Dubai skyscraper world's tallest


Recommended Posts

1.jpg

An unfinished skyscraper in the Persian Gulf state of Dubai has become the world's tallest building, its developers say.

Emaar Properties said the 512m (1,680ft) Burj Dubai is now taller than Taiwan's 508m (1,667ft) Taipei 101.

It is thought Burj Dubai will eventually be 693m (2,275ft) tall.

Height records are contentious, with dispute over what defines a "building" and what is being measured - height to the top floor or the tower's antenna.

When finished the building is expected to meet the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat's four criteria - the height of the structural top, highest occupied floor, the roof's top, and the spire's highest point - to become the world's tallest structure.

"Burj Dubai has now reached 141 storeys, more storeys than any other building in the world," the company said in a statement.

There is speculation that, spire included, the final height could be more than 800m, but Emaar is keeping structural details secret.

'Symbol of Dubai'

When finished, the skyscraper will have more than 160 floors, 56 elevators, apartments, shops, swimming pools, spas, corporate suites, Italian fashion designer Giorgio Armani's first hotel, and an observation platform on the 124th floor.

To qualify as a building, a structure has to have floors and walls all the way to its roof.

The tower is also expected to break the record for highest man-made structure, currently held by the wire-assisted KVLY-TV mast in North Dakota, US, which is 628m (2,072ft) tall.

"It's a symbol of Dubai as a city of the world," Greg Sang, the project director for Emaar Properties, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press.

Chairman Mohammed Ali Alabbar said Dubai has "resisted the usual and has inspired to build a global icon," according to AP.

"It's a human achievement without equal."

Building began on the structure on 21 September 2004, and is expected to be completed in 2008.

The spire of the building is expected to be able to be seen from 100km (60 miles) away.

"It's a fact of life that, at some point, someone else will build a taller building," Mr Sang said.

"There's a lot of talk of other tall buildings, but five years into Burj Dubai's construction, no one's started building them yet."

Previous skyscraper record-holders include New York's Empire State Building at 381m (1,250 ft); Shanghai's Jin Mao Building at 421m (1,381 ft); Chicago's Sears Tower at 442m (1,451 ft) and Malaysia's Petronas Towers at 452m (1,483 ft).

The CN Tower, in Toronto, Canada, is the world's tallest freestanding structure, at 553m (1,815.3 ft).

(BBC)

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/575694-dubai-skyscraper-worlds-tallest/
Share on other sites

While being the world's tallest building probably held some esteem back in the day, it's just a little silly now. Everything will be outdone in due time. What frustrated me most about the Dubai tower was that the building wasn't built as a solution to anything, it was mostly built as a place to pour oil money into like all their other crazy projects (Palm Islands, The World Island, Indoor Skiing, etc). It doesn't even follow any skyline form, most of the buildings around there are barely nubs and this is going to tower above and beyond anything. Atleast the other tall buildings in the world were part of city planning to some extent. If anyone interested in skyscrapers hasn't checked out skyscraperpage.com yet, then it's well worth it. Also, check out this image link at their page for a current top ten buildings to scale.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?1241105

I still thought the Petronas Towers were still the tallest. I guess not. :)

No, they were replaced by Taipei 101 in 2004.

Sears Tower FTW!!

Seriously, these are all imitations just to take the title. They add a bit of spires at the top, and they think they can claim the title. The genuine McCoy is the Sears Tower, no doubt about it.

Well, you could say that but then again that is not entirely true. Petronas Twin Towers was the tallest building in the world simply because the spire is considered part of the building. The Sears Tower has a radio antenna, which does not make it part of the building. Taipei 101 rightly outstrips both of these towers by a few meters, floor and spire wise.

However, I prefer both the Taipei 101 and the Petronas Twin Towers simply because the design itself is unique to the country it is situated in. Petronas Twin Towers for its Islamic and Malaysian design and its unique two deck bridge and the Taipei 101 for the use of Feng Shui in its construction and the unique bamboo shape and design. The Taipei 101 also a has mass damper on top of the tower to help steady itself in high winds, something which I find unique. And of course, instead of one tower, we have two identical Petronas towers and will probably have it for a long time (unless someone has about 1 billion dollars to spare to beat both towers :p ).

For me the Sears Tower looks like any other building in any other city, no offense. The Empire State building design was synonymous with New York, no matter how you look. For the Sears Tower, nothing stands out for it distinguished itself against others.

While being the world's tallest building probably held some esteem back in the day, it's just a little silly now. Everything will be outdone in due time. What frustrated me most about the Dubai tower was that the building wasn't built as a solution to anything, it was mostly built as a place to pour oil money into like all their other crazy projects (Palm Islands, The World Island, Indoor Skiing, etc). It doesn't even follow any skyline form, most of the buildings around there are barely nubs and this is going to tower above and beyond anything. Atleast the other tall buildings in the world were part of city planning to some extent. If anyone interested in skyscrapers hasn't checked out skyscraperpage.com yet, then it's well worth it. Also, check out this image link at their page for a current top ten buildings to scale.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?1241105

I agree with you. But I still believe people will build tall buildings simply because they want to break the 2000ft barrier. That is where nearly all the architects these days are aiming for. Once that is broken, then it becomes pointless to build any taller than that as NOBODY wants to work at a height of 2000ft or more. I hope by then design takes centre stage as that is the only way to distinguish other towers from each other.

As for the Burj Dubai, there's not much making it unique from other towers (it looks similar to Freedom Tower). The one thing I can make out is that it's in the middle of an artificial oasis. I wonder what the foundations are like if the oasis is true.

Scirwode

CN ISN"T A building. It's a structure. Unless the spire on top is over 500meter then it won't be.

there is a difference, and CN is and continues to be the Worlds Tallest Free Standing Structure.

CN ISN"T A building. It's a structure. Unless the spire on top is over 500meter then it won't be.

there is a difference, and CN is and continues to be the Worlds Tallest Free Standing Structure.

Until the Burj overtakes it.

buildings are NOT free standing ...

There is a difference between a building and a free standing structure.

So what holds a "building" up and what holds a "free standing structure" up?

Since 1976, the tallest freestanding structure on land has been the CN Tower in Toronto, Ontario, with a height of 553.33 meters (1,815 ft). The Burj Dubai in Dubai, United Arab Emirates will take both this title and that of world's tallest building upon its planned completion in 2009, if it reaches its planned height of over 800 meters (2,625 ft).

tallestbuildingfull.PNG

The CN Tower is the tallest STRUCTURE on land that doesn't have guay cables because it has it's own concrete structure that provides support. The others are buildings that are defined by some council.

See All About Sky Scrapers who does an awesome job explaining it ...

No, they were replaced by Taipei 101 in 2004.

Well, you could say that but then again that is not entirely true. Petronas Twin Towers was the tallest building in the world simply because the spire is considered part of the building. The Sears Tower has a radio antenna, which does not make it part of the building. Taipei 101 rightly outstrips both of these towers by a few meters, floor and spire wise.

However, I prefer both the Taipei 101 and the Petronas Twin Towers simply because the design itself is unique to the country it is situated in. Petronas Twin Towers for its Islamic and Malaysian design and its unique two deck bridge and the Taipei 101 for the use of Feng Shui in its construction and the unique bamboo shape and design. The Taipei 101 also a has mass damper on top of the tower to help steady itself in high winds, something which I find unique. And of course, instead of one tower, we have two identical Petronas towers and will probably have it for a long time (unless someone has about 1 billion dollars to spare to beat both towers :p ).

For me the Sears Tower looks like any other building in any other city, no offense. The Empire State building design was synonymous with New York, no matter how you look. For the Sears Tower, nothing stands out for it distinguished itself against others.

I agree with you. But I still believe people will build tall buildings simply because they want to break the 2000ft barrier. That is where nearly all the architects these days are aiming for. Once that is broken, then it becomes pointless to build any taller than that as NOBODY wants to work at a height of 2000ft or more. I hope by then design takes centre stage as that is the only way to distinguish other towers from each other.

As for the Burj Dubai, there's not much making it unique from other towers (it looks similar to Freedom Tower). The one thing I can make out is that it's in the middle of an artificial oasis. I wonder what the foundations are like if the oasis is true.

Scirwode

See the thing about sears tower is that the newer towers that the tops for the most part were simply added to take the title, especially in the case of the Petronas towers, which are only taller then the actual sears tower structure because of its mast. Now of course the new tower in Dubai has a legit claim to the title. In my opinion though nothing is more impressive. The fact that it was build over 75 years ago is amazing. 75 years for something like that in the modern world is sort of like how the pyramids were to the ancient world.

See the thing about sears tower is that the newer towers that the tops for the most part were simply added to take the title, especially in the case of the Petronas towers, which are only taller then the actual sears tower structure because of its mast. Now of course the new tower in Dubai has a legit claim to the title. In my opinion though nothing is more impressive. The fact that it was build over 75 years ago is amazing. 75 years for something like that in the modern world is sort of like how the pyramids were to the ancient world.

Heh? Since when was the Sears Tower built 75 years ago :blink: ? In fact I'm not even sure what you're trying to say to be honest. We can argue it all day but the fact of the matter is Petronas strips the Sears using its spire, Taiwan strips the Petronas in building height but both do not outstrip the radio tower of Sears. All things considered, the Burj Dubai will outstrip them all and leave them in the dust (no pun intended :p ).

Scirwode

Buildings including Burj Dubai is considered a free standing structure, there are no support cables that hold them up. I know where you are arguing at, having one single solid foundation as its fundamental framework, but other than the antenna masts that have diagonal wires as support, buildings are considered free standing in itself. Therefore buildings are free standing structures.

Every time I am reminded of the Twin Towers, two near identical 110 story buildings side by side, just astonishing.

All right, according to the "Rules" of The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (which is an international organization that runs this stuff),

But add to this trouble people started saying the CN Tower should be counted as a 'building' so it could get the label of the tallest building. But technically, observation towers and communications towers are considered structures, not buildings, because they are not habitable. They do not have residential or office space. The CN Tower is only a pole of concrete with an observation deck on top. So, as far as im concerned the CN Tower is not a building, it is considered just a structure. So, how could you call it the tallest building?

Source: All About Skyscrapers.com

CN Tower is a structure, since you can't live or have large office spaces. The Burj Dubai is a BUILDING since it has massive amounts of office / living space.

And the Worlds Tallest Tower according to CTBUH rules, is the CN Tower, see here.

I don't know why you're defending so hard on the CN Tower lol but it was your statement of "CN Tower remains to be the tallest free standing structure" that started the argument. I just want to say that Burj Dubai is 1) the tallest free standing structure/building/skyscraper 2) the world's tallest structure (while under construction) and 3) world's tallest building. How you would define the purpose or quality to the building under Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, or say Emporis, is up to you, but the important thing is that a building is more important and dominant than a structure, and the amount of tenant space yields building efficiency, and the "Council/Emporis" usually grade buildings and neglects structures.

Don't get me wrong though, I live 10 minutes from the CN Tower, I'm a proud Canadian to have CN Tower reign as the tallest tower/free standing structure in the world, but when it comes to Burj Dubai, it totally dominates the skyscrapers and structures race to be the tallest, it will be at the top of the list for a pretty damn long time.

Heh? Since when was the Sears Tower built 75 years ago :blink: ? In fact I'm not even sure what you're trying to say to be honest. We can argue it all day but the fact of the matter is Petronas strips the Sears using its spire, Taiwan strips the Petronas in building height but both do not outstrip the radio tower of Sears. All things considered, the Burj Dubai will outstrip them all and leave them in the dust (no pun intended :p ).

Scirwode

I meant to say the empire state building in that part

Heh? Since when was the Sears Tower built 75 years ago :blink: ? In fact I'm not even sure what you're trying to say to be honest. We can argue it all day but the fact of the matter is Petronas strips the Sears using its spire, Taiwan strips the Petronas in building height but both do not outstrip the radio tower of Sears. All things considered, the Burj Dubai will outstrip them all and leave them in the dust (no pun intended :p ).

Scirwode

I think he meant the Empire State Building; completed in just 410 days (1930-1931.)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • With Microsoft now listening to its core audience and acting upon received feedback, fans can finally expect a much better version of Windows 11 than what was available five years ago. Here is to five more years, Windows 11! I guess we all need a good laugh now and again...
    • Amazon Prime Day 2026 deal sees Samsung Odyssey 49" 240Hz QD-OLED monitor at lowest price by Sayan Sen Earlier today we covered a very good deal on JBL's BAR 800 Dolby Atmos soundbar system as the unit is available for just $600 as part of Amazon Prime Day 2026 deals. That's not all though as there are many more discounts to choose from. If you are looking for a high-end monitor, Samsung's 49 inch G9 QD-OLED gaming monitor is a solid deal too as it's currently just $855 (purchase link under the specs table down below). It is a super-ultrawide (32:9) 1440p curved gaming monitor and as such should offer a very immersive experience. The G93SC is a 49-inch QD-OLED (Quantum Dot OLED) screen and that means it should have excellent contrast as well as color reproduction. Brightness is a bit lacking though so if you are looking to set it up in a relatively bright room, you may be better off with something else. Speaking of external light and brightness, the major difference on the G93SC vs the newer G93SD is that the latter comes with Samsung's "Glare Free" technology to reduce glare while the C model packs a glossy finish. The technical specifications of the Samsung G93SC are given in the table below: Specification Value Panel Type OLED Screen Shape Curved Screen Curvature 1800R Resolution DQHD (5120 × 1440) Aspect Ratio 32:9 Brightness (Typical) 250 cd/m² Brightness (Minimum) 200 cd/m² Contrast Ratio 1,000,000:1 HDR Support VESA DisplayHDR True Black 400 HDR10+ HDR10+ Gaming Response Time 0.03 ms (GTG) Refresh Rate Up to 240 Hz Viewing Angle 178° Horizontal / 178° Vertical Color Support 1 Billion Colors Color Gamut 99% DCI-P3 (CIE1976) Adaptive Sync FreeSync Premium Pro / G-SYNC Compatible DisplayPort 1 × DisplayPort 1.4 HDMI 1 × HDMI 2.1 Micro HDMI 1 × Micro HDMI 2.1 USB Hub 3 × USB 3.0 Speakers Built-in Speaker Output 5W × 2 Channels Operating Temperature 10°C – 40°C Operating Humidity 10–80% (Non-condensing) Stand Type Height Adjustable Stand (HAS) Height Adjustment 120.0 ± 5.0 mm Tilt -2° (±2°) to 15° (±2°) Wall Mount 100 × 100 mm (VESA) Included HDMI Cable HDMI-to-Micro HDMI Cable Included DisplayPort Cable Yes Get it at the link below: Samsung 49" Odyssey G93SC Series Curved Gaming Monitor, QD-OLED: $854.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US with Prime) Prime subscription can be cancelled within three business days at no cost. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Actually Windows 11 is the GUI from Windows 10 X slapped onto Windows 10. Hence the many performance issues and initial limitations of the UI, like all the restrictions on the task bar placement and features. You could not even right click on the Taskbar and bring up task manager when it first shipped. Windows 10X was truly a new OS from the ground up. Basically a lightweight OS that ran containers for various app types. Win32 got its own container. Performance was not good and OEM’s pushed back on it, but wanted a new OS to push Pc sales. Hence Windows 11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10X
    • Windows 10 was 6 years old when Microsoft revealed Windows 11. Does this mean Windows 12 is due next year?
    • Congratulations Windows.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      457
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      123
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!