Originally posted by: Eli
:laugh:Originally posted by: Baked
One of these days redneck terrorists from US will return the favor of blowing up giant buildings on foreign soil. You just wait and watch.
I mean, not that it would really be funny.. but the image that puts in my head is effing hilarious.
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Is the worlds tallest building becoming a penis envy thing? Who has the tallest Richard?
Not "becoming", it always has been. It's just been that in the past the wealth to accomplish it was found mostly in the US. Then it moved to the Pacific Rim and now it's in the Middle East. There is absolutely no reason to build something like that in that part of the world. There's plenty of land and a complex of shorter and wider buildings is much more efficient and cost effective. Status is the only reason to do it. They're doing it solely because they can.
It seems like the tallest building thing has died down in the US the last several decades. It seems like once you get above 100 stories you start having issues with elevator capacity etc.
Elevator capacity, access, parking, building costs, etc. There are a lot of reasons not to go supertall and only one to do it: To prove that you have enough money to piss it away on a very inefficient design.
At least in NYC you could justify the inefficient design with the fact you couldn't build out and had to build up....
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Is the worlds tallest building becoming a penis envy thing? Who has the tallest Richard?
Not "becoming", it always has been. It's just been that in the past the wealth to accomplish it was found mostly in the US. Then it moved to the Pacific Rim and now it's in the Middle East. There is absolutely no reason to build something like that in that part of the world. There's plenty of land and a complex of shorter and wider buildings is much more efficient and cost effective. Status is the only reason to do it. They're doing it solely because they can.
It seems like the tallest building thing has died down in the US the last several decades. It seems like once you get above 100 stories you start having issues with elevator capacity etc.
Elevator capacity, access, parking, building costs, etc. There are a lot of reasons not to go supertall and only one to do it: To prove that you have enough money to piss it away on a very inefficient design.
At least in NYC you could justify the inefficient design with the fact you couldn't build out and had to build up....
I think NYC and Tokyo are some of the few areas that you can justify a tall skyscraper. However personally these skyscrapers approaching 1000 meters in height are really more about showing off than being efficient.
Originally posted by: Shlong
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Is the worlds tallest building becoming a penis envy thing? Who has the tallest Richard?
Not "becoming", it always has been. It's just been that in the past the wealth to accomplish it was found mostly in the US. Then it moved to the Pacific Rim and now it's in the Middle East. There is absolutely no reason to build something like that in that part of the world. There's plenty of land and a complex of shorter and wider buildings is much more efficient and cost effective. Status is the only reason to do it. They're doing it solely because they can.
It seems like the tallest building thing has died down in the US the last several decades. It seems like once you get above 100 stories you start having issues with elevator capacity etc.
Elevator capacity, access, parking, building costs, etc. There are a lot of reasons not to go supertall and only one to do it: To prove that you have enough money to piss it away on a very inefficient design.
At least in NYC you could justify the inefficient design with the fact you couldn't build out and had to build up....
I think NYC and Tokyo are some of the few areas that you can justify a tall skyscraper. However personally these skyscrapers approaching 1000 meters in height are really more about showing off than being efficient.
Hong Kong as well, it's blocked by mountains and water.
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Shlong
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Brovane
Is the worlds tallest building becoming a penis envy thing? Who has the tallest Richard?
Not "becoming", it always has been. It's just been that in the past the wealth to accomplish it was found mostly in the US. Then it moved to the Pacific Rim and now it's in the Middle East. There is absolutely no reason to build something like that in that part of the world. There's plenty of land and a complex of shorter and wider buildings is much more efficient and cost effective. Status is the only reason to do it. They're doing it solely because they can.
It seems like the tallest building thing has died down in the US the last several decades. It seems like once you get above 100 stories you start having issues with elevator capacity etc.
Elevator capacity, access, parking, building costs, etc. There are a lot of reasons not to go supertall and only one to do it: To prove that you have enough money to piss it away on a very inefficient design.
At least in NYC you could justify the inefficient design with the fact you couldn't build out and had to build up....
I think NYC and Tokyo are some of the few areas that you can justify a tall skyscraper. However personally these skyscrapers approaching 1000 meters in height are really more about showing off than being efficient.
Hong Kong as well, it's blocked by mountains and water.
While there's some slight justification to do it in New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong and Taiwan it was more ego that logistics. There was never a reason to take the heights to the extremes. In a tight area 50 stories might make sense, 100+ didn't. Not in New York, Tokyo or anywhere else. The World Trade Center was a complete joke, it was never fully occupied and many of the tenants were paying very little just to get them in the door. There simply wasn't the demand for office space in NYC to justify that type of building and there never was. They built it big because they could, not because there was a need to do so.