Comments | tombfyre: Sky City

tombfyre

Sky City

Sep 05, 2010 11:08

Oh my, am I ever hoping this project gets off the ground. :3 As many of you may know, I'm a sucker for Archology projects. I think they're a great way of efficiently using land, and easing urban sprawl. Personally I think a handful of mega cities within large buildings would be far better than spreading roads and suburbs over every usable chunk of ( Read more... )

Comments 14

Oooh...coooool! huxbear September 5 2010, 17:27:04 UTC

I love the idea of the whole "arcology" stuff, but keep flashing on "tower-people" vs. "tunnel-people" in some dystopian super-future, with the "haves" in the towers and the "have-nots" (ie, "workers") in the tunnels... ;o)

And the last pic is dead-due-to-hotlinking... :o)

Re: Oooh...coooool! tombfyre September 5 2010, 17:29:08 UTC

It is? Huh, I'll have to poke it more. And yeah, there's definitely dystopian story related things when it comes to Arcology things. :3

Re: Oooh...coooool! huxbear September 5 2010, 17:37:14 UTC

Cool, fixed! Thanks!

Tennis?

I'd have to live on a non-tennis level. Maybe more pools or giant mega coffee-shop-complex or "Free Doughnuts For Bears!"-store or something... ;oP

Re: Oooh...coooool! tombfyre September 5 2010, 18:55:08 UTC

Yes, those would all be good options. :3 Much better than tennis.

ravenworks September 5 2010, 17:53:35 UTC

Why would they build that platform thing so high up, though? Actually... why build the whole thing so high in general? Just make the base a little wider and cut the height in half, make it less of a death trap for the people above the, what, second floor? X3

Self-contained complexes like this are real interesting, but the idea of building anything this tall just screams "ego" more than "practicality"..

tombfyre September 5 2010, 18:54:46 UTC

Building them tall makes a lot of sense, to me at least. ^^ The idea is to do a lot with a small footprint of space. There seems to be quite a lot of safety taken into mind with things like this, such as evacuation methods and huge fire walls between levels.

ravenworks September 5 2010, 19:00:58 UTC

But seems like building them stockier would increase the safety way more than it increases the footprint, though... they'd already be so much more efficient than normal cities that it seems like you could afford to err on the side of safety and still come out ahead.

I dunno, maybe they'll give everybody emergency hang-gliders. ;P

tombfyre September 5 2010, 20:01:09 UTC

Heh, it is quite wide on the base already. ^^ 500m is quite a lot of room down on the level. Plus the idea with the hyper city model, is to chain lots of them together into a combined structure, which would further increase stability and all that.

There's always the big conical arcology model they've put together as well, which is about 2km wide at the base, and 1km tall. ^^

Thread 6

hgryphon September 6 2010, 03:48:05 UTC

Until someone finds a way to bring one down. Also, the least safe kind of building to live in if things go nuclear.

tombfyre September 6 2010, 04:21:20 UTC

They're definitely thinking safety with the things. They're extremely well built structures, at least in the design phase. But yes, they're far from safe if large explosives come into play. Things that atomize steel anyways. ^^()

hgryphon September 6 2010, 04:29:14 UTC

Was more thinking fallout/aerosol chemicals...

Because I'm a cheery guy!

tombfyre September 6 2010, 04:31:31 UTC

Ah yes, that would ruin everyone's day. :3