Large-scale infrastructure projects often span decades, yet the materials and technologies involved can become obsolete in a fraction of that time. Here’s how Australian engineers are embracing modular, future-ready systems designed to embrace change.
By Lachlan Haycock
Nobody expects the newest iPhone to reflect the latest level of technological innovation a decade after it’s manufactured. For Kumar Srinivasan MIEAust, Director of Risk and Insurance at UTS, the principle is the same for long-term infrastructure projects, and the extended life cycles of these projects is the primary cause.
“Consider it in the context of the Sydney Metro,” Srinivasan, who was the project’s former Chief Risk Officer, told create. “Projects such as this typically have a life cycle of more than 10 years from inception to delivery completion and full operation. Numerous technological changes will emerge during that period.
“When we initially designed the tunnel infrastructure for some sections of the rail corridor, 4G was the prevailing technology. However, 5G had arrived by the time construction work was underway, and integrating 5G infrastructure into the tunnels at that stage wasn’t easy.
“It wasn’t as simple as running a different type of Ethernet cable along the tunnel wall. It was also about the contractual levers and the restrictions for engineering practice that come with that.
“Infrastructure projects must anticipate technological evolution and embed flexibility into their design and contractual frameworks to avoid potentially costly retrofits.”
Considerations around the digital architecture – which may not be installed for many years after a project breaks ground – must be “baked into” the project timeline, he said.
“It’s about having the ability to embrace both current technologies and what emerges in the coming years, and designing the broader infrastructure in a modular fashion. Embedding adaptability into infrastructure design isn’t just a technical necessity. It’s a strategic imperative for long-term resilience.”
This means considering a project’s scope according to the standards of the day, rather than the standards of when it was briefed – a tricky ask, given how much it strays into future-prediction territory, but nonetheless vital for the future viability and profitability of large-scale projects.
Ultimately, flexibility isn’t just a design principle. It is also a strategic safeguard against obsolescence.
Inconceivable innovation
An area in which engineers are constantly grappling with the threat of technological obsolescence in long-term projects is defence manufacturing.
In her early career, Amanda Holt FIEAust CPEng, CEO of defence systems integrator SYPAQ, worked on major ship build and upgrade programs within the Australian Navy. One of her first programs of work involved the upgrading of the combat management system of navy frigates.
“That experience gave me insight into how these ships – which stay in service for 30-odd years – are incredibly expensive and complex pieces of equipment with a lead-time of decades,” Holt said. “For some elements, such as the ship hull, there are opportunities for preventative and corrective maintenance throughout its lifetime. But fundamentally, large elements of the design don’t change for decades.
“Then there are other elements, such as how the radars will perform and how the weapons systems will integrate, which need to be managed to ensure a ship is fit-for-purpose for decades to come – and in ways we can’t even conceive of right now.”
On those programs, she observed how the original design decisions made – including those around space, weight and power – inhibited or encouraged the flexibility of and the adaption of future technology in the finished product.
“Certain integration risks and constraints became clear to us, because what was powerful enough to run the computing in the 80s and 90s was fundamentally different to what was needed in 2007, when I was working on the program.”
Systems engineer Professor Alex Zelinsky AO, Vice-Chancellor at the University of Newcastle, prefers to reframe the topic of rapid technological change as an opportunity for innovation, rather than a problem of future obsolescence.
“The days when a project had a single lead or hero engineer are long gone,” he told create. “More and more we work in teams. These teams need to be flexible and agile, and come together in a way that allows new engineering solutions to be created, because we’re now seeing systems of systems being built. One team might be responsible for one system, and another team for another system.
“A good example of this is the F-35 fighter jets. There are about 20 million lines of code in the software that flies those planes; they’re under total software control. There are the propulsion systems, information systems and safety systems for the pilot. They’re incredibly complicated, and no one person is singularly responsible for their engineering.”
The former Chief Defence Scientist of Australia pointed to the country’s submarine programs – both the current fleet of Collins-class craft and the future AUKUS arrangement – as another instance of incredible complexity matched with a demanding future standard.
“Submarines, some of the most complicated machines ever built, need to be built to be extremely reliable, but with redundancy built in,” he said. “If one engine fails, an immediate backup is needed. The Collins-class submarines rely on a diesel engine that charges batteries so they can operate quietly underwater. All systems must be tested and assured for safety. A submarine’s batteries must not catch fire and risk disaster. In the future, batteries could make use of lithium due to their efficiencies, but how can we engineer components and systems to be isolated in the event of fire?
“To maximise safety and flexibility, and to ensure you have the superior solution, you need to achieve a balance between proven technology that has become limited over time, and innovative technology that may come with risks that are not well-understood.”
Case study: OneSKY
Core innovation: Integrating air traffic control systems
When it comes to the complex and high-risk realm of air traffic management, a system of systems approach is necessary.
A joint effort by Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence, OneSKY aims to replace discrete civilian and military air traffic control systems with a single unified system. The Civil‑Military Air Traffic Management System (CMATS) will allow both civil and military air traffic controllers in Australia to access a shared view of the Australian-administered airspace.
In addition to automating air traffic control management, CMATS also integrates voice communications, record‑and‑replay, maintenance management and other support systems. The upgrade is intended to also benefit integration of more uncrewed systems into the country’s airspace.
“One of the challenges of the OneSKY program, which is also to its benefit, is bringing the civilian and military sides of air traffic management together,” Holt said. “That’s where you encounter real risks around different regulators, customers and cultures. And that’s a very difficult thing to write into a specification.
“What we see in a number of these step-change capabilities that are being introduced is that it’s not just about writing a specification about what the software needs to do. It’s about understanding the actual use case and the environment it needs to be designed for – or accepted into – and then managed through life.
“Fundamentally, this is a software system being delivered, so there will be changes to the operating system. As a result, it will require changes in cybersecurity requirements and communications. What gets delivered on day one is absolutely going to change months or years down the track.”
Rapid refresh
The solution is relatively simple. It’s about embedding integration flexibility at the earliest stage.
“When you’re dealing with large and complex infrastructure, the convenience and sheer speed often causes people to have a blinkered view of the project,” Srinivasan said. “They simply aren’t able to see the bigger picture, and that’s where risk engineers come in.
“Integration flexibility is about ensuring that, as part of the procurement of the project, the contract is written in such a way that engineering companies can intervene and make changes without being penalised. It’s not necessarily an engineering outcome – more a contractual outcome – but engineers will need to do this as part of the controls environment.”
Projects such as Snowy Hydro are “really cutting-edge” in terms of the integration flexibility being shown, Srinivasan said.
“Some of the design augmentations made due to technological transitions have, in some instances, meant a reduction of up to 40 per cent of the cost of integration,” he said. “They achieve this by looking at the whole life-cycle cost.
“Take an asset built to last for 100 years and ask how many times a technology change would occur in that period. If there are five technology changes, with each life cycle being 15-20 years, that’s roughly five shifts in those 100 years. Then ask how to design things so retrofitting becomes easy.”
This shift in thinking is bringing benefits beyond the financial.
“The hardest lesson anyone can learn is that they should have prevented a problem back at the planning stage,” Srinivasan said. “But sometimes, the reality is that executive decision-makers won’t acknowledge a mistake has been made or a better option is possible. They’ll typically say their team acted in line with the information available at that point in time.
“I see that as sleeping behind the wheel.”
Learn more about the innovative scope of the Snowy Hydro project.
Case study: Suburban Rail Loop
Core innovation: Planning for adaptability at project inception
Melbourne’s rail network spreads its tendrils out from the CBD, with the only connections between them being other modes of transport such as bus or tram. That will change with the Suburban Rail Loop (SRL), a 90-km rail line linking the city’s middle suburbs.
SRL East, the first section of the line to be delivered and the first to enter construction (in 2022), features 26 km of twin tunnels and six new underground stations. But tunnelling will only start in 2026, and that section of the line won’t open until at least 2035.
That means numerous rounds of updates to rolling stock, signalling and other rail technology – not to mention upskilling of the workforce across decades – making innovation and adaptability essential.
That’s why, when tunnelling does commence, an innovative ground-freezing technique will be used to build some of the safety passages between the twin tunnels, avoiding the need for ground treatment from the surface – reducing disruption to residents and roads on the surface by more than 90 per cent.
“The ground freezing technique involves pipes drilled deep underground and injected with chilled brine [salt and water],” a Suburban Rail Loop Authority spokesperson told create. “The brine will temporarily freeze the surrounding soil, stabilising it and making it safe for our teams to build the safety passages.”
A “kit of parts” model will be used for station floors, walls, ceilings, seating, lighting, signs and fixtures, as well as the mechanical, electrical and plumbing of the SRL East stations.
“Making these station parts modular and then putting them together will save time and money, streamlining construction and reducing defects, delays and the associated costs,” the spokesperson said.
The kit of parts simplifies training, construction, maintenance and replacement of elements, reducing complexity and cost, improving sustainability outcomes, and promoting effective collaboration between architects, engineers and builders.
“This model also increases worker safety as it requires offsite construction in a controlled manufacturing environment, rather than on an active construction site where multiple trades and activities occur at the same time.”
Learn more about artificial ground freezing at this on-demand webinar.
Mindset management
For Holt, there’s a tension between new and old-school ways of thinking.
“Previously, it seems to me, engineers sought to lock down a project and establish a clear baseline that didn’t get changed unless absolutely necessary – because change costs money and introduces schedule delays,” she said. “They did this rather than realise that cost blowouts and schedule delays will also emerge if bad decisions are made during the design phase.
“Take the example of battery technology. We get better power density on more or less an annual refresh cycle. Most of the battery manufacturers now have established that we don’t need to redesign all of our connectors every year, so the form factor remains essentially the same.
“The higher performance means engineers can substitute out the power cells used last year for the cells available this year. And the better power density means that drones will fly for longer, for instance – because a 5 per cent improvement in power density means a resultant improvement in endurance.”
This rate of change of technology is particularly pronounced in electronics, software adaptation, AI algorithm development and even sensor processing capabilities, Holt said.
“These days, the technology refresh cycle is probably 18 months. In some disciplines, it’s even faster. If we continue to take an old-school mindset, we’d spend just as long designing an engineering system to perfection, but wouldn’t actually end up with componentry or elements that are particularly innovative anymore.
“We’d be designing ourselves out of relevance.”
Case study: EastLink
Core innovation: Using new technology to tackle unseen challenges
Cutting-edge construction techniques were necessary on the EastLink road project in Melbourne in the 2000s.
A $400 million tunnel under the Mullum Mullum Valley was the single largest, and most challenging, element of construction, requiring a fully watertight tunnel design at all times, rather than a tunnel that allowed water in and later drained that water out.
According to a report on the project by World Highways magazine, “achieving water tightness involved having a circular cross-section for the tunnel and using a drainage blanket and waterproof membrane lining”.
“A system using curved precast concrete floor units, sitting on temporary blocks on the membrane, allowed a flat top to be constructed so that trucks could run by. Temporary rails on each side supported two gantries in each tunnel to assist with construction including concrete pouring.”
The toll road was one of the first to upgrade its tunnel ventilation system to dynamic ventilation on demand with partial portal emission.
The originally commissioned tunnel ventilation system was designed to expel 100 per cent of tunnel air through 45 m-high ventilation stacks.
The upgraded system allowed real-time adjustment of ventilation fans based on actual tunnel conditions rather than fixed cycles, achieving a power use reduction of up to 70 per cent, and 9000 t fewer greenhouse gas emissions each year.
This story was originally published in the November 2025 edition of create with the headline “Cognition shift”.
What are the challenges of designing and constructing immersed tunnels?
