This is a terrible design. A linear layout removes a degree of freedom compared to a normal city. And it doesn’t even look cool to balance the impracticality. Not that I was planning on moving to KSA, but if they pursue this I will just be further convinced that they are fumbling around trying to modernize their country without any idea of what they actually need.
"The designs revealed today for the city's vertically layered communities will challenge the traditional flat, horizontal cities and create a model for nature preservation and enhanced human livability,"
The reaaon is that those houses are not built in the desert. Your point is invalid.
You have to protect the plants from the drought and humans from sandstorms. You
can not cover a km wide 100m tall city, it has to be 200m x 500m. (numbers are arbitrary, but it has to be compact and as always, biger is cheaper, if 200x200 already covered "up" it is.
I suppose so? The Shanghai maglev train [2] might be the only high-speed maglev in operation [3]. The train has a cruising speed of 431 km/h, but averages 250 km/h in actual operation — covering 30 km in 8 minutes with no stops in the middle.
It might actually be good for transport, you could run one set of rails along the entire length and just jump on/off at your desired station. Probably the real-estate in the middle would be the most expensive because it will still be the hub of the city.
I disagree. It’s time we tried something new rather than the organically outward expanding cities we’ve always done. I’m all for this and if nothing else we will learn something from the experience at a cost trivial compared to the wars that we have been fighting in contemporary times.
They forgot to put in an ocean water pump that will pump water 100 miles upland in order to than have a nice saltwater river meander between the two buildings flow back to the ocean.
Are you thinking they could structure it internally like, say, Snowpiercer ? No-one is going to be able to go outside the box to move in the second spatial dimension.
The whole complex comes in at about 34 km^2 which puts the population density at about 10 times the density of Manhattan. The water and energy needs alone will require several key innovations before this becomes even a pipe dream. Household and public space water usage could be a billion gallons of fresh water a day.
25% of the country's population in one bulding. This can't be something they really intend to build, the plan must be their equivalent of a concept car.
This doesn't strike me as quite as ridiculous as it did on first glance.
One, you've got a giant vertical wall that can have building integrated PV for windows.
TWo, you've got a shaded area on the north side.
Three, they're building it partly undergound, which is good for hot climates.
Four, it's planned as a post-car, walkable city which in general is an exciting concept.
Five, it appears to be going for an enclosed living area, which is seen as dystopic by people who live in moderate climates, but has always made sense to me for regions with extreme weather (hot or cold) and doing it on a scale that might avoid the downsides of feeling like you're shut in.
Redundancy of infrastructure in a linear city strikes me as a potential problem, as is the fact that one end is near the sea and the other end just seems randomly inland. If there's some purpose to the location that I'm not aware of (joining two important places for example) then it's an interesting response to the 'organic' growth of sprawl that occurs when you have two cities linked by a fast communication route, by planning it in advance.
Yes interesting. There are also good reasons to build cities in circles/squares.
1. Minimize the perimeter to area ratio. This minimizes the interface with the outside, such as protective walls and access points. On the other hand, in linear city, everyone gets a nice view, albeit basically the same view.
2. Minimize distance between points. Putting everything on a line means increases the distance for point to point trips. In a 2d city, things are closer together. In a 3d city, even more so. This affects travel, networks, etc. Important / highly frequented things will cluster in the middle.
3. Enhance resilience. If there's a roadblock or problem in a linear city, the whole thing gets blocked. In a 2d city, you can usually just reroute around. This applies to travel, sewage, grid, etc blockages. Linear city is just asking for single point failures.
Many of these points fall apart when you consider American cities are built kind of like 1d cities around highways and such. The linear city is just admitting it upfront.
On 1. now I wonder what is the optimal width for this type of city in place it is build. If we are thinking of protection from things like sand storms or other effects. As at somepoint the walls stop covering what is on other side of them. Unless we are talking about old-school fortications.
>2. Minimize distance between points. Putting everything on a line means increases the distance for point to point trips. In a 2d city, things are closer together. In a 3d city, even more so. This affects travel, networks, etc. Important / highly frequented things will cluster in the middle.
higher dimensions also increases the length public infrastructure laid down and number of routes. connecting a 5x5 grid needs twice as as many lines as a 1x25 grid.
Somebody looked at elevators and thought, "This is perfect: everything that moves should be an elevator!"
But the whole world would need to be in a straight line. "This is perfect: we'll make everybody live in a line!"
And, not realize that elevators move in a straight line because they hang on a cable. If you lay it on its side, it becomes a train, and can go anywhere the tracks bend to.
Generally train tracks bend because they have to, not because they want to.
One of the things holding high speed rail back is the turning circle needed at high speed not fitting in existing rights of way, which were as straight as they could get away with at the time of building. And the inability to now just purchase a right of way directly between the two points of interest because it's owned by lots of different people.
If you were building a traditional circular city and rail at the same time, the main trains would radiate out in lines as straight as the terrain allows and you'd probably spend a great deal of money building bridges and tunnels to make that possible if the terrain wasn't flat.
If you were building two cities from scratch, and owned all the land between them, you'd almost certainly build a direct train line as straight as possible between them.
Any light that is passing through a pv/window is not being converted into electricity, a solar panel that is both a window and a PV cell is not good at doing either
If you make that window reflective, now you have a bad mirror, a bad solar panel and a bad window
Google "Saudi Arabia linear city" and you'll likely see an ad for neom.com [1]. It's worth checking out the site for the impressive but bizarrely fantastical concept art. A BBC article [2] about Neom mentions it will have an autonomous legal system drafted by the investors.
It feels like Saudi Arabia is trying to create the next Hong Kong. Maybe the linear city plan is more of a way to convince investors there's enough real estate room to expand. Or perhaps there's a reason to need an autonomous legal zone stretching from the Red Sea to inner Saudi Arabia.
They treat women with respect and dignity. What are you talking about? Women feel safe there. My mom likes to live there. I know because I've lived there for 18 years.
never talked to someone who lived there, do natives really leave during ramadhan because of "infections from africans and asians"? because thats what i've heard, 5-7 years ago that the natives take holidays in order to avoid the influx of foreigners
No, I haven't seen anything like this. Ramadhan is the best part of Saudi Arabia. It's a religious and business season. Stores stay open at night until 3 AM.
Probably not a representative sample, but I spent several days hanging out with a group of Saudi men and women at burning man. They all liked living there and were pretty open minded.
to be fair MBS is opening the society at a frightening pace, its no more required male tutor approval to marry (of "equal"status) or work (lmited by sharia decency), liberty of child custody (for minors 15-18), travel, study, etc...
I am 100% sure that "Neom" is a colossal Ozymandian mistake that will end up wasting many billions of dollars while achieving precisely nothing of any value to Saudi Arabia or the rest of humanity.
I cannot imagine a worse way to organize a city than to put it on a line in the middle of a desert with no economic activity whatsoever.
Here's a question - what does this city produce? What industries could possibly exist in a city where the only way in or out is on a single line? How do shipments of goods for the grocery stores and restaurants and everything else get into the city? If I want to buy a desk, or a mattress, or anything else does it go on the maglev(s)?
The city seems to ignore the fact that building up is exponentially more expensive compared to building flat. Simply getting the material to the height it needs to be now requires a crane, not to speak of the transportation, accessibility, and plumbing issues.
Has anyone considered what would happen if there was a fire in the middle of the city? Would people be cut off from their jobs? What if repairs take weeks or months?If the maglev breaks the whole city goes with it.
Final point - building a city in the middle of the desert rather than somewhere cold with access to clean drinking water seems stupid in the face of climate change (or in general).
It's amazing that people keep reporting on Neom as if it is actually going to happen. It's not a credible plan. This is a rich kid's over-funded sci-fi.
This was first proposed earlier, at least 2021. Since that time many of the big building projects in Saudi Arabia such as Jeddah Tower have been cancelled or put on hold.
how cool would it have been if NEOM was a blend of Arab culture (muscat?) with sensible city design (no carcentric hellhole), instead Billions off Saudis people money will be wasted in this BS. Maybe the plan is to make a meropoly baackbone but its too enormous for the country (or any country) needs or any country
This will have an interesting impact on people who are still convinced the world is flat. You will not be able to look down the hall from one end to the other.
63 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 122 ms ] threadOh and low gravity
"The designs revealed today for the city's vertically layered communities will challenge the traditional flat, horizontal cities and create a model for nature preservation and enhanced human livability,"
This article and digital rendering has seemingly managed to convince you otherwise.
You have to protect the plants from the drought and humans from sandstorms. You can not cover a km wide 100m tall city, it has to be 200m x 500m. (numbers are arbitrary, but it has to be compact and as always, biger is cheaper, if 200x200 already covered "up" it is.
But of course the whole idea is just "clickbait".
Next you're going to say that a sky bridge 300m above the ground with a shin high guard rail is impractical.
> A transport system running the length of the megastructure would be designed to connect both ends of the city within 20 minutes.
It would take a 500 km/h train to cover 170 km in 20 minutes. I think only maglevs [1] approach that speed.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_maglev_train
[3]: Maglevs in Beijing, Changsha, Incheon, and Aichi Prefecture all operate at ~100 km/h or less.
The US made Vegas. And stopped.
One, you've got a giant vertical wall that can have building integrated PV for windows.
TWo, you've got a shaded area on the north side.
Three, they're building it partly undergound, which is good for hot climates.
Four, it's planned as a post-car, walkable city which in general is an exciting concept.
Five, it appears to be going for an enclosed living area, which is seen as dystopic by people who live in moderate climates, but has always made sense to me for regions with extreme weather (hot or cold) and doing it on a scale that might avoid the downsides of feeling like you're shut in.
Redundancy of infrastructure in a linear city strikes me as a potential problem, as is the fact that one end is near the sea and the other end just seems randomly inland. If there's some purpose to the location that I'm not aware of (joining two important places for example) then it's an interesting response to the 'organic' growth of sprawl that occurs when you have two cities linked by a fast communication route, by planning it in advance.
1. Minimize the perimeter to area ratio. This minimizes the interface with the outside, such as protective walls and access points. On the other hand, in linear city, everyone gets a nice view, albeit basically the same view.
2. Minimize distance between points. Putting everything on a line means increases the distance for point to point trips. In a 2d city, things are closer together. In a 3d city, even more so. This affects travel, networks, etc. Important / highly frequented things will cluster in the middle.
3. Enhance resilience. If there's a roadblock or problem in a linear city, the whole thing gets blocked. In a 2d city, you can usually just reroute around. This applies to travel, sewage, grid, etc blockages. Linear city is just asking for single point failures.
Many of these points fall apart when you consider American cities are built kind of like 1d cities around highways and such. The linear city is just admitting it upfront.
Needs flat people, though.
Flatten people!
higher dimensions also increases the length public infrastructure laid down and number of routes. connecting a 5x5 grid needs twice as as many lines as a 1x25 grid.
But the whole world would need to be in a straight line. "This is perfect: we'll make everybody live in a line!"
And, not realize that elevators move in a straight line because they hang on a cable. If you lay it on its side, it becomes a train, and can go anywhere the tracks bend to.
One of the things holding high speed rail back is the turning circle needed at high speed not fitting in existing rights of way, which were as straight as they could get away with at the time of building. And the inability to now just purchase a right of way directly between the two points of interest because it's owned by lots of different people.
If you were building a traditional circular city and rail at the same time, the main trains would radiate out in lines as straight as the terrain allows and you'd probably spend a great deal of money building bridges and tunnels to make that possible if the terrain wasn't flat.
If you were building two cities from scratch, and owned all the land between them, you'd almost certainly build a direct train line as straight as possible between them.
If you make that window reflective, now you have a bad mirror, a bad solar panel and a bad window
That's just weak light transmission! You made a bad window, Petey!
It feels like Saudi Arabia is trying to create the next Hong Kong. Maybe the linear city plan is more of a way to convince investors there's enough real estate room to expand. Or perhaps there's a reason to need an autonomous legal zone stretching from the Red Sea to inner Saudi Arabia.
[1] https://www.neom.com/en-us/regions/theline
[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-59601335
But a $trillion pile of empty, decaying buildings slowly being covered with sand need not be terrifying if you (like everybody else) don't go there.
Please read on kafala system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafala_system
Bonus negative points for treatment of women.
They treat women with respect and dignity. What are you talking about? Women feel safe there. My mom likes to live there. I know because I've lived there for 18 years.
They just recently were allowed to start driving.
They just recently were allowed to get a passport and travel freely without permission from male guardian.
Male guardian approval is required to seek an abortion.
Male guardian permission required to marry.
There is still much segregation and inequality.
Family laws skews towards males, as they become guardians.
Child custody also skews towards males.
It is quite distant from the freedoms women experience in the western world.
I won't even mention the treatment of migrant female workers.
> the treatment of migrant female workers
It's just some miscreant peoples. No need to blame the government. They are trying their best to fight it.
[]https://www.thenationalnews.com/gulf-news/2022/03/09/women-w...
[]https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mec/2021/02/15/the-new-saudi-persona...
Walter Disney made a synthetic city, too. And a monorail!
Here's a question - what does this city produce? What industries could possibly exist in a city where the only way in or out is on a single line? How do shipments of goods for the grocery stores and restaurants and everything else get into the city? If I want to buy a desk, or a mattress, or anything else does it go on the maglev(s)?
The city seems to ignore the fact that building up is exponentially more expensive compared to building flat. Simply getting the material to the height it needs to be now requires a crane, not to speak of the transportation, accessibility, and plumbing issues.
Has anyone considered what would happen if there was a fire in the middle of the city? Would people be cut off from their jobs? What if repairs take weeks or months?If the maglev breaks the whole city goes with it.
Final point - building a city in the middle of the desert rather than somewhere cold with access to clean drinking water seems stupid in the face of climate change (or in general).