This major railway line is a project promoted by the Bolivian government. The plan is to cross the South American continent from east to west (Brazil, Bolivia, Peru), connecting the three countries and possibly adding branches to Paraguay and Argentina. The project involves building a total of approximately 4,700 kilometres of a freight and passenger line in order to establish a high-capacity transport route between the Pacific and Atlantic.

To analyse the feasibility of the project, the Spanish engineering company Ineco, in consortium with Incosa, carried out a feasibility study for Peru’s Ministry of Transport in 2016 and 2017. The work, which focused on Peruvian territory, included analysis of possible route options and optimum technical and financial solutions; examination of freight demand forecasts until 2055; assessment of Bolivia’s infrastructure situation; studies of the compatibility of the different existing track gauges; and calculation of works budget distribution. The analysis concluded with a social assessment of the project and its feasibility.

This is a large-scale project whose profitability depends on freight and passenger demand originating in Bolivia and, especially, Brazil

Analysis of options

In order to define the best route, the consortium carried out a study of options on three corridors: two departing from the Desaguadero border post south of Lake Titicaca between Peru and Bolivia, and a third from a location proposed in the Bolivian government’s project known as Milestone 4, located southeast of the Desaguadero border post.

The three routes would reach ports on Peru’s Pacific coast: option 1 (originating at Milestone 4) and 2 (originating in Desaguadero), measuring 406.6 and 458.7 kilometres in length respectively, would join in the city of Moquegua into a common branch that would terminate at the port of Ilo; option 3 (originating in Desaguadero) would be the most extensive route, measuring 633.4 kilometres in length, 194 kilometres of which already exist and 439 kilometres which would need to be built. The latter would skirt Lake Titicaca, pass through the cities of Puno, Juliaca and Arequipa and terminate at the port of Matarani.

In all three options, the railway would need to negotiate considerably uneven terrain. The border between Peru and Bolivia is located at an altitude of 4,000 metres, which means that the railway would be required to wind between mountains and highlands to descend to a port on the coast. The basic geometric conditions of the project call for minimum radii of 250 metres and maximum slopes of 2.5%, in addition to the need to minimise the number of bridges, tunnels and earthworks.

In terms of social benefits, the study assessed savings on the operation of freight diverted from the roads; freight and passenger traffic times; environmental benefits; and reduced accident rates

Demand study

An important part of establishing the feasibility of the Bioceanic Railway Corridor was a demand study to calculate freight volumes in Peruvian territory for all of the route options and their projections for the time horizon under assessment.

The time horizons of the CFBC project to which the study worked were 2025 for entry into operation, 2055 as the end of the maturity period and 2075 as the final time horizon.

In order to determine future demand for the Railway Corridor, a transport model was drawn up using spatial referencing (zoning) to relate the network (supply) with mobility data (demand). It was a macro transport model that enabled prediction of the layout of an origin-destination matrix (demand) across different transport mode networks (supply).

To create this model, Ineco used TransCAD, a powerful transport planning software that uses aspects such as socio-economic variables, the general characterisation of the infrastructure and road and railway demand as baseline information. In addition, field work was also required to collect additional data to calibrate the supply network entered and the demand in the final origin-destination matrices together with the Bolivian review of the transport model.

Demand scenarios were simulated for three time horizons: 2025, entry into operation; 2050, intermediate year; and 2075, the project’s final time horizon. And the three supply scenarios for the three route options.

As a result of this model, the CBFC’s demand corresponding to the area of direct influence was estimated as follows:

• Internal Peru: representing flows captured by the line between internal areas within Peruvian territory.
• Bolivia-Desaguadero: representing flows captured by the line between internal areas within Peruvian territory and Bolivia.

Track gauges

The Peruvian rail network has standard gauge (UIC), except on the Cuzco branch to Aguas Calientes (Machu Picchu), which has metric gauge, meaning that any new railway line built in Peru must have standard gauge. Traffic on this gauge also has more transport capacity than on metric gauge.

For its part, the CFBC in Bolivia would have metric gauge, which would require trains to change gauge at the border with Peru. To solve the problem of gauge difference between the two rail networks, 3 options were analysed for the Peruvian section of the CFBC: metric gauge, standard gauge and mixed gauge. A set of indicators was considered such as, among others, compliance with the terms of reference, transport capacity, rolling stock requirements, network effect, benefits obtained by Peru and possible logistics activities in order to identify the possible advantages and disadvantages of the different gauge options.

Analysis showed that the standard gauge option would be the most beneficial for Peru.

To make decisions regarding the different CFBC options, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was used in order to select seven criteria: construction, environmental impact, economic aspects, social improvement services, concessionaires, operations and ports

Social assessment of the project: cost and benefit

In the study carried out by the consortium, the parameters and values applied to the evaluations for quantification of costs and benefits were those indicated by the methodology defined by the National System of Public Investment (SNIP), with the following concepts assessed:

• Infrastructure conservation costs.
• Variable costs of freight train operation (fuel consumption).
• Variable costs of passenger train operation (fuel consumption).
• Rolling stock maintenance costs.
• Fixed costs of train operation (personnel costs and general expenses).

In terms of social benefits, the study assessed savings in freight vehicle operation diverted from the roads; time savings for freight and passenger traffic; and the benefits of reduced accidents (material losses and loss of human lives and injuries) and environmental benefits (noise, atmospheric pollution, climate change, nature and landscape, loss of biodiversity, soil and water pollution).

The project has negative NPV social indicators because it only considers Bolivian freight in its analysis. In addition, IRR social indicators are below investor expectations. For the project to be socially profitable, the railway must be assessed taking the Bolivian and Brazilian freight that the railway could potentially use into account.

Multi-criteria analysis

To make decisions regarding the different CFBC options, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was used. This is a system used in large infrastructure projects in Peru which is acknowledged and valued for the multiple benefits it provides in the analysis of complex problems involving multiple variables.

For the analysis, seven criteria were selected –construction, environmental impact, economic aspects, social improvement services, concessionaires, operations and ports– and each one included a set of sub-criteria that were analysed for the three proposed options. The AHP system uses a scale of 1 to 9 to rate the relative preferences of the two elements to be compared. This method is based on the comparison of all of the options in a paired way for each of the sub-criteria selected.

Once the summarised values of the sub-criteria and criteria had been acquired, they were multiplied to obtain the weight of each of the sub-criteria. With these weights and summarised values of the comparison of the options, the matrices were multiplied to obtain the overall value for each one of the options.

The main conclusion of the study was that this is a large-scale project whose profitability depends on freight and passenger demand originating in Bolivia and especially in bordering countries, whose rail networks will need to upgrade their infrastructure and rolling stock, and, in the case of Bolivia, also complete the merging of its two railway sectors.

The environment, which takes centre stage on this autumn’s cover, increasingly influences our projects and activities in Spain and around the world. With the support of Ineco, Ecuador’s capital Quito has launched initiatives to reduce waste and foster a circular economy of resources; this will without a doubt translate into improved welfare and quality of life for the city’s inhabitants.

Public policy is key in the move towards more sustainable cities. We are honoured with the opinion of María Verónica Arias Cabanilla, Environment secretary for the Municipality of Quito, the highest authority for environmental policy in the Ecuadorian capital. The city’s environmental policy includes the ‘Cero Basura’ programme, based on the integrated management of resources; this is an ambitious project in which Ineco was responsible for the Master Plan for Comprehensive Waste Management and its legal framework. This coincides with Quito’s selection by the UN to host the Habitat III Sustainable Cities Conference in October 2016. In addition to this, as Verónica Arias points out in her interview, Quito is Ecuador’s most sustainable city and one of the 17 finalists for the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) award for the world’s most sustainable city.

Optimal management of an environmental resource such as the sky is another area of interest that we will address in these pages. Specifically, we have a report dedicated to ENAIRE’s significant technical efforts and investment to guarantee air safety with the highest levels of efficiency. The high concentration of flights in Europe requires a complex new automated air traffic control system: SACTA (so-called for its initials in Spanish) is a series of systems and equipment which ENAIRE is investing over 16 million euros to renovate. Ineco engineers, who are collaborating in the project, offer us a detailed description of the function of these services and what they bring us.

Public policy is key in the necessary move towards more sustainable cities

Also worth highlighting is Ineco’s more than 20 years of experience in supervising the manufacture of trains. This issue features an in-depth article on rolling stock design validation, supervision and testing, particularly in Spain, Chile, Brazil and Colombia, where we have recently renewed our contract.

Finally, I am proud to present the new modernisation project at Chiclayo airport in Peru, where a new terminal is being designed. This large aeronautical project will complement our existing project at Lima’s Jorge Chávez airport. These are big jobs and big challenges in a globalised world where we want to demonstrate the skills and capabilities of Spanish engineering.

“To create a unique symbol for each place”

Bruce Fairbanks, founder of Fairbanks Arquitectos, has accumulated extensive experience in the design of airport buildings since 1996 when he won the tender for the construction of the Madrid-Barajas control tower.

Presently in the world of airports there is a trend to promote the control tower as a symbol, an image that represents the airport and a reference point for the arrival in, and departure from the city where it is located. This trend has created increased interest in architectural execution in the design of control towers in addition to their functional requirements. It is precisely the individuality of these requirements that significantly affects the type of building, such that throughout history there are various examples of “types” of tower designs, which, once designed, were repeated in various airports: one notable case is the leoh Ming Pei control tower. It was designed between 1962 and 1965 with the objective implementation in 70 airports, although in the end 16 were built. The concept of locating in upper levels strictly that which was necessary was developed, putting the maximum amount of functions in the base building, which was adapted to the specific characteristics of each location. As such, the tower could be prefabricated and repeated with standardised equipment, giving the airport network an image of safety since a controller could work in any location without having to adapt. The tower was designed with 5 standardised heights (18-46 m) in accordance with visibility requirements in each location. The control tower’s cab is pentagonal so there are no parallel façades and so as to avoid reflections. In Spain, in the 1970s, Juan Montero Romero, an aeronautical engineer, built a tower, which was repeated in several cities: Málaga, Alicante, Valencia, etc.

To create a landmark, the architect must find within the functionality the characteristics that distinguish one tower from others

Converting control towers into airport landmarks and reference points for cities is a challenge in the work of an architect: creating a symbol, always unique for each location, which meets all of the requirements for the optimal functioning of the tower. The location, the height of the control room, its form and the layout of its structural elements are some of the first elements to define. Control towers typically have a base building and a shaft that supports the upper floors, which are designed to adapt to the control operations. Given the form, with an upper part and a lower part and the height of the type of building, in my opinion it is essential to incorporate the construction process into the design of the tower, and this is what I have done in those which I have designed. This design comes from an analysis of the functional aspects, the programme and the location. To create a landmark, the architect must find within the functionality the characteristics that can distinguish one tower from others and strengthen them to create a unique tower with its own character in each case.

Analysis of four cases

The following examples of control towers show diferente conceptual approaches to design this building type and the elements that diversify its design.

1962. Dulles airport, Washington DC
Eero Saarinen

The Dulles tower has all of the equipment rooms at a height, elegantly assembled by Saarinen with two juxtaposed bodies. The form of the tower is integrated with that of the terminal building, also designed by the same architect.

1992. JFK airport, Nueva York
Pei Cobb Freed & Partners

The upper part of the JFK tower, 97.5 metres in height, contains only the aerodrome control cab and half way up the shaft there is the platform control room, which takes the same form as the upper levels.

1997. Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas airport
Bruce Fairbanks

The Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas control tower had the specific feature of a 400 m² equipment room located at a height. To resolve the transition between the shaft of the tower and the projection, an inverted half sphere was adopted, with a floor for air conditioning equipment being inserted in the support. The octagonal shape defined for the
cab is extended throughout the top of the building, the structural design of a central column and 8 perimeter columns is repeated on all levels.

Another particular feature of the tower is the construction system designed as an integral part of the design. The shaft is built with prefabricated segments assembled in spirals, which, on the inside, contain the service ducts and circumscribe the emergency stairway. The upper floors were built with a metallic structure on the floor and subsequently hoisted onto the shaft. The system allowed the tower to be built in nine months, without using scaffolding.

2004. Barcelona-El Prat airport
Bruce Fairbanks

The functional requirements were similar to those of Barajas, with the exception that a large part of the equipment is located in the base building. The resistant structure is defined independently from the functional elements of the shaft, which was developed as a representative design element. An eight-pointed hyperbola generated from the octagonal shape of the cab holds the upper floors.

The hyperbola links the tower with Catalan Modernism and Antoni Gaudí, who used this form in many of his designs, including on the domes of the Sagrada Familia. The construction system is a representative part of his design. The assembly of the hyperbola, built with prefabricated concrete girders, was guided by a central aluminium structure designed to contain the elements of the shaft. The upper floors were built on land and hoisted into position, supported by the eight points of the hyperbola, consolidating the whole structure when it was under load.

“In the future, it will not be necessary to view operations”

Roberto Serrano has participated in more than 50 aeronautical projects, amongst them, the NET and SAT control towers of Madrid-Barajas airport and the new control tower of Eldorado airport (Bogotá).

Although the first control towers date back to the 1920s (in 1921, Croydon airport in London was the first in the world to introduce air traffic control), it was from the 1930s that they became commonplace, due to the fact that growing aircraft traffic made controlling and managing it necessary. At that time, in which technology was nothing like the current systems, the need to visually supervise aeronautical operations around the airport was met by placing the control room (cab) in an elevated and predominant position of the airport (control tower).

To date, the first steps in designing a control tower involve establishing its site and the height of the cab. Internationally, to meet the viewing requirements from the cab, the recommendations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are applied. The optimum height and location of a control tower is the result of weighing up many considerations. The view from the cab requires the air traffic controller to be able to distinguish the aircraft and vehicles that circulate in the manoeuvring area, as well as aircraft that fly over the airport, particularly in take-off and landing paths. The objective is to have the maximum visibility possible and avoid the sun, external light sources and reflections from adjacent buildings affecting the visibility of the controller.

Nowadays, technology allows a practically blind landing

With regard to the location, we must consider the potential effects of local weather: flood areas or areas susceptible to fog. Its compatibility with the potential future development of the airport must also be studied, thereby avoiding the need to relocate the tower before the end of its life cycle. Insofar as possible, the tower and its buildings should be located on the landside of the airport, thus avoiding access through the airfield and facilitating the entry of staff. Furthermore, the location should be such that it does not affect the quality of the signals of the airport’s radio navigation aids (ILS, VOR, DME, etc.), or communication systems. The minimum height required for the control tower can be obtained with the aid of the FAA visibility analysis tool, ATCTVAT (Airport Traffic Control Tower Visibility Analysis Tool), in accordance with the physical conditions of the airport.

Once the position and height has been determined, the infrastructure is designed, and generally includes a cab and an antenna field, which, located on the roof of the cab, normally has communications antennas, radio relays, and other electronic and lightening protection elements. Furthermore, there are areas for staff, equipment, power, air conditioning, etc.

In an era in which technology provides information to pilots to allow a practically blind landing, is it necessary to keep air traffic controllers in a high position so they can see these operations? In the future, air traffic control rooms will probably be in buildings that are more similar to those of offices or air traffic control centres than the current towers.

The future has already become reality

2015. Control tower of Örnsköldsvik airport, Sweden

Recently, Örnsköldsvik airport in Sweden replaced its control tower with high-tech cameras. Signals are sent to controllers stationed in Sunvsal airport, located around 150 kilometres away, from a 25-metre mast with 14 high-definition cameras. The high performance of these cameras eliminates blind spots, provides information in rain, fog or snow and, along with a whole series of weather sensors, microphones and other devices, it allows controllers to feel as if they were beside the runway. The Swedish Transport Agency approved remotely operated towers on 31 October 2014. Six months later, the first airplane landed in Örnsköldsvik airport using the remote tower services.