
http://www.waltlockley.com/manhattandome/domeappendix.htm

Here is a view from inside of the Montreal Biosphere
and some more here _

http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty_projects/terri/...




.

Well I've been to some good parties, but, I came across this chart today - might be interesting to some?


[Edited on 18-9-2008 by DrP]

Past and Future

Still in the hypothetical stage , building castles in the sky is the last frontier
transcending architecture. Buildings are a very mature technology, 5000
years ago when they were proposed for the first time it was innovative.
What have we done lately. Frank Lloyd Wright shrinks to mundane in
comparison to Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin.

Oh, I do miss those two towers... I've taken a look through one of the cameras on Empire State Building and it suddenly showed Freedom Tower. Here's the photo.

I have almost no sympathies for the overall design of the whole site. It's too generic. There's nothing special about that tower that would say "NYC". The Towers were icons, bold and easily remembered. Paint a sillhouette of a city and two fat stripes and everyone knows where that is. Freedom Tower? Oh, the irony and bland, sold out "architecture". :/

[Edited on 16-8-2013 by Endimion17]

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

Oh, I do miss those two towers. The Towers were icons, bold and easily remembered. Paint a sillhouette of a city and two fat stripes and everyone knows where that is. Freedom Tower? Oh, the irony and bland, sold out "architecture"

Transferred to an R&D lab in NY in 81, all I had for a camera was a crappy 110 film POS as my 35 mm had been lifted a few days prior. Had a local snap a pic of me with the WTC as a backdrop. Really wish I had owned my DSC-F717 digital still camera back then. Resolution is so poor with hopefully obsolete 110. No doubt they stood out compared to all the buildings around them.

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

...............I have almost no sympathies for the overall design of the whole site. It's too generic. There's nothing special about that tower that would say "NYC". The Towers were icons, bold and easily remembered. Paint a sillhouette of a city and two fat stripes and everyone knows where that is. Freedom Tower? Oh, the irony and bland, sold out "architecture".

Quote: Originally posted by IrC

Transferred to an R&D lab in NY in 81, all I had for a camera was a crappy 110 film POS as my 35 mm had been lifted a few days prior. Had a local snap a pic of me with the WTC as a backdrop. Really wish I had owned my DSC-F717 digital still camera back then. Resolution is so poor with hopefully obsolete 110. No doubt they stood out compared to all the buildings around them.

110, I've still got one unexposed cassette. There's no way I could develop it today without spending lots of money, so I keep it in the refrigerator. One day, who knows...

I've got some photos from the 70's, while the North Tower still had nothing on its top except few small antennas. Some of my family members went to NY on a tourist trip and, although they've captured nice shots while cruising the Hudson river, they never went to actually visit the site. I don't know why.

I have a few brochures from that decade, even this postcard.

It must've been amazing to go to that beach Battery Park City is now located on.

The sun, the sand and two giant silver monoliths, and sometimes public art. Amazing.

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

The race for the highest building continues. In 2018 the "Burj al Mamlakah" in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) must be completed (it currently is under construction). This tower will have a height of just over 1 km: http://www.urbanfile.org/blog/2012/06/jeddah-kingdom-tower-%...

Quote: Originally posted by jock88

There would have been no better two fingered salute than to build the two towers back, just as they were, to the last inch. [Edited on 16-8-2013 by jock88]

Lords of the rings

I seem to have triggered a lot of sentimental reminiscences.
My recollection of the World Trade Center complex of buildings
was that it presumed to be a self contained city but did so
awkwardly , as if it was reaching , but fell short of the goal.
This I attribute to it's conception as a bigger version of just
another building. Anything that extensive in scale requires
considerable human amenities without which the structure
is barren and uninviting , as if the inhabitants are alien to it.
Traveling vertically within it I had a sense of concern for
what could happen should there be an emergency and
leaving it fast became a priority. My thought was to have
a glass cutter and a sport fishing reel of high tensile line to
bust out and rappel myself to the ground.

__________________________________________


Gerard O’Neill’s High Frontier near earth space colonization
working group termed L5 society undertook serious study
of visionary projects to develop living habitats in space. In
a weightless environment megastructures of unprecedented
size are entirely feasible , providing there is a cheap enough
method to lift material off the earth's surface for their
construction. An electromagnetic driver /launcher would
accelerate capsules to a six mile per second speed to reach
the low earth orbit of manned space vehicles. http://bit.ly/lZiYQR


Click the pictures for video










— No one can say our generation wasn't bold —


"We choose to go to the moon. Not because it is easy , but because it is hard."
— John Fitzgerald Kennedy — September 12, 1962

www.youtube.com/embed/g25G1M4EXrQ

.

Chew Coca

Quote: Originally posted by Paddywhacker

High is when you become confused about whether you are inhaling or exhaling and hold your breath until the anoxia makes you panic.

Can you top this ?

In view of the precedent of 911 , structures which by their very existence is like
waving a cape at a bull should more so consider defensive measures as those
employed by naval vessels to counter missiles. An exclusion no fly zone
surrounding such buildings would be needed.

C L I C K image for animation

Quote: Originally posted by Bert

I am a major buzz kill. So I am thinking: End of life demolition plans? We know the materials are NOT spec'd to last as long as the great pyramid, especially those built in areas with substantial rainfall... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Bank_Building

Quote: Originally posted by Paddywhacker

High is when you become confused about whether you are inhaling or exhaling and hod your breath until the anoxia makes you panic.

+How high are you?
-No, officer, it's "Hi. How are you?".

OK, right, to the point. I consider a building as high when its prominence (relative to the other buildings) is significant. I don't think that you can actually get height into absolute terms: Ben Nevis is relatively high, but if you place it in the Himalayas it will have a similar effect to defecating in the US Senate. In fact, I consider a building high in absolute terms only if observing the building could cause pain to my neck. More or less.

[Edited on 10-11-2014 by Eddygp]