Estudo de viabilidade do Aerdromo Bissaya Barreto

Bissaya Barreto Municipal Airfield Sustainability StudyFrancisco LemosThanks President of the Juri - Prof. Ana Cristina Amaro (Phd)(Examiner) Pedro Tavares (Phd)(Maters Thesis Orienter) Pedro Coimbra Martins (Phd)(Maters Thesis Co-Orienter)Paulo Leito (City Council Official)(Maters Thesis Supervisor) Cmd. Costa Ramos (Aeronatical Engeneering Technician)KeywordsBissaya Barreto Municipal Airfield Coimbra City CouncilApplied MathematicsLinear OptimizationOperations ResearchData Envelopment AnalysisFinancial envelopeCost structure:Anual current expense aprox. 150.000,00 (Financial + HR)No income, no landing, parking or fuel supply fees

Functional structurePilot School - Aero Clube de Coimbra

Aeronautic maintenance Industrias Aeronuticas de Coimbra

Functional structure

Fire prevention squadron

Functional runway landing of Brazils President, Dilma Roussef

Architecture project for development 5 tsages with a total of 9 infrastructures

1st stage: Parking space and fuel supply2nd stage: runway extension and transfer of safe house3rd stage: Parking space4th stage: Parking space and access to runway5th stage: Parking space and hangar layoutWhats the Problem?Minimum ammount of capital q decreasing linearly with time thats necessary to execute the project?Initial ScenarioNecessary:Execute the infrastructure project in 15 yearsPay the project in 25 yearsWith:Bank financingEuropean Union fundingIncome from investments being made

Formulation Data Project stagesST0 = 25.000,00 (initial capital at t = 0, or starting cash flow) Formulation Data Income predictionFormulation Data Income prediction(interests)(sum of debt payment equals the loans amount)Formulation Data Financing constraintsFormulation Data Human resources and financial costsFormulao Data Project stage constraintsFormulation Data Project stage constraintsFormulation CompilationFormulation CompilationFormulao Dados e Programao Linear Inteira Mista Restries adicionaisFormulation Sustainability constraintEfficiency analysis Data envelopment analysis

Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), formulated by CHARNES et al.Input:q

Outputs:Net Present Value (NPV)Investment incomeZInvestment in internal processes and internal learning (PAPC)Scenario resultsInitial scenario(5.1.1)q []RI [] (Total income from investment)NPV []D [] (Total of expenses)P [] (Total loans)J [] (Total interest paid)Z [] (Deficit)250.744,37998.621,86121.234,734.154.545,59113.562,4511.023,52151.851,36Initial scenario(5.1.1)InfrastructureYear123456789111000000020011110003000000101400000000050000000006000000000700000000080000000009000000000100000000001100000000012000000000130000000001400000000015000000010Scenario resultsReduction of expenses (5.1.2)Scenario resultsResultados e anlise de ScenariosReduction of expenses(5.1.2)q []RI [] (Total income from investment)NPV []D [] (Total of expenses)P [] (Total loans)J [] (Total interest paid)Z [] (Deficit)107.220,96845.854,84189.979,721.864.637,23617.193,30282.360,403.120,10Reduction of expenses(5.1.2)InfrastructureYear123456789100000000021000000003000000000401000000050010000006000110100700000100180000000009000000000100000000001100000000012000000000130000000001400000000015000000010Scenario resultsNo European Union Funding with expense reduction(5.1.3)Scenario resultsNo European Union Funding with expense reduction (5.1.3)q []RI [] (Total income from investment)NPV []D [] (Total of expenses)P [] (Total loans)J [] (Total interest paid)Z [] (Deficit)141.769,19718.131,9472.561,751.864.637,23470.375,88132.844,533.120,10Scenario resultsNo European Union Funding with expense reduction(5.1.3)InfrastructureYear 123456789110000000020000000003000000000400000000050000000006000000000700000000080100000009000100000100010100001100000100012000000000130000000001400000010115000000010Scenario resultsExpense reduction and replaning (5.1.4)Scenario resultsExpense reduction and replaning(5.1.4)Scenario resultsExpense reduction and replaning(5.1.4)q []RI [] (Total income from investment)NPV []D [] (Total of expenses)P [] (Total loans)J [] (Total interest paid)Z [] (Deficit)109.925,24839.572,11195.903,541.864.637,23662.863,38291.234,542.695,98Scenario resultsExpense reduction and replaning(5.1.4InfrastructureYear 12345678910100000000002100000000030000000000401000000005000000000160011000000700001100008000000101090000000000100000000000110000000000120000000000130000000000140000000000150000000100Scenario resultsExpense reduction with replaning and investment in internal processes and learning,PAPC (5.1.5)Scenario resultsExpense reduction with replaning and investment in internal processes and learning,PAPC (5.1.5)Scenario resultsExpense reduction with replaning and investment in internal processes and learning,PAPC (5.1.5)Scenario resultsExpense reduction with replaning and investment in internal processes and learning,PAPC (5.1.5)q []RI [] (Total income from investment)NPV []D [] (Total of expenses)P [] (Total loans)J [] (Total interest paid)Z [] (Deficit)120.507,42972.952,09180.312,312.149.571,12576.094,36267.247,7510.457,22Scenario resultsExpense reduction with replaning and investment in internal processes and learning,PAPC(5.1.5)InfrastructureYear 123456789101112131415100000000001000021000000000000003000000000000000401000000000000050001000001000006001010000001100700000110100001080000000000000009000000000000000100000000000000001100000000000000012000000000000000130000000000000001400000000000000015000000010000001Scenario resultsResultados e anlise de ScenariosRI vs PAPC (5.2.1)DMU/scenarioInputOutputsq []RI []PAPC5.1.1.250744,3674998621,8615.1.2.107220,9553845854,8415.1.3.141.769,19718.131,9415.1.4.109925,2415839572,1115.1.5.120.507,42972.952,0910DMU/scenarioEficiency [%]Target q []Target RI []Target PAPCq [%] RI [%]PAPC [%]5.1.1.49,33123686,81998621,8610,26-50,70926,45.1.2.97,71104765,47845854,848,69-2,30769,45.1.3.62,74 88946,03718131,947,38-37,30638,15.1.4.94,60 103987,31839572,118,63-5,40762,95.1.5.100,00 120507,42972952,0910000RI vs PAPC (5.2.1)

Scenario resultsNPV vs PAPC(5.2.2)DMU/ScenarioInputOutputsqNPVPAPC5.1.1.250744,3674121234,72815.1.2.107220,9553189979,71715.1.3.141.769,1972.561,7515.1.4.109925,2415195903,54415.1.5.120.507,42180.312,3110DMU/ ScenarioEficiency [%]Target q []Target VAL []Target PAPCq [%]VAL [%]PAPC [%]5.1.1.27,4568838,62121234,731-72,5005.1.2.99,48106665,65189979,721-0,5005.1.3.29,6742056,2472561,751-70,3005.1.4.100109925,24195903,5410005.1.5.100120507,42180312,3110000Scenario resultsNPV vs PAPC(5.2.2)

Scenario resultsZ vs PAPC(5.2.3)DMU/ScenarioInputOutputsqZPAPC5.1.1.250744,3674-151851,3615.1.2.107220,9553-3120,10315.1.3.141.769,19-3.120,1015.1.4.109925,2415-2695,98315.1.5.120.507,42-10.457,2210DMU/ Scenario Eficiency [%]Target q []Target Z []Target PAPC q [%]Z [%]PAPC [%]5.1.1.4,8112050,74-1045,721-95,2-99,305.1.2.11,2412050,74-1045,721-88,8-66,505.1.3.8,512050,74-1045,721-91,5-66,505.1.4.10,9612050,74-1045,721-89-61,205.1.5.100120507,42-10457,2210000Scenario resultsScenario resultsZ vs PAPC(5.2.3)

Financial analysis (5.2.4)DMU/ ScenarioEficiency [%]Target q []Target Z []Target VAL []Target RI []q [%]Z [%]VAL [%]RI [%]5.1.1.49,33123686,81998621,86185069,56-10733,12-50,7052,7-92,95.1.2.100107220,96845854,84189979,72-3120,100005.1.3.64,0790837718131,94158671,8-3120,1-35,90118,705.1.4.100109925,24839572,11195903,54-2695,9800005.1.5.100120507,42972952,09180312,31-10457,220000Scenario resultsModel conclusionsWhats left to explore?Variable limitations? Software package distribution ?Other applications:Highways, hospital, stadiums?Production of pharmaceuticals?Software development?Sustainability study conclusionsGradual decrease of expenseAcompany infrastructure execution with the understanding of internal processes and learning.European Union fundingThe EndThank you