JEDDAH | Kingdom Tower | 3,303 FT / 1007 M | ON HOLD - Page 6

gellithy · #**101** Posted **Mar 14, 2008, 5:45 PM**

does anyone know about the foundation system proposed for this building? Generally, I think there are many serious problems in this world worth spending money on. But... it's their money...

JDRCRASH · #**102** Posted **Mar 14, 2008, 5:56 PM**

Deep down inside, I feel the same way. But yes, it is they're money now.

BTW, you kinda bumped a dead thread, but it's okay.

Aleks · #**103** Posted **Mar 17, 2008, 5:01 AM**

What happened to this building anyways? Is it still proposed? I say build it.

We should add a Canceled Buildings Sub-forum.

JDRCRASH · #**104** Posted **Mar 17, 2008, 3:43 PM**

I believe it's still just a proposal, but rumors have been flying around that its cancelled.

MolsonExport · #**105** Posted **Mar 17, 2008, 5:11 PM**

Aim higher: Build the space elevator.

ATLksuGUY · #**106** Posted **Mar 23, 2008, 3:02 PM**

"We should add a Canceled Buildings Sub-forum."

Agreed, much needed.

JDRCRASH · #**107** Posted **Mar 24, 2008, 1:31 AM**

Yeah, that would be interesting. We could talk about the dead proposals that could've gone through and what those projects could have brought, whether good or bad.

myshtern · #**108** Posted **Mar 25, 2008, 4:51 PM**

Forbes Reports:
http://www.forbes.com/video/?video=f...oxes=popvideos

Any details?

JDRCRASH · #**109** Posted **Mar 25, 2008, 4:54 PM**

There is already a thread on this:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=135116

As for the tower, it is technically still a proposal.

Chriss · #**110** Posted **Mar 25, 2008, 5:29 PM**

I don't like the idea of a building that requires active rather than passive stabilization systems.

Blackouts happen, back-up systems fail, etc. It's not like, say, a nuclear reactor that can be shut down - it's a building, and the only way it recovers from instability is by coming down.

JDRCRASH · #**111** Posted **Mar 28, 2008, 8:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chriss

I don't like the idea of a building that requires active rather than passive stabilization systems.

Blackouts happen, back-up systems fail, etc. It's not like, say, a nuclear reactor that can be shut down - it's a building, and the only way it recovers from instability is by coming down.

...........huh?

theWatusi · #**112** Posted **Mar 28, 2008, 10:07 PM**

They should build it and construct a walkway from the top floor to Denver.

The mile high walkway.

Another Jake · #**113** Posted **Mar 31, 2008, 7:58 PM**

In the news: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1811
via Drudge

JDRCRASH · #**114** Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 4:17 AM**

It looks like a freakin' Spaceship........

gttx · #**115** Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 1:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

...........huh?

A passive stabilization system is used by most (well, all) buildings - essentially they are self-supported and do not need any electronic monitoring to react to large lateral forces. In tall buildings, larger passive stabilization systems are things like outrigger systems and tuned mass dampers; the latter causes the building to "self-adjust" to lateral loads from wind or even seismic events.

Because of the enormous forces this tower would see - and because of its sheer size - such a passive system would not be possible. Instead, it would require computer monitoring and real-time adjustment through new, "active" stabilization systems. The system itself would be revolutionary, but, as with anything that does not really solely on gravity, has the potential to fail under particular scenarios - some outlined by Chriss. I believe Burj Dubai uses a combination of passive and active systems.

JDRCRASH · #**116** Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 5:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttx

A passive stabilization system is used by most (well, all) buildings - essentially they are self-supported and do not need any electronic monitoring to react to large lateral forces. In tall buildings, larger passive stabilization systems are things like outrigger systems and tuned mass dampers; the latter causes the building to "self-adjust" to lateral loads from wind or even seismic events.

Because of the enormous forces this tower would see - and because of its sheer size - such a passive system would not be possible. Instead, it would require computer monitoring and real-time adjustment through new, "active" stabilization systems. The system itself would be revolutionary, but, as with anything that does not really solely on gravity, has the potential to fail under particular scenarios - some outlined by Chriss. I believe Burj Dubai uses a combination of passive and active systems.

I remember hearing something about this in the Shimizu's Pyramid on "MegaStructures" and "Extreme Engineering".

Manahata · #**117** Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 11:38 PM**

Saudi prince reveals plans for Mile High Tower in Saudi desert town

BY BILL HUTCHINSON
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, April 1st 2008, 4:00 AM

A mega-rich Saudi prince revealed plans Monday to erect the world's tallest skyscraper, a 5,250-foot behemoth more than triple the height of the Empire State Building.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, 51, said his Mile High Tower will rise in the Saudi Arabian desert town of Jidda.

The prince said the building will cost about $10 billion and bids to build it will be accepted in July.

Designed by British-based engineers, the building will dwarf the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower being built at Ground Zero, and be twice the size of the reigning world's tallest building, the Burj Dubai skyscraper in Dubai.

From the top of the Mile High Tower, visitors will be able to see North Africa and the Indian Ocean.

Tom In Chicago · #**118** Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 3:46 PM**

Please keep your posts relevent to the discussion of this building. . . editorial comments about Arabs/oil/why-this-building?etc. will be removed. . . do not reply to this post. . . if you have issues with what I have to say about it feel free to PM me. . .

tintinex · #**119** Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 4:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manahata

Saudi prince reveals plans for Mile High Tower in Saudi desert town

BY BILL HUTCHINSON
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, April 1st 2008, 4:00 AM

A mega-rich Saudi prince revealed plans Monday to erect the world's tallest skyscraper, a 5,250-foot behemoth more than triple the height of the Empire State Building.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, 51, said his Mile High Tower will rise in the Saudi Arabian desert town of Jidda.

The prince said the building will cost about $10 billion and bids to build it will be accepted in July.

Designed by British-based engineers, the building will dwarf the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower being built at Ground Zero, and be twice the size of the reigning world's tallest building, the Burj Dubai skyscraper in Dubai.

From the top of the Mile High Tower, visitors will be able to see North Africa and the Indian Ocean.

source link please?

Manahata · #**120** Posted **Apr 3, 2008, 12:41 AM**

[QUOTE=migueltorres;3457003]source link please?[/QUOTE

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_w...mile_high.html