Which one of the super tall skyscrapers will fall first or will be forced to considerably reduce its height due to...

The tower today

>China's skyscrapers are here to stay.

At least the landmark ones, which are designed and built by western firms, ensuring corners aren't cut during construction.

Buildings of any type need renovation every 30 years or so to stay fresh. As long as there's no water damage from a broken facade, the structure should last indefinitely.

>due to structural problems
We don't just make 'em smaller when that happens, we demolish the entire building. We literally can't afford to have accident at these scales. (Insurance claims aside.)

All buildings require maintenance. Which one falls first depends entirely on which one is abandoned first. (Assuming the engineers had sustainability in mind when they designed these things.)

All joking aside, the ones built in the middle east will probably collapse due to deferred maintenance. If the deflation in oil prices persist, or if countries start imposing tariffs on oil (as both Obama and Congress are looking at), then the Saudis won't have enough money to hire foreigners to repair and maintain their buildings. The same is true for China if they are hit with a tariff.

So I'd put my money on #10.

More specific to the ESB, it was built incredibly solidly. It only sways an inch during storms, versus feet for modern towers. The windows though, were originally built with galvanized steel frames, which rusted out after 80 years, and recently had to be replaced. Compare with the contemporary Chrysler building which used stainless steel and aluminum for the facade, and still has the windows in mint condition. Materials matter. Aluminum and stainless steel are pretty much the default materials for high end facades now.

>ensuring corners aren't cut during construction.
>western firms

This is fucking hilarious.

No water damage + exterior sealed + interior climate control means basically an unlimited lifespan. Especially if a "major" part fails, in many cases jacks can be put around it and the part replaced.

>Will they have to dismantle it one day because it's so old and becoming hazardous? Will they somehow reinforce it instead?

Look at it from an engineer's perspective: if the building can still do it's job in a modern way then it can generate money and be a useful investment. Nobody cares if most buildings are torn down if they are surrounded by newer or grander ones.

large underground structures > skyscrapers

fight me

Space > all

Virtual ovjects > real world orientable baby shit

Most likely Burj Dubai. If not, then the Empire State Building.

Dubai has the some of the worst construction standards in the world when it comes to skyscrapers.

That's not large

>Empire State
Dafuq? It's been around for like 90 years...

That is, I believe, the logic: That the Empire State Building, being the oldest, is the most likely to fail at some point simply due to aging.

I mean, it's wrong logic, but it's understandable to think that the oldest building is the one most likely to fail soon.

>Look up Kingdom Tower
>They're just building tall shit in the middle of fucking nowhere for the sake of building tall shit.

I wouldn't be surprised if half the stuff they're building out in the Middle East collapses just through being abandoned.

I have a serious boner for leipzig's public transit it is so hot

Sure thing commie.

>Which one of the super tall skyscrapers will fall first
Whichever one gets demolished first.
>or will be forced to considerably reduce its height due to structural problems?
None of them...

Just remembered that best Korea started building one in the 90s and they're still working on it. If any supertall is going to collapse, it'll be that one. The elevator shafts are feet out of alignment, and lots of balconies collapsed during periods it was on hold.

They're never gonna finish it
The building is severely damaged from years of sitting unattended in weather
The building also settled poorly so the elevator shafts aren't aligned
They literally fucked it up just to have it

man i was looking at that pic thinking that was NASAs timeline for developing new rocket designs. fuck.

...

Agreed. At least the degradation is stopped now that the facade is finished.

I've heard without maintenance that eventually the cables holding these babies up will snap and they'll probably take down the entire building with them when they fall. Actually kinda curious about this -- any structEs have comment?

at least they managed that
too bad it's a non usable statue at this point

not a structE, but my first thought is:
they maintain them, duh

Hold your horses, fampai, Kingdom tower is only like 15% complete; Busan Lotte world tower and the Pentominium are on hold (latter being on hold for nearly 5 years now). I think Kingdom tower will kick the bucket when Saudi Arabia collapses in the coming year or two. And good for them! Those cunts deserve it.

But in all seriousness, clearly the tower that will fall the first will be Pajeet tower in Bombay. I mean poo in the loo building a supertall? Hehe.

Not the first Indian supertall, #9 from OP is underconstruction, although they haven't gotten approvals for the full height yet.

All the Arab ones are built by Western firms too though.

Coincidence that the majority of the tallest towers are in asian countries?
Don't think so

Technically they are built by slave labour from Nepal and other poor Asian countries.

Whoa there boy. I know this is sci, but wtf is this about the magic Kingdom imploding? (And yes they deserve it the prime exporters of extremism and terrorism).

>tower height not function of land value but just arbitrarily made high for prestige
disgusting

Cheap oil; mounting debt. The country is still built on shoddy foundations. If things go awry, this tower is not a sure bet.

Have another fun fact: The Bin Laden Group (yes, related to THAT Bin Laden) is a major Saudi construction company, and built the 601m tall pic related.

I want to sneak into North Korea armed to the teeth and see just how bad it really is up North in their Prison Death Camps.

Middle East skyscrapers seem to have big problems with fire. Their firefighters are not capable of dealing with it properly.

As long as the steel beams don't melt

It doesn't help that they use cheap cladding that uses highly flammable foam insulation.

Most ME skyscrapers are concrete so that shouldn't be an issue.