AEROPORTO DE FARO [ALGARVE]

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "AEROPORTO DE FARO [ALGARVE]"

Transcription

1 AEROPORTO DE FARO [ALGARVE]

2 )*+&! " #! $% &'!!! & ( *,-". *'/#)./ *0%1! "

3

4 ! " "# $ % #! &'(' ) *&'&*+, &'&&+$-,.(, $ / # % $ 01!1 1 2 #3 $ # " % " " 1, "#, " ",#$

5 6 # # 0, " 1 0 )", $! 2, "1 " "0$ 6 " ,1$ "0, 1 3,! $ &

6 ! "#

7

8 !"#$! " # "" " $" " "$ % "$& $' ( " " ) ' * + ' $ " %,-( " $. "/#0 *1 2 %'+ + + $ $"*4 0", 5 &" * 6-, 5 ' " " " $ 8 : 9; #! +. " +, + 3, *,( -6<$, %,-(%, =- (

9 " : 8> # 9 8 : <9; : " $ "3 8 9; "3! & " 8 )9 "'? ' " $ "" " ' %!& '(()*) $ "! " "*4 "3 % "$ ' " 3! * + ' ' "! " ", 5 "3! & "$ $ " $ " " & & +? ( ' *4 " ' /

10 % < $ + (# 7 < " % $ $ < $, A

11

12 ! " # $ %&&' ( #) %*%+% ( #)# %,-%. # #) %*.%/ # #)0 %-/ #)2 %/+%-%+- 0 #) %%%!" # #)3 --$-1%41- " #!$ % # &$" ' ( #!" ' ( #) * ' + #, ' # " #)" ++%%* ## % $'-" %!! $ % '!'""$.! ) %) $"/-!" ) #)5 --/+/ #2 (!/, ( 0/ ( * # () " ( #) ( 1* + $" + & #) *- "$$ / "/ ) )!-"$*,

13 , "* $$&-!1-!* # 0 % "$$" (!-"$ # + "'$ # #) # +$% 3 $ $ # $ $".! ( #) */-%, 0( #) 0 /*- 0( )!-"$!" )+ ) "!"!$2-! $ ) ) &'$ ) )) -!" ) ), / ) )!"2* ) )# "/$""$" ), )% $!"$$/ ), & 1!6 02 ) %/+% 02 )# %4%1**%+%-/%/$- 02 ) 4%1*4*% /%$-/ ) /*--$-1% )# 71%,--$-1%41-2 0) -$.--$-1%41-2# 0)0 1*-%/- 2 )) "!, )) "!1',, )) $ $,# 8-6-! 25! ( ) /*+9#(( :#((2; ( )# 71%, #(( :#((2; # ) 7,%/--+- #

14 $/#: 8%*%+% ( $/#:#8%%++,1- ( $/#:8-$%*.%/9:%/$*<+1=#((2; $/#:08,-%+*--$ 1%41$/-9 5"":#((2;> +*/--- %:+%11+*1%41-9-%/+:--+-; 5 $/#:28#((2--$ 9 +*/$ --;1%41-=. 1%,9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.-- %#((2; 5 $/#:81*+,+%:=%/%/=%/-%/$ 9-%/+8%/$/-; # $/#:38-$+%%*%? #2 $/#:"8%*.%/9-%/+8%/$/-; #3 $/#:58%% #" $/#: (8%% #5 $/#: 8%% #5 $/#: #8--$1*>/ # $/#: 8--$1*>/ # $/#: 08/*17-00 $/: 8%%*%+% $/:#8-+,1+-%%%%-/%/$- 03 $/:8#((2--$ $/-=. +$%. : +*/----$ -9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2; 05 $/:08#((2+1%41-=.. %*$,9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2; 2( $/:28#((2+1%41-=. +%++$%. 9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--% #((2; 2( $/:87 1%,--$ -=.. %#((29-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2; 2 $/:387 1%,1%41-=.. %#((29-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2; 2 $/:"8-$.--$-=.+*%+7,%/9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 2# $/:58-$.1%41-=.+*%+7,%/9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 2# $/: (81*-=. /1=%--$ -9#((2;> +*/----$ -9-%/+>-%-: +$*.--%#((2; $/: 81%/-*%?=. +%/. -;> +*/----$-9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; $/: #81%/-*%?=. -;> +*/----$-9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 20 $/: 81*-=. /1=%1%41-9#((2;9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2 ; 22 $/: 081%/-*%?=. +%/. 9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; $/: 281%/-*%?= >-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 2 )

15 $/: 81+$%*-=. +$%%$ 9#((2;9-%/+>-%-:+$ *.--%#((2 ; 23 $/: 381+$%%/-*%?=. +%/. ; 9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 23 $/: "81+$%%/-*%?=. ; 9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; 2",

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

17 =* 81+$%%/-*%?=. +*/-%:+%11+* 9-%/+>-%-:+$*.--%#((2; " =*#8/=*+/*-,% 0( =*81$+.-=.$%-,% 0 =*08%?*-=/%%,% 0 =*28-/=-%--**%% 0 =*8=1-+%%*- 0# =*38/*-%$7-00 =*"8+%-/1% 02 =*58/*1%41-#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; ( =*0(8/*--$-#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; =*0 8/*+$%#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; =*0#871%,7.--+-#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; # =*087,%/--+-#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; # =*0087,%/ ,$;#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; # =*0287,%/--+-9%:-+,$;#(( >#((29-%/+-/ ; #

18 ! : ; 3< <<496: = 8 7/ 627: 3<3= 7<: =6<=8 2: 3"> $ $274=3: : = <4= > 7 4=3 4: 9 9: : =3 < < 64 6 =7 > : < :? = 7 46 : > < 7: 4> 8= =97&69 : 32 8 A 8 879: < 8=79 879: < > 8 8 <=4 62: 3 8 6: =97& : < 8= < 8 <867567? = > 8 8=8?<> 7 84> 88=86<6547< =8 < 8696: 86=8 8 76= 89: 8< 86: : >? ?4 73B48= : : 7 C2> < > 4: => =6<9 76= 896>?D 9 7 8: 4< >? =< 84< < : : <<=8 <: 8> ?47546< 873: <4< > 88=817 3 =9 87 =: 6 < 85===4: : =: < : > 8 8 : 3 2 7: :? =4 :? = = : 4 67 > : ;?872?= > 56 79: 6 7: =: << : < <<4 %

19 8 5;4 9 68= > 8 <7= : < = 4: : = : =: 8: ?<: ; D&7<<4"5 : : 3< < < 4 4 < 8444 (

20 # $ %&&' #) *! 4 7)?: > < <8 47 #E++D )DD7+#E,#D,DD/7 67#2,: AF: 3 #84 #: 8! -= <4 8 F 7<: G' 4 $ 8=9 6 H 8&69 94 < I 6J4 48: D5 8 8=97 8&69= 84 48: <89=2 6 +: 6 9 : 5342, = 84 A<: 8=92&697F 9=5 8 ==61 4 > : 7 4 #:#8 +! +

21 "4> 847 =73 : 689: 675 > 1+%E$7 )E$26 = <4 : 6<E$6=6 ' 5 3=3=72> 87<=446=29=2 733/ > 8> 26 8> 7 8> > 7446= 67)K < 8 : > <)K < 8 : 7: 8%+K < 8 : > > 7<: < 8 67: ! 6 >?277 9: 4 Full Airport Name IATA / ICAO Code IATA Slot Coordination LAT/LONG Altitude 7.5m Airport reference temperature Distance from the city Distance from other population centers Access to the airport Catchment area (Portuguese side data) Site size Aeroporto de Faro Apartado FARO TEL: SITA: FAOKAXH FAO / LPFR Level 3 (Summer only) N / W 26ºC (August) 4 km Tavira 30km, Lagos 78km, Huelva (Spain) 91km, Beja 152km, Lisbon - 300km. Regional access to the airport is provided by a single arterial (N125-10) that connects the airport to N-125 and Faro Centro. Faro Centro is located east of the airport and is separated only by Parque Natural da Ria Formosa. This four-lane arterial also serves as a major route to area beaches via N and, as such, is frequently congested during peak tourist months. 30 minutes 246,000 inhabitants. 60 minutes 395,000 inhabitants. 90 minutes 942,000 inhabitants. 120 minutes 2,801,000 inhabitants. (Source: Instituto Nacional de Estatistica Portugal, Regiao do Algarve, Censos 2001) 237 hectares 8!! : = > => 77 > 718

22 #)#, =(7 7 <<4 L632(, 8 935== 87 > 6> 32 8(B 846 +%6> 3C> 8= 8<)++: B : C7 8++> 8= 8<#,+: B: > 8 86> 3> > 79=47 C 8 4<=6 > <, 4<?= 2 7F> : 7 (#7(%(26 =7+4<?= > 4<?= > = <?= 8 : 567== > : (%(8 : 85<65877F : < Year Event 1962 Construction starts on Airport Airport opened (July) Formation of Empresa Pública Aeroportos e Navegação Aérea ANA, EP to provide management, operation and development of nine commercial airports and air navigation services to civil aviation Construction completed on terminal building ANA and EP split into two new entities: ANA, SA for airport management NAV, EP for air navigation services Completion on terminal expansion. #)*6 #8,! 6 =6> 3 > 8 F> 3 86=86 F < 86> 31 F> 33 : 8 > : 567= 8< <4 7 8 : 567=6 8< 86> =7 8' < 8

23 #:8 69: <! #((2; #)0-6-! 87 75> > 797<: 3<++,7 7 8 : 7<<4: 3F 5 > 87 7<=6 76: : <<4 < <4 8 F46 < 4 <=8 B= = <=8 2 <=8 F4= 4847<<46 2 4C7 8: 8767 : 48 = <=8 Passengers Commercial movements International 4,491,144 32,505 1,025 Domestic 196, Transit 30,473 Total 4,717,746 33,361 1,212 Cargo (tonnes) 8-6!#((29!> :+$ 6#((2;

24 4= <I 7 <J4= Passengers Peak month 627,027 4,210 Design day 17, Peak hour 3, Commercial movements 08C <6!#((2>! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; / 8< =737< =73< 8?: 8 : <=6: 5?867< > 8 8 7=73B 857+1: 6 = ?86C #)2/!!!4 7<4 <=6: 57: 9: 6: : A7 8 55> 8<=67 8< 87: 7= <4 7531$ 8, 8L Passengers (mppa) ,52 Movements (000s) Cargo (tonnes) 1,217* 1,499 2,232 3,317 4,638 6,103 *Note: The small difference in the cargo 2005 figure with the figure in table 1-3 is due to the inclusion of non commercial cargo tonnage 28/!! 9! ; & 9!: : +$!#((; 8: 93: 7<<45 > 8<=6 7<++, <=6<++, 8: <: 8 : 9: : 767 8<4 F48<=6> 45 7= 8<=6 75B 8> F4 245 C > 8 7=2 D : <4 < 8 <6 6 : <: 7> 8:? =<: 8? = > < : <:? ==: > 8: "> $ $2 : = 84: : : <: 84=7<76: 5<> =7< 8,3 847 < 8=: 6 8<> =<4 < 87++#1+M )

25 Parsons 2010 Passengers (mppa) Movements (000s) Cargo (tonnes) _ 1,499 8/!! 9! ; & 9#((3:#( ; 86 <: D: > 86 < 8<> =6: M 854> 8 : 7 <<4<++N => 8< < +K 2> 848 > 8 89: 76: => 8 : 7531$ B#K 6: CN 847 < 8=7: 9: 6 =<: 8> 6 =7> 8 8"> 4 $< 873 8<4 6 <: <<4 8< : 7 : <: 27 8<: 74579<: 8: 76: :? 796: > 8 == < <<4< 84: < 8 =: 8 6 < 8 >? > 477 D : <4 < 8 < 8 < 79: 27> 6: 7 8 8= : 8 <<496> 49=> 8 8 <4 7531$ =< 8 79: 8 < <4 7 8 = : 3 : : : < <6 6 79: : > : 2> 797<4 47> > = : 9> : 5< 84 67: =8 446,

26 #) Airport Operation #)) %-. $/*% Flight Safety of civil airline operations Flight Crew and Engineer licensing, control of aircraft regulation Airworthiness of commercial and general aviation aircraft Regulation of Air Navigation Services Licensing and Certification of Aerodromes Flight safety oversight and control of civil operators is the responsibility of INAC. INAC is funded directly by the Portuguese State. INAC is supervised by the Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Communications. Flight safety oversight and control of civil operators is the responsibility of INAC. INAC is funded directly by the Portuguese State. INAC is supervised by the Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Communications. Flight safety oversight and control of civil operators is the responsibility of INAC. INAC is funded directly by the Portuguese State. INAC is supervised by the Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Communications. Currently there is no formal regulation of the Air Navigation services. It is understood that this function will be undertaken by INAC in the near future. Currently there is no formal process for the regulation and certification of the aerodrome. It is understood that this function will be undertaken by INAC in the near future. Regulation of environmental standards (omissions & noise policy) ANA must comply with national and EU legislation on environmental standards. Setting and Control of airspace policy, and the regulation of airspace design, classification, including the navigation and communications infrastructure Responsibility of INAC. Air Accident Investigation Air Accident Investigation is undertaken by an independent governmental organization (GPIAA) established by law to investigate and determine the cause or probable cause of aircraft accidents and incidents that occur in Portugal. The organization reports directly to the Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Communications. Provision of air navigation services for airfields NAV Portugal Provision of en-route Air Navigation services NAV Portugal Regulation of airport charges including: Landing / Use of Runway Parking & Handling Passenger Charge Aerodrome charges are set by local government authorities including the participation of the national regulator INAC. Regulation of ATM Charges including enroute En-route charges are set by NAV Portugal.

27 #))# %%% Hours of Operation H24, no environmental or night curfews in operation. Currently the Airport is closed between (0000 and 0600) hours as there is no scheduled traffic. Type of Operation Civil Commercial Aircraft and General Aviation. Airport Management Stakeholder Co-ordination Airport Ramp Control Airport Roles & Responsibilities Gate / Stand and Check-In Allocation Aerodrome Maintenance Flight Briefing State & VIP Handling Airport Rescue & Fire Fighting Service (ARFFS) Category Category 7. Maximum Aircraft Size Design Aircraft ICAO Code E - B Average Aircraft Turnaround Time minutes Aerodrome Operations Manual (AOM) Not yet approved by INAC Airport Emergency Plan (Draft) Mandatory Aerodrome Documentation Safety Management System National Security Plan Aircraft Parking Manual Low Visibility Procedures Ramp Handling Concessions Portway (concession ends 2011) Ground Force (concession ends 2011) Hours of Operation: (All year 06:00 24:00) Passenger Handling Concession SERVISAIR, AIR PASS, Ground Force, Portway and GB Airways (Self-handling and third party handling) #

28 Passenger Security Concession Passenger Hand Baggage Screening, Hold Baggage Screening and access control all outsourced to Prossegur. until Airport Stake Holder Coordination The airport conducts monthly stakeholder coordination meetings with the airlines, ground handlers, and other stakeholders. All aircraft positions are serviced by a hydrant fuel system. Aircraft Refueling Hours of Operation (Fuel Concessionaire) (All year 06:00 24:00) Other services Met Briefing Office Customs & Immigration Health & Sanitation ATS Briefing Office (ARO) All offices H24 Cargo Facilities Cargo facilities have a capacity up to 20,000 tonnes. Number of Employees 202 total Breakdown of employees #)3 1& #)3) %/+% & 4=7: 9: 4 75> 77 6 =: : 35<67 8F 87 75> > 797<: 3<++,7 7 8 : 7<<4: 3F 5 > 87 7<=6 76: : <<4 < <4 8 F46 < 4 <=8 B= = <=8 2 <=8 F4= 4847<<46 2 4C7 8: 8767 : 48 = <=8! 8> 72: 9: 4: : 4: 9: %

29 #)3)#,-%+*--$ -1%41- Faro - Total passengers & movements ( ) 5,000,000 40,000 Passengers 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000, , Total Passengers (Excl transit) 1997 Year Total Movements (Commercial only) 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 #:08,! & 9 5"":#((2;>! :!! & 9!:!; 5,000 0 Movements #)3) /*--$ -1%41- Annual commercial movements and passengers - Faro 2005 Passengers 700, , , , , , ,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Movements 0 0 January February March April May June Year July August September October November December Total commercial passengers (exc transit passengers) Total commercial movements #:28#((2 9! ; & 6 9!> :+$ 6#((2; (

30 ICAO code Passengers Movements Passenger Type Number % Number % Domestic Interior 194, % % *230 Domestic Territorial 1, % 8 0.0% 168 LCC Non-Schengen 1,181, % 11, % 100 LCC Schengen 264, % 4, % 55 Non-Schengen 1,967, % 9, % 209 Other European 18, % % 85 Schengen 1,038, % 6, % 173 Third Countries 19, % % 107 Total 4,687, % 33, % 141 Average PAX per movement * Note that the figure shown for average passenger per movement for domestic interior does not fully reflect the actual number of passengers on domestic flights. This is because a significant proportion of domestic passengers are transit passengers arriving or departing on international flights. The domestic movements figure does not account for all domestic passengers, therefore giving a larger average passenger per movement value. 38#((2 9! ; & 6! 69!> : +$ 6#((2 ; Movements % Code A % Code B 1, % Code C 27, % Code D 4, % Code E % Total 33, % 82.3% Faro - Percentage of movements by ICAO aircraft category 13.5% 0.9% 3.2% 0.1% Code A Code B Code C Code D Code E "8#((2! & 6+%!! 69!> :+$ 6 #((2; #)3)0 7 --$ -1%41- Passengers Arrivals 326,341 2,102 Departures 300,686 2,108 Transits 3,943 Total 630,970 4,210 Movements 58#((2 C & 9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; +

31 #)3)2 -$. --$ -1%41- Passengers Movements Arrivals 8, Departures 8, Transits 254 Total 17, (8#((2 6 & 9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; =737< =73 < 8?: 8 : < =6: 5 #)3) 1*-%$ 6: : 3< 8: 7=7 8> 8 55> 8 5 8I,J484 =36 8 4: 35<67 8F Passengers Movements Airline PAX % of total PAX Airline Movements % of total movements Easyjet 578, % Easyjet 4, % Monarch 435, % TAP 3, % First Choice 374, % Monarch 2, % TAP 306, % Transavia 1, % Transavia 280, % First Choice 1, % 81 6 & 9#((2;>! 9!> :+$ 6#((2 ; Passengers Movements Country PAX % of total PAX Country Movements % of total movements UK 2,783, % UK 18, % Germany 597, % Germany 3, % Netherlands 412, % Netherlands 2, % Ireland 356, % Ireland 2, % France 92, % France 1, % #81 ' 6! >! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; : 8=8=8 8> A7F: 2I6: 5< =<: 4J< 86: 5<=9=7 =<=8 > 8 <7 > 4B < 84< => = <: 4C8 < 8 > 1<7M

32 8 8: : 4N : < <4 =2 = < =<7 B<F: 2 84<<=8 <: "7 "59 2 7: 4 = 57= > = = "5C Passengers Movements Airport PAX % of total PAX Airport Movements % of total movements London, Gatwick 682, % London, Gatwick 4, % Manchester 495, % Manchester 2, % Amsterdam, Schiphol 358, % Amsterdam, Schiphol 2, % Dublin 272, % Dublin 1, % Birmingham Internl. 194, % London, Luton Airport 1, % 81 ' >! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; #)"!+ #)") +%4-%-=*- ATC provider Responsibilities NAV Portugal NAV Portugal is responsible for providing approach, tower and ground services. 08+& 6 #)")# -/%/$-+ Classification Restrictions Faro CTR (control zone), class C airspace During the site visit, ANA indicated that there were no airspace restrictions in the vicinity of the airport. From an earlier Parsons-FCG report, it is understood that the nearest restricted airspace is 46 km north of Faro. 28-! 8 : 48 <: 8 75>

33 #:8 ++%: % 9!8 ;

34 #)") 4$ %-/4**+A /1 Navigation NDB ILS (LLZ) ILS GP/DME DVOR/DME Airport non-directional beacon providing omni-directional coverage to 250nm. There is also a non precision NDB approach promulgated for Runway 28. There is currently a CAT I ILS on Runway 28. There are currently plans to Install a CAT II ILS on Runway 28 (this was planned to be certified and flight checked in June 2006). Install a CAT I ILS on Runway 10. There is a CAT I ILS glide-path and DME. Airport DVOR/DME providing omni-directional coverage to 200nm and supports non precision approaches to both runways and Standard Instrument Arrivals and Departure procedures. Surveillance PSR MSSR Primary surveillance radar was being installed, but not operational, at the time of the site visit (June 2006). Dedicated MSSR. This was installed approximately six months ago (end of 2005). Lighting Approach lighting Airfield lighting The approach lighting is configured CAT I for Runway 28 (there is a difference filed with ICAO SARPS as the configuration of the approach lighting array is reduced from 900m to 450m). There is a Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) for both Runway 10 and Runway 28. Airfield lighting is CAT II configured. MET MET equipments There is an RVR assessment system, comprising transmissometers at the touchdown zone (TDZ), mid-point and stop-end. There are also two anemometers at each touchdown and two ceilometers in each runway undershoot. 8& &!D 8 <7 =8 = > 7 7 : ' 8 : 4=: <<7=8 =5 > 7' 31 7<: 8746: 855 7<: 746> =697 8 : < $ #)")0 +%%*%?=/*$ 84 > 567=8> 8F <=6 )

35 #)5! #:38! ' #)5) /?. /?. +/*- Dimensions Material RESA Designation 10/28 Primary direction Runway 28 (85%) Hours of operation 2490m*45m (strip 2610m*150m) ICAO runway code 4E. Runway PCN 80/F/A/W/Tcoeficient 0.5 (maintenance) Asphalted concrete. The runway was last resurfaced in Runway 10: 130m*90m. Runway 28: 90m*90m. (This is not fully compliant with the recommendations of ICAO Annex 14.) Aerodrome Operational Hours are daily 06:00 / 24:00 LMT (Local Mean Time). 38 ' 6! 846 B6> 37< 3C 87<486> 3(+: F(+: <6> 3% 7+: F(+: <6> < 8(+: 8> 9$4: : 7,

36 O6> 37< 38672<4 452F 7<: 87<6> 3 7 4< P)+: > : 5)OB$F)24 )C 846 6> 3 4: > 8 6> 3 F 7,+: 87<6> 34 87: : < 8 <7 <= F 7 F <6 6 /?. ++.,%/$,/ Hourly declared runway capacity In-hour capacity limits Other capacity limits Basis for capacity calculation 22 movements per hour Within the hour there must be no more that 11 arrival or departures. There is also an in hour limit of 8 movements within a 15 minute period. This is limited to no more that 5 arrivals or departures. Understood to be supported by a EUROCONTROL CAMACA study. "8 ' 6!! = : 9: > 8?863: 9: ++, 5#: 9: 844 3<=67 : 7531 $ 57$47 8 4<#: 9: 86? <? > 8 46< : F6=96<= #)5)#?.- Width Surface 23m (all taxiways) Asphalt 58' 6!

37 #)5) %7 $ %-%- %*.%/ 836 7=61%5> #:"8 6 9!8 ; #

38 /1=%7 $ %-%-9#((; Total Contact Non-contact Total positions in the AIP $ %-%->=. +-B9#((; #(8 C Total Contact Non-contact ICAO code C D E F C D E F C D E F Total # 8 C 6!E 8?= 6 8 : 8766?= ?446 <<: 7 8 6=6 > < 3< 46?= < : 35F 4 : =< 8 75> #:58 %

39 #: (8 #)5)0 %*%1% #: 8 (

40 *%?4-=*. %%- $"5= 76> 3%76 ="' <> 7<"' 9=7 /*7 %-%- 8< %7+B4 7 8 < 81 =61%C> ?= 8> 97 < 8 $47,$47$4< +

41 #) ( #) () --$+*% Departing Passengers per Hour 1,999 (Year 2005) Arriving Passengers per Hour 2,029 (Year 2005) Transfer Passengers Per Hour Awaiting Information from TAP Annual Capacity 4,687,273 (Year 2005). Passenger Terminal Floor Area 68,500 M 2 Number of Check-In Desks 60 desks Number of Self-Service Desks None Outbound Baggage Handling Capacity 5,400 bags per hour Number of Passenger Screening Positions Hold Baggage System Number of Baggage Belts (Outbound) Number of Departure Gates Centralised system with 8 lanes. Manual system at present Level 3 in-line system, 100% screening of all outbound and transfer bags to be installed September Planned to have 14 inline screening machines. 5 collecting belts (900 bags/hour) 3 rings (800 bags/hour) 32 chutes and 2 race-tracks 6 contact and 15 bus (5 Schengen, 5 non Schengen & 5 swing). Number of Inbound Passport / Immigration Positions 8 / 8 Number of Baggage Reclaim Belts 5 Number of Airline Lounges One lounge allocated to Ground Force Custom Inspection One central area.

42 #) ()# %,%1% =19= : 567=978=8 9 <94 $84?1 =A7 > <48=748= A == 7 48= 7 48= 4? = 7? <7759= = #: #8 > #: 8 >

43 #) * #) ) $%*++-- = = B,1+C ,7$ $ 4 7 < : 8<61 9: ; = 776=? 6 : 8 8<> =9774 <77<4 8< > 8,1+7,#1 86= : : A75(1856: 67< 87> 344 3=< 87<< 7> 3: > 5 7<: : ! : < Facility No of lanes Desirable Capacity Enter Exit Enter Exit Primary access (N ) N (to/from beach area) (employee areas) 2 2 1,500 1, Total 3 3 2,250 2,250 ##8-6 6!!9&! ;<!! #) )# %%?.- 7> 37=7<<1<> 47 /8 > 7> " <<4==1?=> > : 7=1 :?=<4 7> 37<4 374 = F =577;4 7> 37?=< < 8<: 7<4 6: : A75

44 Facility No of lanes Desirable Capacity To Terminal Frontage 4 3,800 From Terminal Frontage 4 3,800 Exit Road from P1 & P3 2 1,200 Enter/Exit Road P2 & P4 2 (one in each direction) 1,200 #8-6, 6+!94!, ; #) ) 1*%?.- 8 : 9753=97> 374 < > < :?=8 : < =79775 > > 7< 8 : : < =F: 3): 877+#: 86 7F469F7$ > 7< 8 : 567= : : A 8 6 < 8 : < = < 4?16 B56 7 FC 7 71<< B56C<= 5 )6: : A 8 6: 5 < : 6 8 : < =4656: =9=984= 8<9: Facility No of Vehicles Inner Road 20 Outer Road 15 #08+!6 + * =844 < 8 : < =<4 6: : A75, Facility No of lanes Desirable Capacity Inner Road Outer Road Total 5 1,200 #28-6, 6+!94!, ; )

45 #) )0 /=*+7$ 8<66<4654?=<4 9= 8 8<7 22 7) <=1 :?= 7 ) < = :?= 6= = 7 ) : : A 8654?=453<4 3 Facility No of Spaces Type P1 292 Departures short term P2 390 Arrivals short term/medium term P3 380 Long term P4 346 Long term (1 week or more pre-sold) Total 1,408 #8-6!C -! 654?=< ?= : B$C3: 7536 : 448: ' ' 7B6 : <4 > F C3: ) ' ' 75#6: : A 84876<?=<<48<4 3 8?=44 Duration Facility P1 P2 P3 P4 Up to ½ Hour Pre-paid 1 hr or fraction hrs or fraction Subsequent hours Daily maximum nd day or fraction Subsequent day or fraction Up to 1 week Up to 2 weeks Up to 3 weeks #38-!C 9 ; 832 : 2: 1676?=957=5 > %(7#6$6?=<)+6 : 3: 7?> 8?= 64 6== <:,6: 8 %+63,

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

47 6 L7: 9 64 & A : , <4 9=7 )2# = 8 81: 875 > #) )5 /=*+-% ' 56 #) ) (1*-4+$ : 94= < 8: 567= #) # + #) #) +$%--+- $= 4 75> <: 3<++, : : 7<<4: 3F 5 > : : 3 4B<F: 26: : < 4=C 77 6 = 4: 35<67 8F -/11. %+$%--+- Operation Tonnes Operation Tonnes Domestic Mixed International 1,024.7 Cargo only Total 1,211.5 Total 1,211.5 #"8-6! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; #

48 447+ <I 7 <J4= 1+$%+-%$ Airline Tonnage % of tonnage DES R Cargo Express % TAP % GB Airways % LTU Airways % Lufthansa % #581! 6 >! :!!9!> :+$ 6 #((2; 8: <> 7F46 8<> =M &"6! 0> < Country Tonnage % of tonnage Mauritania % United Kingdom % Portugal % Germany % Morocco % (81! ' 6! >! :!!9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; : 8=8=8 8> A7F: 2I=<: 4J< 84=9=7 =<=8 > 8 <7 > 4B < 84< => = <: 4C Airport Tonnage % of tonnage Nouarkchott (Mauritania) % London, Gatwick % Lisbon % Nouadhibou (Mauritania) % Dusseldorf % 81! ' >! :!! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; %

49 #) #)# +$%+*. A / <4 3 <4 < 8 87= 7 44 < 4= 7 : 8 8 4= < 4= : : 7 < $ 7 7 > = =7= 4=4= <> =4: : 7 895F 4 7<: $F# 4=7 : 87=744< = : < =787=< 4=2 467= 567= 6 7 5?= 7> < F 8 46 : A <: $= : 8 =<4 <4 4= B= 965 = : 2 86: : =6=72> 9: C 859=: 867? : 6 8<> =4: : 7 895F 4 7<: 8 9: <46 4=7: 87=744<4 M $= <: 8 F> 3?= 4= > 8 7 4= = 8 6 7=< 8> 86 : 7=: 69=4< 8<> ==A =8 87=4> 8 : 5?= 87=<> F 77F4=<4 3 9: =4 $6 : 46 3= = 87= < > 7 4 7<72 : 3 BC 8 4=27BC 8>?=< < $=6 (

50 #) * / % Planned improvements Description Year Source Master Plan Expropriate / use additional 14.9 ha for future airside expansion. Until yr 2007 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Expropriate / use additional 14.7 ha for future airport expansion. In yr 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase Change main access route to airport, connect to VLA. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase Relocate facilities and installations. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase Develop landside to accommodate new passenger flows and demand. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase Runway and Taxiway reconfigured to allow NLA operations. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase Runway, strips and RESA reconfigured to allow precision approach CAT II or CAT III code 4. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit Master Plan Final phase #) 0 / Install ILS and corresponding approach lighting and NAVAIDS in the runways. Beyond 2020 Site Inventory visit #) 0) /=*+/* > 2> > 8 8F< 8 : 83++ Public Supply Services Water Electrical Gas Sewage treatment plant Water supplied by city mains. Supply feeds from national grid EDP. Propane/Butane gas tank is situated landside to supply the restaurants kitchens. Sewage is collected in a drainage network and sent to the city treatment plant. #8! 8 8: =43 753= $4: : 7 2: 3M )+

51 Stand by Generators Location and capacity 2* 700 kva generators to feed part of airside lighting and the NAV systems, with a 5,000-litre fuel tank. 2* kva generators (new) to feed the new amplified terminal with a 10,000-litre- fuel tank. 2* 315 kva generator for emergency systems for the terminal with a 4,000-litre fuel tank. 1* 170 kva generator for ARFF station with a 5,000-litre fuel tank. 1* 325 kva generator next to the maintenance building. 8!6 6 #) 0)# 1*/*-%/+%<-=/%1$ +. $. < 8<6,?' > 63=3 8 : == > <: Location Terminal Catering Fuel Farm Rent-a-car Power Supplies One 15 k V power line. One 15 k V power line. One 15 k V power line. One 15 k V power line. 08' 8 : 8< )7,2 8 55> N )+++' 9> Substation ref PT 1 PT 2 PT 3 PT 4 PT 5 External block Location and capacity PTS: 3 x 630 kva Terminal: 4 x 800 kva and 1 x kva Terminal: 4 x 1,000 kva 1* 170 kva for new ARFF station Rent-a-car: 1 x 400 kva 1 x 250 kva 28-8 > ,)+?' <=3< : 7 8: =43= 8&' $2< 7! : #) 0),4+ 8 : R&'$3 : >?535> = 86=8 <= 1>? < 4= < <= B8 ;4 C2 7 6= 4= )

52 > $8 7<7 = &! : >?3 : 8: 648<<46' $ 6 8: <7&'$3 : : 8F =3 : 2F4 645? =346: 8$ > 8 > 77 &' $3 : #) 0)0 =/*$ 1$ : 8-3 : > <> = Systems Controlled Description of Control Lighting Energy Control lighting system. The system controls the distribution of electrical energy, peak hours and regulates energy consumption. It features stand-by generators. HVAC Supervises and controls the HVAC. Mechanical Lifts, escalators i.e. position alarms, switchboard and controls. Water Sprinklers and potable water. Security Fire detection systems, intrusion alarms and carbon monoxide detection. Airside Runway control systems, lighting & signage, CAT II systems. 8=1-! 8 : => 89<63 = 73 : 86=8<5 4 I6 7I >?> ! ' 63 : : = : $!BC!7 83 : 8 96' 6" 7M $: 39 3 : N = 7 3 : N 14?= 6743 : N )

53 01: =N 64-?1<: 9 8 < : =: N $3 : 1 <4> 8 > = 7N = > 8$!!144 : 9 67 <=8 <: N $13 : <7 =5===4 N $194=3 : N $ < )++,N 013: =: 73++)++, 83 : 57 >!07$"9 8<6 62++K 5=== 4=8675 7/1" 749= 8 : 2 $ > 8 946=/3 : = 7 3 : > 86 : 4: =: < = 7484?17?> 55 4: : 64 > 8 894=2 2-&2 074 > 3 : #) 0)2 -%1? : / =7 89 8> 8 : > 44 >? : < > : #) 0) /*-.-1<7 1 8<6<: 753 $2> 8 8<6<: 24 =< =2152-7" <6<: <6=3 : 8 =44 3 <L 1< > 848 >?R636 64?7 8<6 <: 8<9 =?<> M )

54 Type of Storage Tank Capacity Vertical tank 2 tanks with 1,500,000-litre capacity each. Buried tank 3 tanks with 100,000-litre capacity each C #: 08 C 8 <6 <: 8 6= ,++ < 9 7 7> 4 7 8<6<: ))

55 #) 0)3 -%*?-+%**+%-%-* 7> < 8 777<= 7<3> > 8573: 7> 8 8=? 4 4: : 6 38 <4 #) 0)" +%-/1%%*++.? 8<> = > 46: < 83((( ++, 7 <3++95 Utility Water 3 117, , , , , ,793 m Electrical kwh 8,311,525 8,917,638 14,197,961 15,556,370 16,254,521 15,915,982 "8+ & 1!6 )! 9: 6 7 <: 4 89? : 4 4 > : 4 5 =7 4 5 : : A7 > 8?= 3 : : =: = < 89: <4: 44 : 6 546=7<> > 5 < : 86= =<: >?2 > : 4 < 95< 8 : =<: 8=8 9: 4328> 47 4: : = 8=8 < 89: 43< 86 : : 4 )# & *! =85687< 67: / > 8 8 ),

56 : 8 *! 8 667= > 53 8F 4<: 86== < 86 8> 4<772> : 86==62 86=8: 34 7> 8B6: : C =7 > : "?=: =2 87<< > : 2 : : 82> : > I&777 "67J27<7> 89 6B"#%)2<: 3)C 8 8 8= 9= = '7: 2 : < 837=845> 8: 76: )?: = 87?: > 7 88: 9<> <: = =856 < = 7 : 527 : 8 < 8 8 < > = : 24 =<<6 <4 = <857= 48: = 7 )

57 :#8-!! : 7 S524 7< > : 7: 67<= Environmental developments +++2 : 7 9: : 673 > 8 : F<658: 9 : 8 > 3: 7 : 4 27> 8 86<43 8 9: =3 76"> 2<69: => 67? ) 8+++9: => 8< < 84: 7< 779: < $ = 7 9: =: 3 : B 1$C2> L < $> 9727 : : 4: : 47;6 < > = 8 4 9: =: < 8 >? 6 =<: 8: : <D$ <> $6 3 : = 89: : 673 7> 8 8 <4 7>?<F7<658: < 8< )#

58 )%

59 4 Supporting Summary Statistics 4.1 Annual Passengers and Movements 77 6: : 3 4<++, > 6 8: > > 797<: 3<++,7 7 8 : 7<<4: 3F 5 > 87 7<=6 76: : <<4 < <4 8 F46 < 4 <=8 B= = <=8 2 <=8 F4= 484 7<<46 2 4C 7 8 : : 48 = <= <<4> 7467> 876= 8<4 3 Pax type No of pax % Domestic Interior 194, % Domestic Territorial 1, % LCC Non- Schengen 1,181, % LCC Schengen 264, % Faro Passengers by category 0.4% 5.6% 0.4% 25.2% Non- Schengen 1,967, % Other European 18, % 42.0% 22.2% 4.2% 0.0% Schengen 1,038, % Domestic Interior Domestic Territorial Schengen Non Schengen Third Countries 19, % Other European Third Countries LCC Schengen LCC Non Schengen Total 4,687, % :8#((2 6! 6:! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; )(

60 Movement type No of movs % Domestic Interior % Domestic Territorial 8 0.0% LCC Non- Schengen 11, % LCC Schengen 4, % Non- Schengen 9, % Other European % Schengen 6, % Third country % Total 33, % 0.6% 0.7% 14.5% 28.2% Faro Aircraft movements by type of flight 35.5% 18.0% Domestic Interior Domestic Territorial Schengen Non Schengen Other European Third Countries LCC Schengen LCC Non Schengen 2.5% 0.0% ICAO code :08#((2! & 66 9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; Movement s % Code A % Code B 1, % Code C 27, % Code D 4, % Code E % Total 33, % 82.3% Faro - Percentage of movements by ICAO aircraft category 13.5% 0.9% 3.2% 0.1% Code A Code B Code C Code D Code E :28#((2! & 6+%!! 69!> :+$ 6 #((2;,+

61 4.2 Peak Month Passengers and Movements Peak month passengers by day - Faro (July 2005) Total passengers st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th Total passengers (excluding transit) Date 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 24th Total passengers (including transit) 25th 26th 27th 28th 29th 30th 31st :8C 6 6#((29!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; Peak month movements by day - Faro (July 2005) Daily movementss st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th 26th 27th 28th 29th 30th 31st, Date Total movements :38C & 66#((29!> :+$ 6#((2 ;?: 87<7 856 : 8 : <=6: 5

62 0) 6 1& Passengers Faro - Design day passengers by clock hour (Wed 27th July 2005) Hour (UTC) Arriving passengers Departing passengers Transit passengers :"8 6 6!!C 9!> :+$ 6#((2; Movements Faro - Design day movements by clock hour (Wed 27th July 2005) Hour (UTC) Arrival movements Departure movements :58 6 & 6!!C9!> :+$ 6#((2; =737< =73< 8?: 8 : < =6: 5,

63 4.4 Main Airlines and Routes 0)0) *-%/->--$ - Airline (Top 10) No of pax % Easyjet 578, % Monarch 435, % First Choice 374, % TAP 306, % Transavia 280, % Hapag- Lloyd 255, % GB Airways 225, % Thomas Cook 221, % MyTravel 183, % Air Berlin 150, % Other 1,675, % Total 4,687, % Main airlines by number of passengers (Faro 2005) 57.9% 12.3% 6.0% 8.0% 9.3% 6.5% Easyjet Monarch First Choice TAP Transavia Other Origin/ destination country : (81 6 9#((2;>! 9!> :+$ 6#((2; No of pax % UK 2,783, % Germany 597, % Netherlands 412, % Ireland 356, % France 92, % Other 444, % Total 4,687, % Main routes flown by country of origin / final destination (based on total passengers) - Faro % 8.8% 7.6% 2.0% 9.4% 59.4% United Kingdom Germany Netherlands Ireland France Other : 81 ' 6! 9 ;>! 9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; : 8=8=8 8> F: 2I6: 5 <=<: 4J< 86: 5<=9=7 =,

64 <=8 > 8 <7 > 4B < 8 4< => = <: 4C8 < 8 > 1<7M 8 8: : 4N : <<4 =2= < =<7 B<F: 2 84<<=8 <: "7 "5 9 27: 4=57= > = = "5C Origin/ destin. Airport No of passengers % London, Gatwick 682, % Manchester 495, % Amsterdam, Schiphol 358, % Dublin 272, % Birmingham Internl. 194, % Other 2,684, % Total 4,687, % 4.2% Main routes flown by airport of origin / final destination (based on total passengers) - Faro % 14.6% 5.8% 7.7% 10.6% London, Gatw ick Manchester Amsterdam, Schiphol Dublin Birmingham Internl. Other : #81 ' 9 ;>! 9!> :+$ 6 #((2 ; > 7976= 8: : 87 8 < 896 5B: 6 <> <=<7 C,)

65 Airline (Top 10) 0)0)# *%/->1%41- No of movs % Easyjet 4, % TAP 3, % Monarch 2, % Transavia 1, % First Choice 1, % Hapag- Lloyd 1, % GB Airways 1, % Budget Air 1, % Channel Express 1, % MyTravel 1, % Other 12, % Total 33, % 5.6% Main airlines by number of movements (Faro 2005) 5.9% 57.5% 7.6% 9.7% 13.7% Easyjet TAP Monarch Transavia First Choice Other : 81 6 & 9#((2;9!> :+$ 6 #((2;,,

66 Origin/ destination country No of movs % UK 18, % Main routes flown by country of origin / final destination (based on total movements) - Faro 2005 Germany 3, % Netherlands 2, % 11.7% 9.0% 7.4% 3.0% 12.9% Ireland 2, % France 1, % Other 4, % Total 33, % 56.0% United Kingdom Germany Netherlands Ireland France Other : 081 ' 6! 9 & ; 9!> :+$ 6#((2; Origin/ destination airport No of movs % London, Gatwick 4, % Manchester 2, % Amsterdam, Schiphol 2, % Main routes flown by airport of origin / final destination (based on total movements) - Faro % Dublin 1, % London, Luton Airport 1, % Other 20, % 12.3% Total 33, % 4.4% 5.4% 7.8% 8.5% London, Gatw ick Manchester Amsterdam, Schiphol Dublin London, Luton Airport Other : 281 ' 9 & ; 9!> :+$ 6#((2;,

67 0)0) +$%--+- Airline Tonnage % DES R Cargo Express % Faro - Main Cargo airlines (by tonnage) TAP % GB Airways % LTU Airways % 17.8% 14.6% 6.7% 2.9% 7.2% Lufthansa % Other % Total 1, % 50.8% DES R Cargo Express TAP GB Airw ays LTU Airw ays Lufthansa Other Origin/ destin. country : 81! 6! 9#((2;9!> :+$ 6 #((2; Tonnage % Mauritania % UK % Portugal % Germany % Morocco % Other % Total 1, % 18.1% Faro - Main Cargo routes flown by country (based on cargo tonnage) 15.4% 46.6% 11.6% 2.2% 6.1% Mauritania United Kingdom Portugal Germany Morocco Other : 381! ' 6! 9 ;9!> :+$ 6#((2; : 8=8=8 8> A7F: 2I=<: 4J< 84=9=7 =<=8 > 8 <7 >,#

68 4B < 84< => = <: 4C Origin/ destin. airport Tonnage % Nouakchott (Mauritania) % Faro - Main Cargo routes flown by airport (based on cargo tonnage) London, Gatwick % Lisbon % 15.4% 8.8% 6.8% 14.8% Nouadhibou (Mauritania) % Dusseldorf % Other % 16.3% Total 1, % 37.9% Nouakchott London, Gatw ick Lisbon Nouadhibou Dusseldorf Other : "81! ' 9 ;9!> :+$ 6#((2; > 7976= 8: : 87 8 < 896 5B4=6 <> <=<7 C,%

69 8-6-!,(

70 ! 84 4<++++, <<4 7 8 : 7<<4: 3F 5 > 87 7<=6 7 6: : <<4 < <4 8 F46 < 4 <=8 B= = <=8 2 <=8 F4= 484 7<<46 2 4C 7 8 : : 48 = <=8 6487<<4> 7467> 876= 8<4 3 )!9#(( :#((2; /*1%41-9#(( :#((2; International 27,919 29,031 29,910 31,143 33,229 Regular 11,811 13,906 15,875 17,536 22,054 Non-regular 16,108 15,125 14,035 13,607 11,175 Domestic 2,546 2,370 2,012 1, Interior 2,536 2,364 1,992 1, Territorial Total Commercial 30,465 31,401 31,922 32,580 34,155 Non-Commercial 4,339 6,418 5,356 4,389 3,868 Total 34,804 37,819 37,278 36,969 38, & #(( >#((29! 6!; +

71 /*--$-9#(( :#((2; International 4,329,183 4,420,545 4,422,018 4,354,544 4,492,935 Regular 1,553,374 1,815,438 2,021,442 2,214,338 2,794,777 Non-regular 2,775,809 2,605,107 2,400,576 2,140,206 1,698,158 Domestic 250, , , , ,443 Interior 249, , , , ,181 Territorial ,266 2,262 Schengen 1,734,236 1,544,090 1,456,886 1,329,783 1,304,153 Non-Schengen 2,516,473 2,862,066 2,946,976 3,009,391 3,169,150 Total (excl transits) 4,579,493 4,655,448 4,634,957 4,565,340 4,690,378 Transits 78,713 70,347 61,098 78,286 63,601 Total 4,658,206 4,725,795 4,696,055 4,643,626 4,753,979 0(8 #(( >#((29! 6!; /*+$%9#(( :#((2; International 1, , , , ,024.5 Domestic Transit and Transfer Total Commercial 1, , , , , !#(( >#((29! 6!;

72 )# C1 C6-!9#(( :#((2; Year Movements Passengers Month Nº Date Nº Month Nº Date Nº 2001 Aug 4, Jul 388 Aug 638, Sep 36, Aug 4, Aug 252 Aug 674, Aug 39, Aug 4, Sep 255 Aug 673, Aug 37, Jul 4, Jun 269 Aug 618, Aug 37, Aug 4, Sep 227 Jul 634, Sep 34,884 0#8C C 6!#(( >#((29! 6!; ) C, -! 7,%/--+- Year Movements Passengers Date Peak hour Nº Date Peak hour Nº May Jul , Feb Jun , Nov Jun , Aug Aug , Apr Aug ,793 08C!#(( >#((29! 6!; 7,%/ ,$ +; Year Movements Passengers Date Peak hour Nº Date Peak hour Nº Aug Sep , Feb Sep , Oct Jul , Aug Aug , Apr Oct , Apr Oct , C!9-! ;#(( >#((29! 6!;

73 7,%/--+-9%:-+,$ +; Year Movements Passengers Date Peak hour Nº Date Peak hour Nº May Jun , May May , Jun Jun , Sep Jul , Jul Aug , C!9 :-! ;#(( >#((29! 6!;

74

75 ! # $ % & ' ( ' $ ' *!+, )!" #$"%" & '!" ' ', ' $"( () $* + ' ) ' "*, ' & *, '. ' ( ' /+01$2 3$ " " " 4 " " ' 356!1 & " ( " ) '-

76 7*!+, %. '7$%++$ 18'99":!7/; 71$%+!!, 5+$ 1:!7 /; "71$%+1 +$$ 1:!7/; " &71$%+,! % ++$! :!7/; " (71$%+, 5 % %$%+$ 1:!7/; " -7!+$ 18, 1, :!7; - )71$%! %, 1,..71$%,, '9 97*, 1, %,!<, $% =>8#, '9 7 %%!5* ' '7 %%!5* '' 7# 4 + % %%!%, +,, '' "71$%#% +,, 4 + %%! ' &7? $ 5% %%! '" (7$ 5%!+$!+ %%! '& -72 $ 5% %%! '& )7 5% %%! '(.7$%+ %, 99B 9A '( '97 $ '- '7* %!, % 9 ''7!, ++% '7!%$+%, 81$$8 9&$2 9&B9(A

77 !, $-)-. ## ($$ "$/ # $, 0C # 1 2, ($( $. $3 ( -. $"$ $ ( # (,0 1 # * * 4 25 *($ # ($( - $ $ #. #(- "( #$. # # $"#$#6 *"" 7 (-$ $" # )##$ 7 ##$# " ( " 6 4 % "$ # ( (. 8-, -&&- #" $* #(8 $ $*#(-*. # 9"*-. 1 *3*C? # " * #(* ( #" 6 * " # ((( * #$"%" * " $ (( 8$ *- *-"( " *3?/033/? # (*(( $. # (# ($(. ( : " #. # (#(*# *" * #6 * ""*, "* # = 0* # # ($ #$- $ (*( # *$. $( $ ("( ( +

78 # "( " # $. # :8 ( $( &&"-. # #$(2 $( #$# 4-" ( $*(8 $ $*-. ##. #$" # ". ( (# #$ #" 8#-. ###" 1 )## 7 (( * #$"% " 7 ( 7 ($ 7 ##( #" *8. #0 $*. #;( $< "1 (9(3 # #= # "( #(( *= (" #" * # (= (" #$ #$ (= ( " -6 *-""7 # $ % ( "( $*>($? #. * " ( # $*. 8. # #(< * #-. # # # # # ( # $ #A. 7 # $* # (" # 3 # $ 8# 8$$ " #$"% " # * ( #("(. # #( "!*. " ( * $ #*-" # * #. 8" #( # #*. $ #,. " ( *. $*8(. " ( ;

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

80 ((8 (*. * ($-. # (* (9 (8 ( * 2 (4 2" (4 ( #> ( (?(8 ( -. ## $ "> # # (*" #(?("- $ $. # $ >? # * # (:. ##. # #- # - #$. * # " # " > *? $- # ##- #(0 ( # 0-. #-. # "$- #* "- $ # $ $ 8 $ $ )" # (8 $ ( -#. # >?-. (- $>? /

81 ' $ ' *!+, # $ 0 #( # ( # 0 * $ ( #$$" 7$ # >? # ($ # #( # " "" #$ #$. 8 ( " -. ## $ # ". # ( $ $ >?- # ($ $$ # #( "" > ( 8 # #? # 0 $# > - - 6? * # $# - # $ $.. * #(. ##9. # #$> -( " -#$. -? #( # "-( *- ( # ( #$") C*;-. ## - # 68*"- * #$. # # ( #$ A ## # 9 (7)DE # 8! F- # # # " * # $" % *$(- -$. # $. # " #$$#*-. * # - "$ # * 9 $ #( 6 #( ( * $ * # $" (8 - $ *. #. # $ $"% "(8 -. ## #$ B

82 7 % *!+, G # 0 #( - &( (*-"*;&&-&&& # - $ $"0 - # )# %"- 9 $ #$#( #$0 ( $ " -. ## (*- #. "- ( * # 0 $# ' 3#3= ** 3 2 3>. 8" #$"( # **: (. * # $"$. #)#" % "-# A # # $(*#$#. *>. #? 0 $: 8. * # $ # $" - ( A$ >.? #)#>?#"#" (< ( # $" * A " " * " 6( = C * )" " " ( - $. $ (( $# ". # #$")

83 ' ' 3= *C 3/0#C /= 0C /30 /3= #**? #( # (( *#$. # *$". #6 *" # # ;+ #. ### # # *%""#. #( 5 ( &&&&& #( #$" $ 1 A = = A /&+/ ; B; D/$ ;/ B / B, C $$ B H H,, + +& H H *, ;+ + +; $ "&( '. &'& -. ) 9& >H? ( " * $ 1 A &E/$ I I "E/$ I +I E/$ I I 'E/$ I +I E/$ ;I +I 8= 8#30 33=? D3= ( #($ " G #. # ( # &J($"% ""* # #$"# # "( # && # > (* #= #=. : #= "#? #% "A3&J(-( #+ #" $". ( $ -. #( # ; $ > +;&#? # #" * # " $ " ' #5K $ $ - #$"# # 6 * ($$ # #6 ** #-(* #($* #"* # # ( #( $ "%" #/$ " $ 1 A ; / &

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

86 &&+-. #( ($"0# -. * # # # (# #(8 * &I $ #$" ( #+I $. #$$#*.. # # #(8 # B*- # ((8 I '7$%++$ 18'99":!7/; &&+- #"$ ( #$. ;;BI -&I #- ( "$ *. # # $ (-# #. &&&>:+BI **"$?#. # #" #( ( 71$%+!!, 5+$ 1:!7/; &&+- #"$ *#. &*-#"$/*/#. #$"$ * (

87 "71$%+1 +$$ 1:!7/; #. *#"(8* # "( # -6 ( - - *-$ "( # " *0 #$" &71$%+,! % ++$! :!7/; # #$O &&- #( $ #$"&&+-$# I.. (- #( $ #$" #( # *- #- -) (- ' - :* #( N (71$%+, 5 % %$%+$ 1:!7/; ' ' ' 3= #? *-# #.. (- *9 # ( #$"%. "- #((( " # (* ( # "( # $" -6 *-( +

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

89 -. #. #( 8$ ( (. -$ #*. $: G # # 5 #* - *-. # #*#" # -$ $ #" $ # G # ## - #$" " $. # (( O ## #$" #. $ #)- #;& -8* & -5$* - (- # ##-#. $ ($. # - # # $"- ( #. $3!$&&-($ ("( " &&;.. - # ( " * ##$ # " ($ *'"- #$" $ ( "$ " ( ( # $"0 9 ( "$ " # :#$ #$" # # " * #$(8. "$ ## #$-" $ # -$ #* ( #"(. - # #(. #*- (-# # (-#$#6 *#-( # (.. * * #$"( >? - # $ * ( $ ( # $" # #9. *-;I "$**$. # #( * # ( #$". $$ # $. # $ # # # ( $ * # " #"( # $( ' # # #-. # * - ( " $(( $ # $-. $ # #

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

91 ( " *. ##$#"( #$" #" %"%. "- # $ #"( #. * ( #$ - # $ #(. # # * $ (. ( ;;I BI # ;&* #7 )-)- " # ;&I # $ *## #$"-$ # # )-- *-# #$# (-"" ( #"( #$ ( # #( (-. $- &&-&&& >( " #(- ( - #- -? $. ##(- #* * # #$ ( #*(8*-"#$# * # #"( #($ ( #$" ' +( $- $ +-B; (( " &&+- # ( $ $. * -/I - (( ("( +-BI!$ # ;*- #. "$$. # -BI $ G # $ # ( * # $- #.. *8 # ( #$" B

92 + $$ +& ; & ; & ; & ; & ;-& +-; +-& -; -& -; -& -; -& &-; &-& & & *,,!$ 1, 1$ *,,!$ 1$ + + ; ; aagr 2,8% / aagr 3,7% / B B )# 7# &&& )# 7# &&& && && aagr -10,4% aagr 13,8% && aagr -11,4% aagr 15,5% && && && &&+ &&+ &&; &&; )71$%! %, 1,. $ # " 5" - # #$ #$$ # B*(*&I #$ - # +I #$ &&; #. $ # -. $. # # (&&& &&;-# $. - ** "$- ;-;I ## -**"$--+I I. ##. -*- #"(. # ( -&&;- -($-$ +I $

93 *,,!$ 5, &&I &I B&I /&I &I ;&I +&I &I &I &I &I & + ; / B &&& && && && &&+ &&; 7# )7 A77.71$%,, # >! "$$ ( # -9( *BI # ( $ * ; (8 -. ## # O J$( ;I (*-. ## # 0 (8 - I # " -. #% - # #(8 -#*BI 0(-. *. #BI $(. #I '99& + *, 1 %,! /&I &I O J$( ;&I +&I &I (* &I &I average market share &I ) :&-&I :;-&I :&-&I :;-&I &-&I ;-&I &-&I ;-&I &-&I 9&B9 97*, 1, %,!<, $% = > 8#, # #($ #(< *. ## #&&&J(. * (A # I #( ( # &

94 7 5- # ( (-8 -!Q - (#. " ( # #5$# # $ #-. ## * #. (- #( "( # -. # #"( $* $"0 (# #9( - $--E -' -7 #$-) 8#( #A( ( # ( $ - #$# 0 - ( " * 5 A- 0#- $ # #(*0 #( $ # +I $0 #*A $# # ( $ * "$ )- #* $ # ( Total 2004 by City %%!5*

95 F '99& &&&&& &&&&&& B&&&&& &&&&& +&&&&& &&&&& & A # ( (! ($#( A $., $#( 8! A ( #,. 78 ( # %($ F '99& B&&&&& /&&&&& &&&&& ;&&&&& +&&&&& &&&&& &&&&& &&&&& &. 8 # ( ( 20,0% 15,0% 10,0% 5,0% 0,0% -5,0% -10,0% -15,0% -20,0%! ($#( A 12,9% 6,5% A ), #$#( 17,5% 10,3% $. '7 %%!5* )&&&- #O J $(#" "$. # -. ##&&&# ""* " $. # - $ "$. #&&+-( #$. ## #&&;#(! #(8 ( -&&&-$ "$. # #( $ -0,3% 1,5% 2,5% 2,9% -0,6% -1,1% ,1% ,4% -6,6% -6,0% -6,0% -8,9% -12,0% -12,2% 13,8% -14,0% United Kingdom (57%) Germany (14%) Holland (8%) Ireland (7%) Total AFR 7# 4 + % %%!%, +,, # $. #. #! # " 8!Q A % #. ( #,. 78

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

97 # "(- #(< * $: ( ($. #. "". I I * # *. $$. # (-(: $: (-. +I ;I # (( (8 -# #, # 5-#$. #(8 # # "( #-#A ( ** #G (' $3 (C*&&-$. # #( 5 +I $ #( - # *. (# $ #9. ** #- #( ( * # # * ( 6 " - 8 # 8 -#$ ( # # * # ( *$ #G (' $3 - #**"$$. # $I -. #"$ #($5 # 3 0? # * #$"0( :N : (-$ *- # #$# #* #)((> '? "*$ $ # ( # - $. # #(( #. $ # )((( # * BI **!$ #- #( # C-C*-$ #( $# I +I I &I BI I && &&+ &7? $ 5% %%! ##$. -. #$. ## $# # -#". $# *$ # * # 6 *- #$" ##. ( # $ #$# #*- $". *. #"( ($ #. -. #"( ( +I I &I C * C C $ ) ',"! +

98 BI I +I I &I BI I +I I &I C * C C $ ) ', 7# (7$ 5%!+$!+ %%! * #. 8* $ #" # # $# # "$. # " - # :#($ #$# # * #. 8 #* * *I. 8*$ -. # $# ( # O J$(( $) *-( * $# ( #O J$(- I #. 8* )*( * ( #O J$( I #. 8* ;I #* #. 8 C $. # #.. $ *-.. " $. 8* ;I &I ;I &I ;I &I * * G * #* * ) * )* "$*&&"$*&&+ -72 $ 5% %%! 0 ( #( $-. # (. #" # (. # #* $ # * *- # # ("( #$# #* ;

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

100 ' "*, 0 9( * & ( "$ # " / ( *$# " * - /(#( ( $ " &I # $ - $ #-( ( 5*C #$$ (* I #$ ;I ("( 7# #((* $# $# $#/I #(8 # #$ F /&&&&& &&&&& ;&&&&& +&&&&& &&&&& &&&&& &&&&& & 5*< # 7# $ " %$ *. * #(78 *" C ( %%!5* #( * AO A$ 7 * * E$ A # 5C (. $ )) / &&; '97 $ ' #&("$# $# -. ' # -+ * $3. - # ($ # (9. # )#. * 0( ($( -"$ ". ( 5 # #((-. #. A. (* $*. # #$. ##$# $ $ *- #* # # * #(2( *4 ( #(8 -. ##( # $" $ ($ # (8 # "

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

102 $ (- #. (8 *$ # " (-. #( #( # # # 8 %. "- ( $#.. *. $1 $. # ( -. #(. ( "$ >(?= $. #$ (. -. #( *$. *(((. #(. $" (* - $ #( "( #($ $ "* #$ $: ($ $ #. #$ # (* # "*A. $$# **$ # # #($ (A. # ( - # "*-$ $ ($ # ## (* A. #$# $ $ (. # #"* -;I #$. # # " 8$ #. $ $! # # " $. $ * # - #( ($ ##$# $ #$. ##. #( #$" * 0#>+;I?'. $. ### *# - #(< * +; >BI? #( 6 ::" #. 0- ( - ## #. $ ' & *, # *-. # # 9 - ( ($ # #. * # #(8 *(# * #. -. ##* #(8 $ * -#$#*( #"( # #"-"$ - (-# *-( # # ". ##(. # #$"

103 G # # "3 ($$( ( $. #5 - ## #9 ( # # #. #. ( " *9 (*" # (8 $ $*- #* (. # # #. ( ( $. #5, # #. ( $ -$ $. # "9( *- *-$",. # $ ## # ( #(( - ( # #(" $$# ( -. # ( # "( -. ## # #( %!,!, 4 +. #"$ #( )"=C3. # "$ #( # "*. # $=(= =E (# # " # ) # =, =, == ( $. #9 $$# *= 8# #(8 " '7* %!, % # )" C3 #" "$ #( - ($-. # # #( - (. ##" #$"- # %"- # 7 3 #$ #$ - $ ("$ # # # #% " )" *. # $ " -. # ( ( "# # 0 *" #9 $ # $-(- -E ( 0 #( %. "- #*" # (. # #$" $ #$$ #$-"( * $. # # )#$ &

104 $+HA 5 I $ -& /I $! B- I "8( "I C$! - I 1$$ -/ BI J K - I $, &-B I 13 milhões 3 milhões 0,8 milhões ''7!, ++% # *- ( $ #"( (#" $. #(. # #$- - *- #. $. # # # # $. #)# "*(# # "( ( $#(" #-(* ( : )" # $# ()" # 0-$* : $#,, C G L2 1 '7!%$+%, 81$$8 9&$2 9&B9(A

105 #$ " %" ## ( (. $ * # ( " * # $ (. # #$" - #"*( - # ( # % "!$ # ( ($ # $ " * * #$ ( # 5 # "( # * # - #$#. - # "3 ( # :(: " #! #$. #. #. - #( )- 9(- #. #$ #. #(. -6 *-($ # "$ #(. :8. ' ( (( (( $ " #(8 $ # " < " * #$ #*" (( #( # - #$" #! # #$ #. # - (. *$" #!. #$-* "$ $ (8 $( -# - #$ " $*8$ $3$ # " $ # $ (8 $ #( #$. * $. # # (( # #( *(. - $ * # #. # $ #$ # "$ 9 #(<" ( # ( #$"$ $" *. " ' #-(*: ( -$ *- ##. # #

106 / + 01$2 3 $ + "$ $$$ (8 ' :8 *" % $#( $. *C ' 0( ( "( "* ( 3 $. # 5! "( #. 5. #5! "( 5 5(8 7 ( # # $ ( $ (*: * 5$( ' 0 #( % " * #$" %"! "( ## ( % *" #. 2 A. $. #$ # " *! # #$#$# 9 >*($(? 7 $(8 >+(< (8 B/I $? % $#* (>S;I? % $# * (> * 3? A( * 8$ 7 *% A A.. + ) #$" ( ( ( (2)N)4 $ A( (8 (. 5"( "(

107 " " 4 #. * # # ( ($ # $ " * #$ #( # # -. ## # * 5. -$ # "3$( # :(: " A. (- *-6 * * (#$# " # "( #$ #( - #$" 9 #. *-#$ # # # $- "$. *$* #$-6 *- 7 *- ($( 6 " * #. #$ # - #(- # 8# G # #. ( " 9 # * - $#. # # - ( 9 $ * # ( " # # "( " #$ # 8$. 9-. $ " (8 $ $* $$ (( 9 *- $< $ # # " $( ( # $$# " # $ (8 - $ ( " # *1 7* $ $. # ( # $" ( 59# )) % $#* (>S &I? 7 # $. #. 7 $(8 ( % $# * ( 7 % A. #. * ( ($ +

108 " ' 356!1 ##"( #< "$- # -. # $ $ #$ # # -$8$ # # #(8 - ( "*-8$ #* $ $. # # #. &&&-. ##(* $ "( ( G # # (- $ # (* * * $(( " ##$ #* 9 $ -*$. -. #$ 6*#$#$. # - $(8 ( #. ## *8 #$" )6 *- # ( ( #. (* # - #. #". #( G # # 9 - ( " # $ # # (. 8. ## #. # :< - #(8 - $ * # $. #$. # $*- " #6 * #""# $ # $* ( * # 9 # - # *#- (. # #0#3>&&&?,:#"( # ( # * * (*. (( # 6 $*#( 0 *-( #( $# ( -(* "( $"( (( # $*- #$<. " < ". ##-6 *- (8 $(9 $ 356!1 ;

109 '<! 5 %%!1$, '<'! 5 %%!1$, '<! %%!4 + B/$1 '<"! + %+ 5 '<&, 1, + %%!! % 1! 1 $!, '<(, 1, 1 $$ %! " 3=C03 7 OJ. $(! "(. (8 7 5! "( : >? 7#. 5 5 ((8 3=*BC * (" * (( $*( (( ($(. % "$. * 6 (((9 $ *! :8#$* ( ("(8 $ "#(! ) )* ( 3 33M*3 =*3 2* $"4. ($ $. * % "($ A. $# ( # #( *((. # 8# 3* (( * ( (" #$) )"

110 LAND USE PLAN & MASTER PLAN Airport Layout Plan

111 !"#! $ %&#!'" %(%&') * * * ** * *!"%('"&+!, ((-# ".-%!"%('"&+!, ((-# ".!"-!"%('"&+!, ((-# "."/0!"!/!"%('"&+!, %1.$"/21"&#!34"!/. %!'( *5 %/!"%%0.! *6 %/!"%%0(/17""-'!"-374!!"% *8 %/!"%%0!'"&%!"!//" "!"( *9 %/!"%%0"/0!, - 1# &/""!"( *: * * ** * * *5 *6 *8 *9 *: * * ** * * *5 *6 *8 %/!"%%01 # %/!"%%0, -!#!! %/!"%%0.(".!% $"/!!"%."/ /" "!"( %/!"%%000"/("# " ;1"."- <"- %/!"%%01!1%# # /" %/!!"%%0/" "!"( "(!"+1!"% %-!'1, )%0"&%!/" "!"( =!("%%(("+" "!"("!'1!1>!"#!'(? //((!%!'1, ))(!# "(".%1.00"/! %1.(&%! "(!/( =! %1.(&%! "(!/( ="+" "!)"'%"/%0%/&! # '("-%0 $ %&#!( A /" "!"(.#. )("("(".! " #!! # $ % & '( $!() $ $! #$ *$ /" "!"(.#. )("(!# " + $ +# ),$ &-)

112 * /" "!"(.#. )("(.("..**" $ /! # 0!') 1$ #') /! #1* +# 2%*$ /" "!"(.#. )("(-% )3! #)# /" "!"(.#. )("(1!" "!"(.**" 4 %*$ )$ 4 %*$ 5!

113 ,(*05! *3 ( 24 $ * #6 7,(*3 3) 3 (3 *$ 3 ( 3 ( *) ) ()!$ ** )!$ * (05! * ($ ()# " (3" )6 $ 3 ( & 9 3! 3 (39 $ 3 ( ' 9 3! 3 ( & )!39 $ 3 (! /: 9 & )!% *$ ; ( ( ( (% *$ (4 $ % *$ (*0 " ' 6! 0 *!0 < " ( 3! ( # # 3 ( *$ 9! 0*!0 <0 ($ =$ $!! #3) " ## $ $ $ # (! (3" )) ) (4 $ % *$ ( (% *$ 3 (# % *$ 3 (# 4 $ % *$ >,(*$ *0 ( 33!3! /,,(=!(!0 (24<((#3 (4 $ %*$ 3 ( /3!$ " )" (!( (24 ("

114 GENERAL,($ 05! *3 (24 0( (3$ " '" (!( () $ $ *$ 3 (! '!,(3$ " ' 0 ( = ( 3! * (#<" ( * <!" ( (! 33! *$ )- ( $ 0-3 (! " (!(*$ 3 (05! *,(24 * ( " ()(!# <" (!(* $ 3 3! ( $ #0=! 0: " (!( (0! 3!(3 (3!! < ')!! (* ( = 0 " (3!,(3 3 (24 )" 0 ( $ $ (03 : ( $ *$ " $ *$ ) ($ < (24" 3*$! 3 (3! 33! *$ < 30# " ( 0! 3 3! #!!? *$ (,(24 " 03=0 03 ( $ #0: 3 3*$ 33!3" < (!3 #< ()! "!(: &!* 3 ($ 5 3! 0!$ <" (!( 33!3! * $ ( 3 (= 3 " # ( ## (0 $ 33!*$ 3 ( 9 ( ()'?0 *)?)0 $ 33! *$! 0 3! < 0 ( 0$ =$ $!! #3 ( $ )3! (*!(3 3!,(24 (* ( ( (" 3! " 0: (3 3 <0 (!*0( (3!(3!

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

116 ! 3 ( < (=!3 (BC $ <" (!( 3 )()<,3! ( 3! < (# 3 ( " # # $ (*$! (00# *$! ) ((0 3=$ #( ) ( # (" 3 ( $ (0 ( ( (!( (<0 ( $! $ )! (* 03" ) *0 #,(!: 3 (=! : 3 #,(!3$ 0! (324! 4 $ % *$ 0 $ 0# (((#! " ( ($ =$ $!! #3 (,(((#" ( 0( " 0= (!( <30 )3 (24 3,(24 3 " 00 $ $ =$ $ ) ( )(!! # ( $ =$ $ ) 3 () " # # $ 0)=$ #!3 $ *$ ( '(,( =$ #!! # ()3>$ )D> E ; ( ( * $ =! ( =$ #<)" 0! ( ('( <) ( '(? ( (!3)!" ( (5! 33!* $ " (!($ )( 0=! ($ 3 (! $ ($ * # 3 (*$ 3 <! ) ( 3 $ 0 )*$ < *" 0 ' (*"!$ 3 () $ ( 3 ($ $ $ -(3

117 ,(!! #$! ) (: $ )" 3" 6 )C! ) ( 2 ( $ # 3! ( &!# 3! ( %! 21"#! 6:',( (= ) # #! (*0 #3$ (! &!(!!!$ $ $ >$ ),(* '!( (" 0"- 1 (3 Futuro Campo de Golf Rent-a-Car Catering Área terminal de passageiros Policia Área de manobra de aeronaves Taxiway paralelo Figure 2.1 Available land areas,(! 3 (3$ (0 (! #" 3 <! ( *03! * =$ #>(! <" (!(! * #!!$ $ $ >$ ),(* '!((" 0"-1

118 Futuro Campo de Golf Policia Catering Rent-a-Car Área terminal de passageiros Área de manobra de aeronaves Taxiway paralelo Figure 2.2 Total available land areas,( 3 ( $ 0 )*$ 33! $ '! 0 " (*3!3 ')$ *) (*3 ( ( 3! &!((" 0"- 1 * Futuro Campo de Golf Rent-a-Car Catering Policia Área terminal de passageiros Área de manobra de aeronaves Taxiway paralelo Figure 2.3 Adopted terminal building development concept

119 Futuro Campo de Golf Catering Policia Área de manobra de aeronaves Taxiway paralelo Área terminal de passageiros Rent-a-Car m Actuais limites do AFR Limites propostos para o AFR Pista e taxiways Área de Manobra de Aeronaves Área Terminal Área de Carga Áreas de Suporte Área de Desenvolvimento Comercial Figure 2.4, Available land areas for ultimate development at a million annual passenger level ) (" ( $ 0 )*$!! <3) )*! 3 (*3 (*03 (* 3! 03 ( 0 )*$!!,(*0>(! <3" (!( (: * ()!! #" 0 0*$ ),($ )$ $ (! <" (: *!! #3 $ ),( $ 0!33! 3*3 (!05 33" 6!0!: ) ($ <!) (" ( (! 9. (; 3 ( < (* 3 )!*0 ( ( * (0 #3=0 # (3 (3 ( " $ 3! 9,($ 0!3*3 3! * (0 3=0 #3 (3!,(!! #3 () " ## $ ((<( #$ *$ < (!! # 3 (*0 ( ((< ( 0! $ )()*

120 . 03 (0*!0 (24!00,(" 003 (3! 3 (3! (: -,(=!( " ( (3! 3 (3! < (: - )* () $ (3! (! (24

121 * * GENERAL,( *! 3 ($ (! 3 (3! <0! 3 ( > (0 " (3!,($ 3 (!3 33!! 3$ () $ ) ( " ( ( 33!,(3< (! 3 () $ 3$ $!,(!$ 3! #! 3 33!) <$!< (!) ( )( * 3!!0! * 3 ( < (#$ #(* $ $! F" *< ( $ $ *# (" 3! ( $ $! <0! (3!3!! 3: #!3! " ( (3 (3! ($ <!0 $ 03 (= 0 " (* 3! <" (!( 3!3!!$ 0 3! 35!! (3! ( ($! (24 ((# ( (24 0 $ 3= ),(= )3! ( 30#0 33! *# $ ' $ $ 3* $ #$ < (!$ 3$ (! 3$ 3! 0! (! #$ 3= ($ < (= ) ( $ < (3!! *#$ ( 3$ 3) : #< 2 4 $ #!$ $ 0 " $ 0 3!3! ) : $ " ( ( * ( $ $ * <!! ) ( $ 3!! 0! ( $ $!,(3" )!! (3! " (!(" $ (3! 3 (3! (24

122 * RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PASSENGER TERMINAL AREA AND CARGO AREA &! ($ 5 #3 (!) )" 0 0#)!3 < (!)3" 0=! (*!0 " ( " &! (*$ 33)( =! 0$ )<3 3)(!3 =!,()!3 <) ) $ 3 (!)* $ " 0' " #3$ (!) $ () ( $ () $ (!)!!( ( ** RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PASSENGER TERMINAL AREA AND CATERING AREA )( $ #) *! >3)(! )< )!0*(!3" (*!" ( ( )(! )3! $ #*0! 33 <! *#5! ( ) $ 30<0! (" (!!: #! 3!,( <" (($! #*0<33 3$ " ( ($!!!) 3$ $ # < < (*!3 (= )! )!$ #,( 3! #( 33!!! #3 (!$ )#< (! " 0! " (#* 333 = * RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PASSENGER TERMINAL AREA AND AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE AREA ( )($!(!3 $ *$ 05! $ 3$ 3$!< ($ 5 3 ($!*BC$!3$ ( ( #3 $!<!3 " $ #(* 00 )( (!3 $!,(: $ 3!! #(! #$ )* (3 3 ( " $!!$ $ (3! ( $ <" ( $!! * <! )7 > 8<!03$ " ( ) ($ * RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROUND SERVICE EQUIPMENT (GSE) MAINTENANCE AREA AND OTHER AREAS

123 G! ($ 5 #3) *!: $ 0$ () $ (!)<! 3 (')+&1$!5! (3 ("! (! *5 LOCATION OF ATC AND AIS CENTRE,(! -3 (0*3! ##! : 3 ( 3 F" * (! *$ " ( (,&!! $! (3 <0 :! (33,(! " ( 0 3$!3 '),(! 33! ",! (0! ( 2# *6 LOCATION OF RESCUE & FIRE FIGHTING (R & FF) STATION,(! 3 (/H $ 0# ($ =$ $ " 0 $ < " (!((30# =! " $ # 3 ($ *$ $ $ 0 # 3!! $ (: $ (/H ( #0!! (! 3)* #3 (!3 (!3 (! ( (3 ( " #: (! 0! *8 LOCATION OF THE AIRPORT MAINTENANCE FACILITIES ) 0!3 )0 #3 ( " )$ ' 3 ( < $! )-,( = ) $!3!! (BC $ $ #$ (! (" 0=&!* 3" 3! #(0$ ( " 3 ( $ 0 ) *9 LOCATION OF AIRCRAFT SEWAGE DUMP FACILITIES,(" )!! 3$ (!3 " 033 (" ) $ 3! # ( 3! #( 0! (!=$ # ( *: LOCATION OF FUEL FARM G! 3 ( '!( (! 3 (= )3 )< ( ( 0! " #3$ () $ (0 0 >,(!!,(3 3$! (! ( BC $,(3 ( 0!! ( 3 3$ $ $

124 $! )3! $ #0 (3! ( (3 3$!! ((# # $ #) (!3! ( 3 ( $ (0! 3 (*$ 3" 3 3$ (! 0!! (3 3$ 3$ ((0 " 3 (0 #3#!! 03 " #!! * 0))3 0#0<!#!!!0$ &! (! *$ #0 0#3 ')( 3) ) * LOCATION OF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT,(= )" ) $! ( 3 ( ( # 0 #! 0$ * LOCATION OF A LANDSIDE PETROL SERVICE STATION,(= ) 3=$ #(<5! (!! ( $ 0 ) ( 3 33! #$ #0!! (3! # ** MEDICAL FACILITIES 4 ) " ( ( #0)!!$ $ $ $!3! #,( 3! # )* 33$ $ 0 ( $!!(!'> 0 )!(3! #!$ 0" ( (!> 333! * LOCATION OF OFFICES IN TERMINAL BUILDING,(= )33! () $ 0 )" 0$. ( 33!! #! (B $ C!$ 3 $ () (3!,(#$ #0!! 33!0 ) 3$ ( $ 0 ),(24! (0 # * CAR PARKING,(! 3)* #3 (! 3) 33!! 3 3 ( ) $!( (! 3!')3) 33!( 0! (*! # 33()(*3*! %!!0$ 0 " ( $ ) $ ')<" (0#) $ ')!0! )!3$ ( $ 0 )!!0$ 0 "!<!<$ 0 ) )!

125 ,(= )')3 3 ( $ 0 )" $ = $ (#>,( ') 3 $ # 0 : 3 9 $ #00 >! (!'3! (# $ 3()* )!,(# 3 (!')" 0)!(" # ( 3 $ ) ')3!!0!! *5 LOCATION OF FUTURE COMMERCIAL AREA,(! 3 (3!$ $!(0!,(24 "! ( 3!$ $!*$,(" 0!!(" # ( ($ 0# (!$ $!*$ (3 *$ 3 (3! " 0 (* ) 3 (!$ $!3! $ ')3! *6 CONCENTRATION OF FACILITIES 3$ : $ ( () $ 0!! 0** $ 03! 3 () (5 # ( 9*#)! 0$ #( 33$ 3)( ($ #(* *" ( ( $ ; ( $ 03!! ( $! $ )!* <0 0! 3 ( $ $ 0 ($ #0!! 0 ( ( 3! ( : $ 3!! * 3$ )! 0!!!(< 0 <! (! * 3$ 0# $ ( " < $! 0()" (3!3! ) ($ *8 DISTRIBUTION ALONG THE RUNWAY OF AIRPORT FACILITIES *) =)! ( < 0 (* ($ 3! $!(05! ( " #,( # ( $ (<0 (*$ (3 ( < " ( ')! * 33 *$

126 (# $ ) ( ( $ " $ * (!,( " #!! "!() (!!) ( $ #*)3! #2 0!0$ *0 ( 0 33 (*$ *9 EXTENSION POSSIBILITIES IN THE FAR FUTURE [ULTIMATE PHASE],(!(! ( (33 ( 33!$ " *33 #3$ (! 3 ( $ (3 (!< (0!0 " )!)$ #033 3$ (! < ( $ 03'( )!!()$!#0! 3)!3 < 3*$! <"!(!0 30 *" ( (!! 3!( 3*$ (!>! 3 (! * ( 0$ *03 ( < (" 0(3 (0!3!: $ 3 (* 3! F" *< ')!! ( $ 33!* (!0( <!( 33 =! 0* (* $ 0* *: ACCESS TO THE RUNWAY SYSTEM ; ( ($ )!!! 3$ (!3!! # $ < (( 0! ) ( " ## $,() )!! (# $ <0! 3 ( *#) $ 03!3 $ *$ ( G!!3 $ *$! $ #0=! ) () < =" # =) (! 0: 3!! # * AIRSIDE GROUND TRAFFIC &(!3$!($!3 ( 33!!#! 3 ( <0! ( * $ 3$ #: $ " 033! * INTERNAL GROUND TRANSPORT DISTANCES

127 3 33! (<(!" 03* ( 33! ",(!0 #3 33!<" ( ($ #< ) 3 () 33!< ($ 3!3!! 3! = ** EXTERNAL GROUND TRANSPORT DISTANCES,')!! ( )3= )=" #()(" # (* 3 ( < )! ( (!! ( 3$ ( (!,("!! (0! (#> " )<" ( (!!" 0 3$!#<$ # 3!!)3!!< 33!3$ (0!( * FLEXIBILITY IN CHOICE OF CONCEPT ( )( (!$ * ) )(!* (!: $ 3 ( * 3! ( $ *$ ( 3 ( < ( *$ " 003=!! 33!,($ 0! (5! )% ) ( 3 ( )< (* 03$!$ $ (* 0$! 3 (!!! 3!(3 (3! ( )( ( $ 03(! *3!(3! # 33!!* (< ( *03!( 3$ # " 3!$ 3$! 3 (!(! 3!!?))"! )* 33! 3!0 "! 0 <$!! 3) $ 3! : <333! <!0 (3 <" (!( ($ #$ # 0*0 ( 3 (5! ) (! # " (!( $!! " 0$ 03 ( (" (" * (33,(3<3$ ) 3*" " 0* ) 0 > )(3=0 # (# '!! (3! 3 $!! " (!(!3) 3<0 ( 0 '!! ( <!())! *$ * (=!< (3) $!! $ #!()" " ( $,(! 3!3 2# $!3$ ",( 3=0 # (# ( 0 33! " 3!(3 < 0 0 *$ *$ ( $ $ < 3 ( "

128 )3=0 #!$ ( )3 (5!,(3<!3! = 3# " (!(*!(3=0 #< *3 $!! * DEMARCATION LINE AIRSIDE - LANDSIDE! 33! * $! 0 "! * 33! #$ )$! &!($! (!$ =< ( )(0 )!!< ') (! * *3$ (! * (#!#$ 3 ( 3$ 0#3!,( (* 3!! * ( () < (0 (# 3$! #$ )$ 3*" 0!!!3)!) 33!"!#$!) (! #3! *5 LANDSCAPING ( )( $ # 33! #" ( (*3= *!)<3$ (! 3*" 3 ( 3 ( () 0!<!)! 0 $ ( ) 3 (!)!0* (*)3 (* <3! # (" 0,( : * 3$ (!)< ( 3 ( 3!!(3 << " '* ( * )05! " 0 3 ( *$ < " ( C! $ 3 ( 3 " < $ # 03 3$ (! 3!( ) ( & " $ #0!)3 " (!(!!3 (*))" ($ $ 3 ()* *6 STRATEGIC RESERVE 3 *0! $ )! < * ( 0 *0 3 # 33 3 *$ " 0# ( "!( (<" (!(!0 (*$ 3 (

129 " ( ( # %*$ "! " 0 $ =$ #$ " ( 3 ( ( 3 ( $,( 3 $ #0 33!$ $!*$ *$ 3,( ( # ( 3 (3!!!#0 3"! *!())3! ' *8 PHASING OF DEVELOPMENTS,(*!( 3! $ # (* )* )3!!(!! (24 3 ( $ *$ (,( " * ( )(3 ( $ ( " ( < 0) ( 3 3 ( % ) (( ( ( 033! C$!(#C( 0! * )< <* $ # $ # 0"!! (33! $ # #!(* ( $ $ $ # ),')!! 3 (: $ 3 ( $ (!!$ $ 0 " ($ $ ) $ : $,(3< (()3*$ (0!* (!!! (3! ( " (!(( 0 *! 33! 33!3" <" ( 0) ( 4')3*$ (*$ 3= ) ()(!! # 33! 0# (,(= )3!! $ 033! ( (* 0 '!! " (*$! (*,( $ ( 3 (= )3!!00!$ 0 ) $ < 0 * $ #$ ( 00)( # ($ < (#" #" (!( (!0*:!'# (3 ( 3 (= 3= )3!! 3 (( $ 33!$! )( $ (= 3 () $ *$,(? * 0# ) 3! ( 3$ (03 () $ 30#

130 ()3! ( 0)*3! () $ < (" 33! ( *# % ) (*$ 3 ( $ $ 3! " 00 (< $ ( * $ <$!! < ( ( 33!$ # : (3-3! # F" *<0! (# (00* :!* ( $ *$ (3 ( < (* : (3 *$ ()#$ -" *3*! % ) (#*$ ( (! $ " ()! 0 > 5!!( (,($ # )!,(! 0 0 $!(0 # " 0" ($!! 0 > (3 (<!*)!#3 3 ( <*) ( 3 ( *! *033 =

131 A FACILITIES DEMAND ANALYSIS AIRSIDE!%.1/!"%,(3" )!! ( 3!! #>$ # '0# >+,( " #!! #(0 $ 3$ " #!!!#$ )!3! $!(* " #!!!# $,(!! # 3) (*0!0 " ( ( 3* 1! # ( 3$ (<I = (*0 * ( $ ($! 0* '3$ (1! # 1!1, )/&/"!) SUMMARY FIGURES Runway Runway 10/28 ANA declared capacity Design day peak hour throughput (2006) Current capacity calculated by Parsons-FCG (hourly runway movements) Derivation Additional comments EUROCONTROL study and Parsons-FCG analysis Table 4-1: Current runway capacity %)#3 (#! (*)# 3 ('$ ( $ 3 ) $ 0 * ((1# &!"%(,(3" ) $ " $ 0#> + 0() (!!! #3 ( " #,($ 5 #3 ( $ 0 (0* 1! C # ( C " #!! #

132 Runway Runway 10/28 Inter-arrival separations (AA) Departure interleaving two arrivals (ADA) Departure leading and arrival (DA) Inter-departure separations (DD) Percentage of departures on diverging SIDs AROT of Medium Jet (MJ) DROT of Medium Jet (MJ) 10 nm 10 nm 4nm (to be validated) See section below 0% 66 secs 74 secs Table 4-2: Current runway capacity assumptions /.,3 */ " #.!!!#,$ %/.,3 % / " #.!!!#,$ &!1 &!"% (,( (# $ $ -0" 3 *))$!' Following aircraft H B757 M L H Leading aircraft B MJ MT L Table 4-3: Minimum departure separations in minutes (same tracks) Following aircraft H B757 M L H Leading aircraft B MJ MT L Table 4-4: Minimum departure separations in minutes (diverging tracks)

133 J3 $ $ J?)0 $ $ 1!1&<'%1.#. =!<> + (*! 3! 3'( $ *$,(3! " (! (= )!! #3 ( " #(" 0"- Total peak hour movements by aircraft type Code F Hvy Code E Hvy Code D Hvy Code D 757 Code C Med>75 tons Code C Med tons Code C Med<25 tons Code B Med Code B Light Code A Light 20 Current Capacity Figure 4-1: Forecast peak hour demand and current capacity (unconstrained forecast) 5 %&%(./'-(!%#!.#. $ (3! '( $ < $ 03!()(*0,(!()<)" (# $ < $ $ - (3) 00"

134 Proposed change Comment RUNWAY 10/28 Rapid exit taxiway Add RET. MJ AROT reduced from 66 seconds to 45 seconds. Reduced departure separations Change airspace structure for departures to reduce interdeparture separations through 100% diverging departures. Reduce radar separations on arrival Reduced radar separations for arrivals Without infrastructure changes AA: 10nm to 5nm ADA: 10nm to8nm DA: 4nm to 3nm With infrastructure changes AA: 10nm to 3nm ADA: 10nm to 6nm DA: 4nm to 3nm Table 4-5: Proposed changes Runway 10/28 AIRCRAFT STAND REQUIREMENTS ACTUAL MOVEMENTS Movements (Forecast) Aircraft Code Actual Stands 2005 ICAO Code A ICAO Code B ICAO Code C ICAO Code D ICAO Code E ICAO Code F Total Table 4-6: Stand demand versus actual capacity

135 STANDS REQUIRED FARO Code A Light Code B Light Code B Med Code C Med<25 tons Code C Med tons Code C Med>75 tons Code D Code D Hvy Code E Hvy Code F Hvy Total Stand Demand 55** 54* Difference: demand vs actual stands Table 4-7: Stand requirements to meet forecasts up to 2050 ( 0 ( (! " # ( )( 30 " > $ *$ (,(!! 0# (3! #,(! ( $! (*!! # $ 3#$ *$ ) (( ( # ' ($,(33! 3 (! (" Faro Movement Design Day Profile Movements Hour Base year Figure 4-2 Design Day Profile (Movements)

136 Apron taxilane (max. B747 wingspan 65m) Parallel taxiway Figure 4-3: Ultimate infrastructure layout possible Apron taxilane (max. B747 wingspan 65m) Parallel taxiway Figure 4-4: Proposed infrastructure change,(# (" (!3 ') )!" (!1!3 : $ &! (! 3! 3$ < ( $ 03!3 ') ( $ (" 0!0#$ ( )( ( 33!!() 0"- 1 " *0"- 1 ( $ =$ $ 0!3 ') # 3" ( (!

137 6 &/"!)"# &%$#!(,( " #!! # 03 3 (!() 0*(* 0*!$ 0,(!$ 0 ) " #!! #03 0" Total Rapid Exit Taxiway Reduced RADAR Separations for Arrivals Reduced Departure Separations Parallel Taxiway Current capacity 22 Change 1 X 23 Change 2 X 31 Change 3 X X 39 Constrained Peak Hour Capacity X X X 44 Table 4-8: Proposed capacity improvements Runway 10/28 RUNWAY 10/28 Capacity Improvements (Faro 10/28) Unconstrained Peak Hour Constrained Peak Hour Changes Stands (actual versus Demand Change 3 Cange 2 Demand Gap Cange 1 Current Capacity Hourly Movements Figure 4-4: Capacity improvements Runway 10/28

138 FACILITIES DEMAND ANALYSIS TERMINAL 8,(3" )!! ( 3 ( $!! #>$ # '0# > +,( $!! #!! (03 ( ( )( 3 ($ )!<! )6(!'><% * <&! #&!)< G))),( ( )( 3!(3 (! $ 3 (3! : ( '( ) $ 0# )3$! (, % *$,( *!! # 3 ( $ $ 0# (! " ( ( " ( )(,(!!! #3 $ 3!(! $ <0 (3! 3 3 )* $ $ *$ #)0 " $!! # 3 9 ((1# &!"%( $ 0 3 $ (* 0 $ ) (!! 3!( $!!) $ ( $!! #!! 0 *#! 3 20,( $ $ ( 3I >14 14 (03$ ) ( Process Check-in Departure Passports Arrival Passports Security Processing time assumed Average of Schengen processing time (93 seconds) and Non-Schengen (140 seconds), weighted by the percentage of Schengen and Non-Schengen departures in the peak hour, which varies throughout the forecast period. Average of EU processing time (5 seconds) and Non-EU processing time (46 seconds), weighted by the percentage of EU and non-eu passengers departing on Non-Schengen flights in the peak hour. The assumed percentages are 90% EU and 10% Non-EU, giving a processing rate of 9 seconds. Average of EU processing time (20 seconds) and Non-EU processing time (77 seconds), weighted by the percentage of EU and non-eu passengers departing on Non-Schengen flights in the peak hour. The assumed percentages are 90% EU and 10% Non-EU, giving a processing rate of 21 seconds. 21 seconds

139 ,(!!3) 3 () $ < ( $!!! $!! # ( $ 03: 3! 33 $ 3" 6 Process Number Comments Check-in 62 It is assumed that desk utilization is 90%, such that at any one time a maximum of 90% of desks are used (this is done to take into account periods of transfer between flights, as well as breakdowns and maintenance). Departure Passports Arrival Passports 8 8 Security 8 Bag reclaim 5 Table 4-9: Facilities assumptions : & )("(,0>(" ($ 3 $ 3! 3 (#< $ 3$ (3! 3'( )* $ $ *$,(3" )00* 6 F%6 ' F % ) )<! ),3 0! ), 9 F 6'F *)),(7&3&*!8" 3,0>("!" (!($ 3 (!(!'>'! 0# 3>*!'',( 3! )" ) (" (!< $ ( (3" ) 3)" 3>*!3! 6 Year Percentage using self-service % % % % % % 3 ( $ ( < ((!) $ <3>*!''"! "!(!'>'

140 Process Current Facilities PHDP Check-in 60 Demand Difference Self Service Departure Passports 8 Demand Difference Screening 8 Demand Difference PHAP Arrival Passports Baggage Reclaim 8 5 Demand Difference Demand Difference Table 4-10: Gap analysis departure facilities,(3" )3)!0)(!#(" ($ 33! *** $ " ($ =! (! 3! * 120 Number of facilities Check-in demand Current facilities Figure 4-5: Forecast check-in demand against current facilities Number of facilities Departure passports demand Current facilities Figure 4-6: Forecast departure passport demand against current facilities

141 Number of facilities Screening demand Current facilities Figure 4-7: Forecast screening demand against current facilities Number of facilities Check-in demand Current facilities Figure 4-8: Forecast arrival passport demand against current facilities Number of facilities Check-in demand Current facilities Figure 4-9: Forecast baggage reclaim demand against current facilities G ($ # ( 0 (3! #)(0*< ( $ 3(" ) (! $! $ 3 *) 33!!)!! #(" ) >0" Annual passengers (millions) Check-in Departure Passports Screening Arrival Passports Baggage Reclaim Figure 4-10: Demand coverage of current facilities

142 ((-# " "B"-,(-3 () $ (! *3*!(*0!! 3!( 3 (3! '( )* $ 3 3" ) 0 ( * 3 *! (* 3! 3 ( $,(* 0!$ $ (, % *$ /3! (1 <J # (!! 3*3*! 0)!! $!! > +!$ $ (,2*3 &*! 7 = 8 Level of Service Standards (Sq. Meter/Occupant) A B C D E F Description Few carts and few passengers with checkin luggage (row width = 1.2m) Check-In Queue Area (uni-queue) Few carts and 1 or 2 pieces of luggage per passenger (row width = 1.2m) High percentage of passengers using carts (row width = 1.4m) Pre Check-in Circulation Post check-in circulation 2.6* 2.3* 2.0* 1.9* 1.8* System Breakdown Heavy flights with 2 or more items per passenger and a high percentage of passengers using carts (row width = 1.4m) Hold Room 40% 50% 65% 80% 95% LOS expressed in terms of % occupancy Baggage Claim Area Passport/screening Assuming uniqueue is used Table 4-11 Level of service parameters for various functions,(3" ) 0!0 (2.&! )(" 0* Class A B C D E F Level of Service Excellent level of service; condition of free flow; excellent level of comfort. High level of service; condition of stable flow; very few delays; high level of comfort. Good level of service; condition of stable flow; acceptable delays; good level of comfort. Adequate level of service; condition of unstable flow; acceptable delays for short periods of time; adequate level of comfort. Inadequate level of service; condition of unstable flow; unacceptable delays; inadequate level of comfort. Unacceptable level of service; condition of cross-flows, system breakdown and unacceptable delays; unacceptable level of comfort. Table 4-12: Levels of Service description,(!! 3 (* 3 *!!(* ( )( () (",0 > ) 2* 3 ) $!

143 * =% 3 ( (! (# ( '( ) (0 3 (# Passenger Terminal Sizing Faro Passenger Terminal Area 69, m 2 Proportion of Circulation % Area per PHP (2005) m 2 Year Peak Hour Pax 3,469 4,055 5,240 6,560 7,326 7,326 Area per PHP (m 2 ) Area per PHP Circ (m 2 ) IATA Level of service IATA A IATA A IATA A IATA A IATA B IATA B Total Area of Terminal (m 2 ) 69,575 81, , , , ,941 % Increase in Terminal 100% 117% 151% 189% 211% 211% IATA LoS Area per PAX (m 2 ) IATA Limit Year Table 4-13 Passenger Level of Service (m 2 ) per Occupant. ( $ (,2*3&*!( 0$ ( )( ( ) ( (3 3 ( $ " 0!- $!! 0*3*!3)!! F" *<!!$ $ (! ( $ 0 3 )!< < 3 0*) ( ) 3! ( (* $ " 0!

144 * FACILITIES DEMAND ANALYSIS LANDSIDE * $$",,(3" )!! ( 3 (!! #>$ # '0# > +,(!! #!! (03 (! * #< (3 $ 3!( $! $ 0 ( 3! 33 )* $ #)0 " $!! # 3 * ((1# &!"%( $ 03 $ (*0 $ ) (!0 3!( $! $ )) *!(!!3= )3 ) $ #$ #0*0 0* 3! ( )( ( (!3 ($ $ 3*! 3$ ( 3 * " $ *0 (! 5! >(<(" #0 " < 5! *! (" " 33! ($ 3! #*) ( ( 0 ( *!!!$ ( (! $ # ( 3 $ ' ')! $ *$!) $ 0 ( )(!! 3 (* $ 0 3$! $ +!! < ) + < 4 & % $ 3, #< # *0 3$ * 0# I %1 )! ')! " - 0(! $ &! 33!! *(! # *#"!! 3 " " '#J 0(! *!(!! * 3,(3" ) $ $ - (3$ $ 6 * 'F! ) 1: * G K < >G K * $ #/! #*(!<( <30# 0 ( C!! ( 0!# $

145 TERMINAL FRONTAGE ROAD THROUGHPUT (VEHICLES PER HOUR) Curb Lane 0 Next Lane 300 Additional Lane 600 TERMINAL FRONTAGE CURBSIDE STORAGE Vehicle Dwell Times (minutes) Departure Arrival Vehicle Storage Length Requirements (m) Auto Taxis Buses Shuttle Buses **! /" "!) /: $ 0$ (#! *0#I % 13< (5 *)# ('$ ( ( $ 03= )!!,( $ 03!!* ( $ #0! $ 0# (*!!$ ( 3 (# (5! $ 0 3!!"! * 1+ "/<"- /: $ 0*)!!!#! )3! 3! *0#I % 1< (5 3'$ (< (= L * # & %)<"- $ # ( < ($ 3$ #')0!#! *)3! $ # ($ #$ #') 3! #*)!!! *5 (".1 &/"!)$ 1!"%,( $ #3 (3! 0 (3$ $ # $ (" ) (! 3!! 33!') $ $ 3 ( )( <: )')!! ) >(" (!! G! " 0! L: $ " # $ (#

146 *6 & )("(,0>,0>(" ($ 33! 3 (#< $ 3$ (3! 3'( )* $ Year Activity Terminal Curb Front Queuing (m) Taxis Queue Parking Public Parking (spaces) Employee Parking (spaces) Rental Car (spaces) Current , Demand , Difference Demand ,703-1,270 Difference , Table 4-14: Gap analysis (terminal curb / parking) Year Activity Vehicle Throughput Primary Access Terminal Frontage (# PCE)* (# PCE)* Enter / Exit Current 1,500 1,500 1, Demand Difference Demand 1,640 1, Difference M 1N) 1: * Table 4-15: Gap analysis (vehicle throughput)

147 Millions of annual passengers Terminal Frontage Curbside Queue Terminal Road Throughput Taxi Queue Bus/Mini Bus Public Parking Rental Cars Primary Access (Entry) Primary Access (Exit) *8.("..A%&%(. $ %&#!( Figure 4-11: Faro Landside Capacity *8,( <24 <<I!3 " $ *$!!!0 # (,(6 = " ( 5! ( $ 99!!?1I (" 3 (!!!?1I ( "!! G!( *8 G (!! #)#< (3" )$ *$!$ $!!$ $ $ 3L" (! 3*!,( $ *$ (" ) >!') <')! ( $! " ')!! 3!')3! 1=!3!!!$ $ <# ')!,(!0!!$ (0#!! ) " > (*')! (! 3!') -) ( $ *! ( ( 3 (!!$ 5! ( C)!! (3 $ #')')3! #! 0! " >! "!!0 " ( 0 ),(" )3! #! ($ 3*(! ( $ 3 )

148 FACILITIES DEMAND ANALYSIS CARGO -%0/" "!)-& )("(,(-3 (!)3! # $ 0# (!)* $ $ 3 (,(, %*$ /3! *) 0 ()3!) $ 0 )" ( (!3!3$,( ()! $ 0# (*3 $ Level of automation Low automation (mostly manual) Automated (Average) Highly Automated Planning ratio 5 tonnes per square metre 10 tonnes per square metre 17 tonnes per square metre Table 4-16: IATA Airport Development Reference Manual Planning Ratios,(3" ))((" () ( 3 (= )!)3! #0 (3! (" (!$ (, ) 3 ( 33 * 3 $ ) # ( 0 '<3!(*3 $ < (" (3! #!: (3! # $ (,)

149 Cargo gap analysis (Faro) tonnes/sq m Year Low automation Average automation High automation Current planning ratio Year Terminal Sizing requirements Figure 4-12: Current planning ratio for cargo facilities Low Automation Average Automation Current(Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) Difference (Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) Difference (Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) Difference (Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) Difference (Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) Difference (Sq m) IATA requirement (Sq m) 1, Difference (Sq m) High Automation Table 4-17: Gap analysis for future required cargo facilities FACILITIES DEMAND ANALYSIS UTILITIES $$", 4 $ #3! 3 (! % $ #

150 4 #! (! *3 (I>* $ ( $ (! %$!!) *$ )$ 3 I >* $!! $ * $ 0 (! 3 $ 3 ($ < # )0 * " (!( $ ' $ 0 =! ( 4!3! * $ G# ( ( 4 ; '!!) * $ > (!00 ) ( <0 ( 0!! ( $ 3!(* $ $ < I >* $,(!$ $ 3 *$ >< =! (! 3"!3 '),(*$ * $! (!!)&!!! < (C)*3,$ )" " *5,$ =!$ $ <0#L &< 3 (=<,$ =:!!)&!!! < (C)* 3 ) 0#L 4 " 0: 3 (=3 )0 )!!)&!!! < (C)*3 G ')3! 4 " 0: 3 (=3')!!)&!!! < (C)* 3!3 ')& )" 3$! &<=: 3!" "!"( $ %&#!%-#,(3" ),0 $ $ - (! %*$ )$ ( :!) 4 $ ($ 6

151 Period Facilities Demand that Requires Utilities Corresponding Utilities Demand Source Expansion of Apron Area for + 11 aircraft parking stands ( m²) Expansion of Apron Area for + 9 aircraft parking stands ( m²) Expansion of Apron Area for + 8 aircraft parking stands ( m²) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) Expansion of Cargo Building to 577 m² All required Utilities for building usage (2) Expansion of Public Car Parking to spaces Expansion of Bus Parking to 150 spaces Expansion of Rent-a-car Parking to spaces Expansion of Terminal Building to m² Expansion of Apron Area for + 15 aircraft parking stands ( m²) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) All required Utilities for building usage (2) Electricity: Lighting towers (2) 2050 Expansion of Cargo Building to 836 m² All required Utilities for building usage (2) Expansion of Apron Area for + 16 aircraft parking stands ( m²) Expansion of Cargo Building to * $ >3/. + % *$ )$ 3/. >/ Electricity: Lighting towers (2) All required Utilities for building usage (2),(1: $ /!$ )$ 3! 33!#!3: $! ( =! " ( #*$ $ ( $ )1: $ /!$ " 0!*0#!/ 0 ) *!" "!"(%&%(. $ %&#!( 4 % *$ (4 *$ )3$ (! % $ ( : 4 *$?3$ 4 # *$ 5 ): 0#>+3! 3*$?!# $ *$ < : $ 3!#!!$ < =!! 3 $ < ) 3 # $ : $ " 0! (4 #!$ 1: $ /!$ )$ 3! 33!#!3: $ 1=! 3,3$ & >0#+ < 3$ 0!! *0,(3" ),0 $ $ - (4 % *$ 6

152 Period Utility Planned / Proposed Development Specific Utility Development Description Source Utility Type Improvement Recommend Year for Investment 2010 Expansion of Apron Area for + 11 aircraft parking stands ( m²) (2) Electricity Apron Lighting Towers covering m² for + 11 aircraft parking stands Expansion of Apron Area for + 9 aircraft parking stands ( m²) (2) Electricity Apron Lighting Towers covering m² for + 8 aircraft parking stands Expansion of Apron Area for + 8 aircraft parking stands ( m²) (2) Electricity Apron Lighting Towers covering m² for + 8 aircraft parking stands Expansion of Cargo Building to 577 m² (2) Water/Sewage/ Electricity/ Fire Fighting /HVAC/ Communications Expansion of Cargo Building: m². Required Utilities for Building usage 2030 Air Side Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity Air Side Energy: 2 New Transformers (2x1.000 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of 2 existing Transformers (3x630 kva) providing new capacity 2030 Air Side Emergency Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity Air Side Emergency Energy: 2 New Standby Generators (2x1.000 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of 2 existing transformer (2x700 kva) providing new capacity 2030 Expansion of Public Car Parking to spaces (2) Electricity Lighting Towers covering m² for car spaces for Public Car Parking 2035 Expansion of Bus Parking to 150 spaces (2) Electricity Lighting Towers covering m² for + 67 Bus parking spaces 2035 Expansion of Renta-car Parking to spaces (2) Electricity Lighting Towers covering m² for car spaces for Rent-a-car 2035 Old Terminal Area and Recent Terminal Expansion Area (2001): Utilities Remodeling / Replacement (3) Water/Sewage/ Electricity/ Fire Fighting /HVAC/ Communications Old & Recent Expansion (2001) Terminal Areas: Remodeling/Replaceme nt of all required Utilities for Building usage ( m²) 2035

153 Period Utility Planned / Proposed Development Specific Utility Development Description Source Utility Type Improvement Recommend Year for Investment Old Terminal Area and Recent Terminal Expansion Area (2001) Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity Old & Recent Expansion (2001) Terminal Areas: 8 New Transformers (4x1.000 kva), switchboard & Cables, etc. for replacement of existing (4x800+1x x1.000 kva) transformers in PT2 and PT3 providing kva Normal Energy capacity Old Terminal Area and Recent Terminal Expansion Area (2001) Emergency Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity Old & Recent Expansion (2001) Terminal Areas: 4 New Stand-by Generators (4 x kva), cables, switchboard, etc. for replacement of existing (2x315+2x1.100 kva) generators attached to PT2 and PT3, providing kva Emergency Energy capacity Rent-a-car Energy: Replacement of transformer (3) Electricity Rent-a-car substation PT5: 1New Transformer (1x400 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of existing Transformer (1x400 kva) 2035 External Block Energy: Replacement of transformer (3) Electricity External Block Replacement: 1New Transformer (1x250 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of existing Generator (1x325 kva) 2035 Maintenance Bldg + ANA Office Bldg Emergency Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity Maintenance Bldg + ANA Office Bldg: 1New Stand-by Generator (1x400 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of existing Transformer (1x250 kva) providing new capacity Expansion of Terminal Building to m² (2) Water/Sewage/ Electricity/ Fire Fighting /HVAC/ Communications Expansion of Terminal Building: m². Required Utilities for Building usage 2040 Expansion of Apron Area for + 15 aircraft parking stands ( m²) (2) Electricity Apron Lighting Towers covering m² for + 15 aircraft parking stands 2040

154 Period Utility Planned / Proposed Development Specific Utility Development Description Source Utility Type Improvement Recommend Year for Investment Expansion of Cargo Building to 836 m² (2) Water/Sewage/ Electricity/ Fire Fighting /HVAC/ Communications Expansion of Cargo Building: m². Required Utilities for Building usage 2040 Terminal 2040 Expansion: Energy Supply (3) Electricity Terminal 2040 Expansion - Energy Supply: 4 New Transformers (4x1.000 kva), switchboard & Cables providing kva capacity Terminal 2040 Expansion: Emergency Energy Supply (3) Electricity Terminal 2040 Expansion - Emergency Energy Supply: 2 New Stand-by Generators (2x1.000 kva), switchboard & Cables providing kva emergency capacity ARRF (SLCI) Bldg. Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity ARFF substation PT4: 1New Transformer (1x250 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of existing Transformer (1x170 kva) providing new capacity ARRF (SLCI) Bldg. Emergency Energy: Replacement & Capacity increase (3) Electricity ARFF Emergency Energy: 1New Stand-by Generator (1x250 kva), switchboard & Cables, for replacement of existing (1x170 kva) generators attached to PTS/PT1providing new capacity 2040 Expansion of Apron Area for + 16 aircraft parking stands ( m²) (2) Electricity Apron Lighting Towers covering m² for + 16 aircraft parking stands Expansion of Cargo Building to m² (2) Water/Sewage/ Electricity/ Fire Fighting /HVAC/ Communications Expansion of Cargo Building: m². Required Utilities for Building * $ >3/. + % *$ )$ 3/. + &!3!4 #% *$ )$ 3/. >/ 2050

155 INTRODUCTION (*!( (243 (4 $ %*$ ) (" ( ( $ 3 ( 2# (0,(!( ( 2# > % *$ >3 " (!( *$ 0 ( 33!3! 3 (# >#!#'!! 0 *$,(! 33!*3 ( $ >3$ (0 0( =$ #$ ) $ *$ D$ 3! E< " ( ( $ 0 3!3 $ *$ ( 0 0(< $ *$,( % *$ 3 DE!0!(! -0# (3" )$ $ <" (!(6,("!!DF )(" #! E(! (!! ( " 0 $ #3!! 33!9 %*$ 3 ( " ( * 33! 3" < " 0 0(9!: 3 =$ # $ " ( ( 3 ( #0 #<!$ 9 ($ =! ( 3(0 ) ( #" 0*03 *$ 9,( " #<! ) ( /1&<" 0 )<!$ #3!!( " #! )#<! $ 09,(!:! " ( ( ))" 0 0(9 G ( " #" 0*" (2&!!()( )# $ *) F 3! 3 (0*$ $ " 0)*

156 *,(3! $ 03!3 $ *$ ('( 3 (# 3 ($ *$ (: $ 03!3 (0 0( =$ #!3,(! $ (!! 3 ( $ 03!3!( ( =G,( : $ 3!3!0 0>*3" 6!3 #!3 #%!! (!3 3 $ =" ( 3 < ( (: * 3!3 #1 ($ (! " ()(= < 3!(!(! < ) (" ( )( )= 3 " #,( = 3)!!$ $ $ =$ $ #1!3 #D$ =$ " )E,( == 0 ( " ( " # *3 0 3=0 #3 (,( " #<! ) ( /1&<" 0 )<!$ #3!!( " #! )#<! $ 0,! (! 30!! " ( (" " #!3! < " 0 *0!: ( (3 ( " #!3 $ 3$ (!,("! (! 30!" ( ( $ =$ $ ()( 3*$ &!( " " 3$! *!) ( ( #0 #3! 2'" <3 (! 30! (!(-<!!$ $ /1&< ( = (2&!!!<!:! #3 3 ( "

157 " #" 0: $ < ( )(3 ( #(0!# 0( (! ($ < (G!(/! (=! " #<" ( (2&!!" ( (!!" #3 " #,(! (G!( ( " (0#$ 3 (! 3!) 3 (( 0!!$ #" ( : $ ;,() $ 0 ) ( % *$ 3 (#<" : 33=$ #<$ O,( : 3 ( 0! ( < : ) 3 ) ( 3 =$ #$,(3! # 0!! ( 3 ( $ 0 )< *! ( 3*$ /: $ 3()!! #3< <" (!( 3 $ O#" : 0 )" (33<$ O!) 3$ <$ O * I!3! *$ 3 : 3 ( *$ ( F" *< 3 = 3 ( 3! # " 0 : $ < ( 5! * 33 $ C 7 5,(3! # 0! "! (" 3 ( $ 0 )< *! ( 3*$,( $ -) 3 ( : 0 ( 3" ) $ $ 6 '( )D '( E, $ 03+&1>*(!K P *(! I $ 03*(!$!0 )K P *(! G )3!K $ O*(!<$ O : $ K 3! <$ O

158 &!(: $ "! 33')3! ",(0 ') ( 3 (0 )D $ E" 03 (* # *!5! " ( (= 3 ( $ 0 )! < (!!! 3 (*))5!,(: $ ( $ 030 <0! ( * (33> #')3 (: $ <$!" 0*0,( *! *#0 " <<$ O # 0! 9,(3! # 0!! ( 3 ( $ 0 )< *! ( 3*$,() $ $ <$ O<" (!(! 03 33! - D :,(3! # 0!! "! ( 3 ( $ 0 )< (3 (*$ (,( * $ =$ # < $ O< " (!( * $ = 0 3:,(3! # 0! (3 "! (I (" 3 ( < ( #,( *!!$ $,(: $ 3 (3 3$ 3! #< $ O< 0 $ 0#* 3 # 3 $,( * 3 33! -!!$ $ ( : $ ;

159 ,(+ 20 ) 3 (+ 2# $ 3 ( " #,(= )0 )"!0 : (/C (: $,(2,$ ( %*$ 3 (#<" 00!# 0(" ( ( " '((# / 33!3" " 0*!! (# $ " ( ("!! D()(" #!! E<=! 0*0 (# E 5 3 (!3) 3 (# $ 3 (3 (*$ " ( $ ')*<*0 " )*)),(( $ ')! (>33!'>! 03*!" (*$ ( ($ $ $ $ 03( $ ')! $,(3! *$ ) (=!<$ O<" (!(" *3 ')!$ E 6,() $!')))3 (*$ ((# 0!! (*$ (,(! (!! 3 (!'!!$ $!*$,(" *! ) ( = )')<3" (!( (D) $ E')))" * (!$ 3! # (*$ ( ($ $ $ $ 03) $ ')! $ =$ #,(*!!!$ $ 3! #" (!! #3<!$

160 ,( 3! # $!! ( *$ ((#03 (= 3,( $ =$ $ *0 3 ( 3! #! 0 =$ # <$ O ; E 8 0 ') (3 *$ ( ) (# $ (*$ ((#,( (" (!!!$ $ $ > )! 0 $ ) (!3),(: $ 3 (*$ $ 0 % ) (! " (IJ # ( $ " $ ( (" #" 0)!(" # ( " 0' ( " ',(3I :! (24 * 3 (" #3 " # (# " ) (0** (0!!$ 0 ( $ *$ < (3 ') ))<!$ $!3! ( $ $ $!3!!03 (* ( $ 0 )= DE!$ $!3!!0-" ( (! ($ ' * <3 0 -! $! (=$ #3 ( $! ( *0<! (,(! 33)3! 3!$ $!*$ :,( (3 (*$ * $! *!$ $!3! # ) (" ( ( ) 33 33! # 0!! 5! (,(3! #! *30 ( (* ( " (" (" ( *) (G!(<" (* ( $

161 ,(*3 (!$ 03! #$ $ <$ O & 8,( 3! #! 0 * ( 3 *$ (<! ( ) #*0,(*$ $ <$ O<*$!!!$ $!(3! #< ) (" (! 33') ;,(3! #! 0 ) " ( ( $ F" * ( ( #G )! *#" 0 (!$ $!*$ 0 (! ($ ',(!! 3!FQ G )3 (3 *$ (< : )3<$ O1= 3 (3! # (*$ (* 3,(*! ($ <$ O,( % *$ " )!( ( " )

162

163 ! "# $ %!! & # "# '( #! ' &' ) ) * '+ (,! -(!. # (/!)*!.% 0 # &! )!1!.! )!! &' -) *) 2 %2 0 --( 3 "# % *"#) '-- % )) -(! # 4 5 '! 6 7 ' "#$': ; 7 $'$4+ 3 -; "# -;!7 "#8 "# ( +)! %' 6 7 "#! "#!; 7 8"#' ; 7 85,<,;!7 + = > ;!7 % "#0 315;! 7 % "#? 5? $% &'(" 8 *"#! ".! A B & "# C! ". 3 + D $ > 7

164 *"#& B "#!A 5,<,75F G ' 5F G ( > %2 # H& IA835I7 H& - A835-7( 8 *"#5F G ' : "# '!A!!&! B#!7( 3! 2 J # 8 E-! 2( )* &"! ". *#& 2 A&) ". >85F G7,<,,<,,<, 2 A ".CE-7,<,( >!,<, "#,<, &!' ( 835A8 3 5,<,7I& *"#,<,+( 835-& *"#J,<, 2 ( > : *&"!H & &HB >58>4K5>( ' "#,<, & # ' ".,<,,<, ( + #" '! "# '!& '! H C ".3 ". + '!& % % *"#! A "#3 ". 7( + "#* & ". ".+( '!& '& %! 2 2,! ) ' &' A 3 7( 5,<, "#,<, >,<,!# H B "#! 3 D$ >! 'H! E

165 I 835I!& H B "#! 3 D$ > $': '!&! H & )! B & +( >,<,!# H B "#! 3 D$ >! 'H! +!& "# ' %! ) ( "#!& B "# *"# ( + # " 3 '&! "#$ % ( *"# '% B *"#1!! ".> 85F G *"# '!&! 0 > ' "# ) "#! 22,' %!)(,! " #!)-./ &'(" 8 *"# ' $4+ 3( ' *. # & *) "# $4+ 3 I '! D$ >( "# &!1 ' 2 $4+ 3 -( 8 *"# ' & B "# 2 "# # L-- "# 5 )* &0 > %2#&J % - * M > 8+ 3% -* % -( D

166 ' 2 "#& I( + #" *"#" &) 8'! D$ > "# # /- # C- &' ( >" M>8+ 3' -!&' ) ' 2 "# 5( "# "# 2 "#!& % ". "# ) ) ".) #( +!&*!"#% 2! 8( +!& 2 '1 *!"#%( "#!& + # " 3 '&! "#$ % ( *"# ' % B *"# ". &!"# M > 8+ 3% -( *"# '!& M 33' "#) "# $ ( 1)#2 &'(" ) "# ) & B "# 2 "# #L-- "# 5( ) * " 2 "#& I( + #" 2 "#!&L-- #!& 2 "# # 5! "#! ( /

167 2 "#!& " I " )!'! $ 83 I' 2 "#( + # " 3 "#&J *"#! N! " #!)-./ 3 '!& *"# 8( 4 # % &'(" "# "#! B"# &' ) L/O &'2! % "#&' )C-O 1&'(!. "#1"# J ( 3"# &'' "# ) '2 *2 % * *&P% 2Q ( 3 # 1 ) ' * 2 J! *! 1 2 ( "# "#! &2) ' "# 5 1 & ) B "# # )) % 2! H! &'( ) * " "# "#!& 'H '2)!& % '2 )!& /- & "'2 ( C

168 + #"!& B 2) J H!"%2 ( > "#!& B' '!! % *"# "#!1%( #!& %( +!& 2&% ".3 ( +!&! "# ' * H B '2 A( & '1 (7 *"#( ' *! "# %2%( +!&) 2 % 5!! "#% 2) 8( +!&) % P ( 3!&! ' E(--- ' ( + # 0 +!&'! ' 8$3! 6 - A+8357 *P"#2 1! "# ' J *"#! "# 1 ' ' & ( - A+$3782 % )3 ( " +!&) & "#! % % 5J "#D % "#! '( +!& H' % &!&( 1 C 2 S ' L-(3 %!& ' 1 (% R

169 !#! 'S3 ( 5 #( ( &'(" >,<, 8' '! ' H! H (M ' ) "# ' 1 'H )) & B"#! 'H! )& "#!#! %H!' LLL 8 ),<,!#! 'H!( + % "#! ' 8 * % "#& '! H! 'H!( ) * " & "# ' ' ( + #" >,<,!# "# & H B "#!3D$>& ' H LIL!+D$>& ' LR/( + # 0 > %& *"#1! % ( " %!#H &' 8 1! % " 6# % &'(" ' 8 )% B"#)!1 ". ". )!1 J % "#! ( + 1& B! #% "# '2! ( I

170 ) * " &) ' ' ( + #"!#!3 D$>( + # 0 > %& *"#1! % ( " 3 '"# ' + = > 8& )!"# '! "#&( %!#H &' 8 1! % " 7% &'(" 8"#!,<,) ' * *"# ( + #" >,<,!& "#!3 D$ >( + # " > %& *"#1! % ( " 3 '"# ' + = > 8&)!"#,<,! "#&( %!#H &' 8 1! % "!#'"' *%QQ ( L

171 :.% ; #< &'(" * ' A!!7 & "# &! 2 % A2 %& (7' & "#! ( ) * " = % 2 '1 ( + #" &% 'H ' "#) & ( +!# * % & "#( "#!&!"#! & %'"# "#+ ( + # " "#!&! % 31! & "#( " 3!!& *"#!".% "# & % *"#%!(+'!& P!".!S %! ( =& >#%?, &'(" >031 AR7( % ". (3 % #! ' S! ' ' *"#! ') LIL!'2 ( ) * " 5 ( -

172 + #" 8) #2 J ( + # " >!# '! H J & A' ' 5E7 " % ".!# H* ' A / -A >B0, &'(" % "# ) ' ". LIL %% ' ".! A *"# $ % 7( ) * " 5 + #" 8) #2 J ( + # " > ) ' ' '!& "#! " ( +!# %1! ) '&!"#A "#"#7( " % ".!# H*' ' 8(

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183 !"#$%&' () *++,!"#-+*'.-+*'& /$$0 /*.-" 1 234/2-1 / / 8 2, "*9&: ;'*' < /6" /0 " =/ / 24 7 >/ 7 3/=" = = = <, / 3 3?/3 "$#,!"# -+*'. "#,!"#-+*'& " : A 3$$&# "# =361 3B ) "+#,!"#-+"*'& $$0 /* / " 0 3 / 4o sistema de coordenadas militares (elipsóide internacional, datum Lisboa)!!" "

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

185 - - 9$ $-"%%9 *-."9'. $- 99 $-"%- 9&."+% $-"+*. -%."-% $-"..' $9."-%$ *- 9. $+"%' *."99% -$ 9& $+"%*' &."9%& $- 9' $+"'% 9.."9%& *' 9* $+"$'. -'."'9 '9 -% $+"9+ 9.."-& 99 - $+"9'. *."%&$ %* -$ $+"-%+ + +"**' '+ -9 $+" "'& $+"9+ &- +"&'* -$ -+ $+"9+* $ +"&'' '* -. $+"9*' $' +"&&- 9. -& $+"-9- $- +"&+' +. -' $+" "&$9 &$ -* $+".%% ' +"+9. '& +% $+"+*' '% +"+%9 +& + $+"&9 *. +"-'9 -' +$ $+".*- %& +"9&% %$ +9 $+"*$+ &- +"9$* -% +- $+"*+ 9' +"$&% $+ ++ $."9&' -+ +"'* %& +. $+"*%..- +"$$% *' +& $+"'*. $& +". '$ +' $+"..-.* +"$%$ -$ +* $+".-- '* +"%'' *-.% $+"+9 9 +"$ %. $+"-*& 9+ +"%*% ++.$ $+"-+$ +"$$ &9.9 $-"*-& -. +"$ 9%.- $-"*$- $* +"& 9*.+ $-"&&..& +"&- 9$.. $-"&-- - +"*$ %..& $-"&+ 9* +"$-+ +&.' $-"9'9 &. +"9% $.* $-"9.' -. +"$*% %' &% $-"99. $ +"$9* +. & $-"$'9 -& +"-- 9 &$ $-"$++. +"%*9.* &9 $-"$-- %& +"%'*.& &- $9"'-& $& +"$%- 9* - - &+ $9"'9& &- +"$+.- 9

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

187 # " $/ &'( 0%! 1! 2!!+3 C? 3/B 4% 5 6/ " 5D E 0 F;, 8 C61 = & 775/6 898*!? =9%% - - ** $-"% "9$+ +- 4%56/".G5DE0F;,8 C661 = /" 5 898*!6B $: '( ) / 3 3?" 2?;898*! H /? =$%%% - - ** $-"% "9$+ +- : '( ) / 3 3?" 2?"898*! H /? =$%%% - - ** $-"% "9$+ +- 4% 5 6/ "$D :, I631 = &<<5/6898*!? =$%% - - %% $'"-9+ $+ -"'%9 9$ +

188 4%56/"5D:,I631 = /"5 898*!6B 8: '() =/ %%" 2?8898*! H /? =%%% - - %% $'"-9+ $+ -"'%9 9$ # =$& '( 1 *!!>! +3 37? )3? 3B - - % $$"%+* 9+."%&9 $ %$ $.".%.- +"$&. *9 %9 $."+-* '- -"*' -9 %- $$"%%& ++ +"&&& & #;$&'(!%*!!5+B 3 )3? 3B - - %+ $%%".'+.9 *"'9 '- %. $$'"9++ $- -"999 $+ %& $$&"*$9 +. "'&% '% %' $%%"$+9 *+."&$ 9* # 8$& '( )!+3 3= 4 B - 4 B DJ 6 4.B 2 4$+%% 3 3"0 44 3B - - %* $9"%' -9 +"&+$ &* % $+"+*% &. +"9% '+.

189 4BI 2 4-%%% 3 3"0 44 3B - - %* $9"%' -9 +"&+$ &* % $+"+*% &. +"9% '+ #?$&'(%>+3 3 )3? 3 B - - $"'$& 9$."-%%.- $ $+"'+% 9. +".*9 -$ 9 $+"&%' % -"''- * - $".'+ %. +"+*$ -% $! &!+3 3 ) 3? 3 B - &1 2 <%GK $%&".$' '* &"&%* &' '9 $$"..- %+."%$& +' '' $$"++& & +"-$% *+. $%&"$+% +* +"++ '%?& + - &I1 2 <%G).% - - & *'"$&& '& %"'99 '+ + $%&".$' '* &"&%* &'. $%&"$+% +* +"++ '% ' *&"9*- +% +"&*- ' &

190 - &1 1 2 <$'GK - - *- $."%& -' +"-9* & * $$"+$. &' +"9%9 '' $% $$"9' 9"%'. '% *+ $+"* 9 -"'99 %'?+ + - &, 1 2 <%G).% - - * $$"+$. &' +"9%9 '' $ $9"'%.' +"%.+ '+ $$ $9%"$*& 9$ $. ' $% $$"9' 9"%'. '% # A $!%&>!'(+3 = 3-9K 5 & & 16 2 )B - ' 5 6 G1 D?.% - - $9 $%&".$' '* &"&%* &' $- $$"&& '."99%.$ $+ $-"9..."%*. %& $. $."%&9 %$ +"&+. +9 $& $$"+$. &' +"9%9 '' - 'I561 D?.% - - $' $%&"$+% +* +"++ '% $* $$"+9' +* +"9 '* 9% $9"*+$ &- +"%-* &' 9 $+"''*.% -"&% $- 9$ $$"9' 9"%'. '% '

191 #7$!%&>B/+3 =3.% 8? %%% B $9"%' -9 +"&+$ &* 9- $+"+*% &. +"9% '+ # < $!%&> C+B = K 2 4.%%% 3 3 3B B $9"%' -9 +"&+$ &* 9- $+"+*% &. +"9% '+ #$!%&>B/2+3 =3.% 8?31 <" 2 +%%% $-"9%-.% +"+$& 9$ # " $&'( %/! &!!>)! *!%' ) )+3 3= B - 45H 2!!G! D!/ 3) D6 2 4-$%% 33 3" B $9"%' -9 +"&+$ &* 9- $+"+*% &. +"9% '+ *

192 6 C2+%% 3? 2 73 L+.%% B $%9"*'&.$ '"%*& 9. 9& $%*"+&*. &"& - 9' $%*"9$%. +".9*.' 9* $%9"&$'..".* *% -% $*"$'* %9 +"-- *. - $$-"''% +' -"-9- &- -$ $$-".$ +& $"*+& $' -9 $*"%9% %9 9"*+& +% 4.5H 1 = 2!!G!1 D!/ 1 3)D6B 2 ='+%% $-"9%-.% +"+$& 9$ C? = " = / #?/ 77 / 7 3 / 77 / 7 2=? 3 B /L 7J / J E 7 / J 6 </J %

193 6, J 6! )/?77J J )6 8 3 )3? 7 2?J 6 M 7 / /) / ? 4 " $" I1 " ; : # " = / 3? 2 /? 3 B ?? 3L? J / / 7 77 / 7 2=7 / 37 /? 3L? " 8 " = / #=?/ 77 / 7 3 / 77 / 7 2=? 3 B

194 /L 7J / J 6 E 7 / J 6 </J 6, J 6! )/?77J J )6 8 3 )3? 7 2?J 6 M 7 / /) / ?4 " $" 2 / # = / ) = 3 3>/ / = 2? 3 " 9" / # = =3 7) / 77 ) 27 "? : # ; 2 /? 4? = / 3? 4 7 /?3 " $

195 8 :#82 /? 3 B 6 2 /77?2= / 2 7 / 37 ) D" /6 3 =? /?3 3 33?=" $ : # 8B 6 : / " /6 : 4.3 / /" 6 : 4 3 /"? " N /3 9"9=?= = F3 A F= 3 / " $" 0 = D9"9=? 3 / === /2 7 2 > 4 >" 9

196 7 " : 9.9+? 3 77 / 7 / 77 / 7 2= 3 B /L 7J / J 6 E 7 / J 6 </J 6, J 6! )/?77J J )6 8 3 )3? 7 2?J 6 M 7 / /) / ?4 " $" 3 77 / 7 77/ 7? 3B 4 >! @ ?3 1 / 5K & + I? 3.% 6" 1 2 8?3 1 / 5.% 6" 1 2 8?3 1 / 5K + + 1? 3.% 6" -

197 @ ?3 1 / 5.% 6" < " = / #A?/ 77 / 7 3 / 77 / 7 2=? 3 B /L 7J / J 6 E 7 / J 6 </J 6, J 6! )/?77J J )6 8 3 )3? 7 2?J 6 M 7 / /) / ?4 " $" 2 / / / 7 # A? 3 " : # / 7? +

198 77/ 7 2 8?31 /.% % " " : # < / 7? 77/ 7 2 8?31 = + %.% %.% % = : # / 7? 77 / 7 2 8?31.% % " ; :#"2 /?3 B 6 : %O ; $ 5O ; $ 6J 7 3 / 3 3" /6 : PO ; $ 5 O ; $ 6J 8.

199 " C 3 $# 2 /? / 77 = 3 3? 5 3= 6 / 2= = /? 3 " $", "? " M / / / " $" => / / / " ?" $" : 7 /3 2? //) ) / / /) )3 B 6 <3 /? B%%%% J /6 / " &

200 6 8 ) 2/ / 7 >" 9" 3 7 "#3" -" 0? /3 2 / /) 77" A " 37 3?" $" : 7 > /3 2? / 2 ) " 7 " N / 3 2= / /) 7 / 23 / 7 2=" $" 1 /? 3 /3 /) / /72 / /3 3" "< " E 2 77 / /) /3 3 3 /3 //) " '

201 $" = > 2 7 7" 9" / /) 7 7B 6 2/) 3 7 J /6 7 ) > J 6 7 " -" < >/ 34 3 / / /) % / / = 2 = " " " E 77/ 7 2= 2 7 7" $" / 2= 2" 9" 2 / 3" *

202 -" 0 3> 3 2 % / / =2= " "" " 2 / /) 7 3 /L / 2= / 7 3,!"#%;$%%- *(" $" 1 3 3,! "# %;$%%- * ( 7 /3 /) / / 72 / 2 3 " "=, 3 7 2//) 7 /3 //)72 / 7 /)78 /" "; 0 3Decreto- Lei n.º 51/80, de 25 de Março "8 0 3/" $%

203 ...\Proposta de Servidão AFR_ dgn :24:49

204 !"# $

205 Report for Provision of Consultancy Services ANA, Aeroportos de Portugal, SA FARO Terminal Capacity Review of Faro International Airport June 2006 International Air Transport Association 800 Place Victoria, B.P. 113 Montreal, Quebec Canada H4Z 1M1 Tel: +1 (514) Fax: +1 (514)

206 2

207 Executive Summary IATA was commissioned by ANA to provide a terminal capacity assessment at Faro International airport. The focus of the study was to evaluate the current conditions at the airport based on the busy peak hours in 2005; to calculate the maximum reliable throughput of the existing facilities; and propose possible solutions to ensure capacity balance and to optimize the terminal capacity while maintaining a good Level of Service. The systems were reviewed based on IATA s expanded Rules of Thumb and experience. An airport is more than just the terminal building. Rather it is a network of inter-related systems that processes aircraft, passengers, baggage and vehicles. As such, capacity balance amongst all the inter-related systems is a must to operate an efficient and effective airport. The study is based on original data supplied by ANA, including plans and busy day flight schedules. This data was supplemented by information received during the course of a meeting held at Lisbon Airport on the The additional parameters, including enhanced load factors and on site observations, were input into the previously prepared models, generating a set of revised final results with regard to the original Preliminary Report issue. At the request of the client the capacity audit addressed three separate scenarios, namely: Stage 1 The existing installed system with reduced (50%) utilisation of the available in- and out-bound passport control provisions. Stage 2 - The existing installed system with full (100%) utilisation of all the available system provisions. Stage 3 The system conditions consequent to the implementation of the recommended remedial measures, required to restore available capacity equilibrium within the key components. The results of the capacity study at Faro Airport (Stage 2) indicate that the capacities of the constituent terminal subsystems are broadly at parity, with the current (2005) demand utilising approximately 75 % of the gross aggregate capacity. The single exception being the immigration areas processing the predominant Non-Schengen traffic stream into the baggage reclaim area. The current demand indicates a loading of 100% with all eight positions open. The Stage 1 scenario identifies a situation which is closer to the existing operating conditions at the airport, whereby only 50% (4 no. or fewer) passport control desks are available within the in- and out-bound traffic streams. The results of this study indicate conditions of acute congestion and consequent localized system breakdown. In the light of these results the recommended remedial actions are twofold. The current operating regime must be restored to its full available capacity prior to a commitment to infrastructure enhancement works. The recommended physical development works, within the short / intermediate time frame, include the following areas: Inbound passport control area The landside arrivals concourse Non-Schengen gate lounge facilities (toilets) Long term development objectives should also address the following areas: Non-Schengen gate lounges (total areas) Baggage Reclaim area Outbound security area Following the implementation of the immediate remedial measures, the aggregate system utilisation factors are reduced from 75% to 64% with an ability to accommodate demand growth within the context a balanced system capacity. 3

208 Terminal System Configuration, System Logistics and Market Profile Aircraft Stands There are two types of aircraft stands at Faro. There are a total of six (6) contact stands and there are also sixteen (16) remote stands that are located onto two aprons. The larger of the two remote stand apron with 13 stands is located to the southwest of the passenger terminal building and the other remote stand apron containing three large aircraft stands is located to the immediate right of gate 24. Terminal Configuration The existing passenger terminal at Faro International Airport is configured in four levels. The basement area, identified as Level 1 accommodates all the departure baggage sortation, make-up and despatch facilities. The drawings indicate a provision of 33 laterals arranged in three banks of 11 units. There are also 2 additional make up carousels. The BHS system currently utilises off line HBS facilities to provide 100% manual screening. It is anticipated that integrated in-line HBS equipment will be installed and commissioned by the end of The remainder of the basement area is allocated to sundry technical infrastructure and staff facilities. The core passenger processing functions are located at apron level, identified as Level 2. The departures and arrivals streams are segregated horizontally, with the western terminal sector being dedicated to outbound traffic and the eastern zone catering for all the arrivals. Additional commercial and management functions are accommodated at Level 3. The six airbridge served contact stands are accessed by an elevated linear distributor pier, which contains two levels. The departing traffic stream is directed to the upper Level 4, extending the length of the pier concourse, from which passengers descend down to individual gate holding areas at boarding level 3. Each gate holding area is equipped with duplicate boarding card control positions at the head of the area (pre-boarding mode) and at the entry into the airbridge (trickle flow boarding mode). The gate holding area provisions at Level 3 were not included in the capacity audit, which focused on the prime operational resources at Level 2. Arriving passengers are directed to a collector corridor at Level 3, from which they are able to access the baggage reclaim and immigration areas (Non- Schengen) at Level 2. The mixing of departing and arriving traffic streams is inhibited through staff measures. Kerb The principal kerb area, which has linear length of 180 m is located adjacent the northern elevation, at the immediate head of the check-in concourse. The landside area outside the arrivals zone is dedicated to coach and shuttle traffic. The lateral separation of private vehicular traffic and coach transport provides direct access to the coaching areas for the holiday traffic, without crossing the active kerb. The situation will, however lead to conflicting directional traffic flows on the landside pavements during peak demand periods. Check-in Concourse The check-in desks are arranged in two discrete blocks of 36 and 26 units respectively. The larger desk array is orientated in a westerly direction, while the smaller array faces the landside kerb to the north. This geometry has resulted in two check-in concourse areas, linked by a relatively narrow passageway adjacent the northern façade. Although it is understood that block desk allocations are made according to specific flights / destinations this arrangement may limit flexibility and frustrate passenger orientation upon entry into the building. A clear and comprehensive external and internal signage system is essential in this configuration. The individual check-in desks are of a walk-through type, whereby all passengers enter a collector corridor at the rear of the check-in arrays, prior to entering the outbound security area. Outbound security The outbound security area consists of 7 X-ray machines. Dedicated staff security facilities are located to the east of the northern check-in array. The outbound security area is accessed directly from the check-in concourse. The queuing area within the security inspection zone is relatively limited and includes a lateral access from the larger of the two check-in concourses. The 4

209 system operates satisfactorily under the current peak demand loading of 57%. It is probable, however, that as future demand grows the resulting queuing may extend back into the passenger collector corridor, at the rear of the checkin desks. This, in turn, may frustrate the check-in process at the centrally positioned desks, nearest the security zone entry point. This should be taken into account as part of the intermediate / long term development strategy. Airside Departures Concourse The airside departures concourse comprises a free flow area, bounded on both sides by a variety of commercial and catering outlets. There are three gate lounge areas aligned on an east-west axes. The westernmost lounge is open to the main concourse area and serves domestic and Schengen traffic. The easternmost lounge is accessed via a bank of eight passport control positions to service Non-Schengen sector traffic. The gate lounge in the central location is equipped with valve doors at opposite ends of the area and is able to operate in swap mode, either Schengen or Non-Schengen. Since the bulk of the design Peak Hour traffic at Faro Airport is within the Non- Schengen sector, the capacity analysis assumed that the central lounge dedication will reflect this profile. Both the western and eastern lounge areas are equipped with a stair and escalator providing access to the elevated distributor pier, serving the airbridged contact stands. Additional to this provision, each of the three lounges has 10 coaching boarding gate positions aligned along the airside façade. The lateral distributor pier accommodates two levels, the upper of which (Level 4) provides departures access to the separate boarding lounges at Level 3 of the pier. This enables each contact stand to service either the Schengen or the Non-Schengen traffic stream. Arrivals and Baggage Reclaim Area The baggage reclaim area contains four indirect feed inclined bed reclaim carousels and one through the wall direct feed flatbed unit. Schengen and Non-Schengen traffic arriving from the elevated pier access the area from the western end, while coached arrivals use a dedicated entrance at the eastern flank of the terminal building. The Non- Schengen traffic stream is processed through eight immigration positions. Transfer Logistics Provisions for airside transfer are located immediately downstream of the arrivals immigration control area. A single X-ray machine provides security prior to re-entering the Schengen departures concourse. All other passenger streams transfer landside. Operating principally as a holiday destination, the airport currently experience no specific demand for transfer traffic. Landside Arrivals Concourse The open plan landside arrivals concourse occupies a common space with the north facing check-in array. A stair and escalator leading up from the landside arrivals concourse provides access to a mezzanine at Level 3 which accommodates public bar and catering areas as well as a exhibition, meeting rooms and the airport management suite. The holiday market using charter traffic creates a demand for the processing of substantial passenger groups within the terminal. In terms of the arrivals process this typically involves the assembly and consolidation of multiple groups prior to boarding hotel coaches. This results in a greater dwell time and localization of the passengers within the landside concourse, which is currently reported to be experiencing congestion during peak demand periods. Market Profile The design busy day, recorded on the , indicates 98 directional movements corresponding to departures and arrivals respectively. Of those movements 37 (38 %) are charter traffic and 68 (69 %) serve Non-Schengen destinations / points of origin. The Non-Schengen destinations are almost exclusively located in the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic with few flights also travelling to Switzerland and Poland. This reflects a heavy bias towards tourism, including requirements specific to processing group traffic. 5

210 Capacity Analysis Methodology Analysis Methodology The evaluation of the capacity of the existing Passenger Terminal at Faro Airport was performed in the following manner: Identification of the Prime System Component capacities required meeting the current recorded directional Peak Hour demand (03 September 2005, Departures hrs. and Arrivals hrs.) Extrapolation of the MAXIMUM equivalent Peak Hour Passenger capacity which can be sustained by the EXISTING Prime System Components, assuming similar process conditions. Illustration of the UTILISATION LEVELS of the existing terminal system components within the context of the CURRENT (2005) peak demand loading. Prime System Parameters The capacity audit has been conducted on the basis of he IATA Level of Passenger Service Standards. These provide internationally accredited benchmark targets, whereby the performance of various specific installations can be directly compared using a common, consistent and quantifiable reference database. The IATA Level of Service standards are measured on a 6-point descending scale of performance graded from Level A to F. Level A represents an excellent level of service, free passenger flow and superior level of user comfort. Level F, on the other end of the scale represents a condition of system breakdown, with major process constraints, cross flow conditions and unacceptable level of service. The following tabulation provides an indicative summary of the Passenger Service standards related to specific spatial provisions A B C D E F Queue (Check-in) Wait/Circulate SYSTEM FAILURE Holdroom Bag Claim Gov. Inspection Services This capacity audit, in common with similar studies, has been conducted using IATA Level of Service C as the target parameter for the performance of the prime system components. This level indicates a good level of service commensurate with stable flow conditions and acceptable levels of delay during peak demand conditions. The results, using the above stated parameters, are based on the ultimate capacity of the installed systems, assuming a 100 % utilisation of all the available system resources. Considering the time required to design, construct and fully commission new or additional terminal facilities, there is a common expectation of the degradation of Passenger Service Levels during the lifetime of any terminal building. Extension and remodelling of existing operational facilities also provides additional pressure on the system during the course of the construction works. It, is consequently, not recommended that a Level of Service Standard below C is adopted as the starting point for any future strategic development policy, since the subsequent and inevitable degradation as the system reaches maturity, would provide conditions below acceptable standards. 6

211 Prime System Components IATA regards the following terminal system components as the key factors which govern the overall capacity of the facility: Outbound Security Check-in desk provisions Departures passport control Gate Hold room areas Arrivals passport control Baggage reclaim area Landside concourse Aircraft Stands Prime System Variables The calculation of the system capacity with regard to each individual component specified above is based on the following parameters: Demand Profile o Peak Hour Directional Passenger flow (PHPax) Fixed installation o Number of desks, processing counters or reclaim belts (Number) Floor areas o Gross floor areas within specific holding sectors (sq.m.) Process times o Time taken to process a single passenger (seconds) System redundancy (Optional) o Proportional allowance for staffing / system technical constraints The demand profile was analysed separately for the Schengen and Non-Schengen traffic sectors, where specific dedicated facilities were required namely: Outbound Passport Control positions Departures Gate Lounges Immigration Control positions Where the absolute Busy Day peak hour demand did not reflect the a specific peak in a corresponding traffic sector (Non-Schengen or Schengen) the peak demand of that specific traffic sector was used, in lieu of the combined figure, to determine the capacity of sector dedicated facilities. Other areas were audited in terms of the combined peak hour demand (Schengen and Non-Schengen), reflecting common usage of the facilities. The following graphic illustrates the Schengen boundary conditions in force at the time of this report: 7

212 Passenger Traffic Schengen Non - Schengen Cargo Traffic Non - EU European Union Luxembourg Spain Portugal Austria Italy Greece Denmark Finland Germany Holland Belgium France Sweden Norway Iceland Great Britain Ireland Poland Hungary Czech Republic Slovakia Lithuania Estonia Latvia Slovenia Cyprus Malta Rumania Bulgaria Croatia Switzerland Customs Boundary Planned Accession

213 The system variables used in the capacity audit are listed in the tabulation below: System Component Passenger Service Level (C) Schengen Demand Profile Non - Schengen Demand Profile Fixed Installation Existing Floor Area (sq.m) Process Time LOS System Redundancy Check-In Desks Proportion of Short Haul Internat. Movements in peak hour % of pax in 60 min. before PH % of pax in 60 min. after PH Outbound Security Y Class Passengers J Class Passengers Departures Passport Control Y Class Passengers J Class Passengers 1, PHP (Combined) 100 % 9 mvts % % 1, PHP 80.00% % 1,531 PHP 80.00% % 62 units sec 0% 7 units sec 0% 8 units sec 0% and 50% Gate Hold Rooms Schengen Peak Hour Aircraft Capacity Load Factor Proportion Seated Pax Proportion Standing Pax Area per Seated Pax Area per Standing Pax Gate occupancy time PHP Adjusted 80 % 20 % mins. LOS (C) Schengen peak outside total peak hour Gate Hold Rooms Non- Schengen Peak Hour Aircraft Capacity Load Factor Proportion Seated Pax Proportion Standing Pax Area per Seated Pax Area per Standing Pax Gate occupancy time 1, PHP Adjusted 80 % 20 % 1, mins. LOS (C) Gate Hold Rooms Total Peak Hour Aircraft Capacity Load Factor Proportion Seated Pax Proportion Standing Pax Area per Seated Pax Area per Standing Pax Gate occupancy time 1, PHP Adjusted 80 % 20 % 2, mins. LOS (C) Schengen peak outside total peak hour Arrivals Passport Control Number of aircraft exist doors 1, PHP 10 no. 8 units sec 0% and 50% Baggage Claim Units Proportion of wide body a/c Occupancy wide body pax Wide body claim units Proportion of narrow body a/c Occupancy narrow body pax Narrow body claim units 1, PHP 0.00 % % 5 units tot. 0 units 5 units 20 mins. 20 mins. 0% Arrivals Hall - Landside Average occupancy time / pax Av. Occupancy time / visitor Space per person Number of visitors / pax 1, PHP mins. 30 mins. LOS (C) Aircraft stands - Airside Buffer time Turn around time Number of stands Combined mvts per hour mins. 60 mins. 9

214 Capacity Analysis Results System Capacity At the client s request, the analysis of the system capacity was conducted in three stages to reflect the following operating scenarios: Stage 1 The existing installed system with reduced (50%) utilisation of the available in- and out-bound passport control provisions. Stage 2 - The existing installed system with full (100%) utilisation of all the available system provisions. Stage 3 The system conditions consequent to the implementation of the recommended remedial measures, required to restore available capacity equilibrium within the key components. The results are expressed in terms of the utilisation levels of each system component. These results provide the following indicators: The ability of the existing installation to respond to the current demand The residual capacity (2005 date) of each system component The overall system balances and local constraint conditions, in terms of the mutual relationship of each consecutive system component. System Capacity Selective System Utilisation The following numerical and graphical tabulation illustrates and compares both the CURRENT (2005 Busy day) peak Hour demand and the MAXIMUM saturation capacities of the respective installed terminal sub-systems. The results reflect a capacity profile consistent with the target LOS (C). The capacity of the areas which are highlighted in red boxes is modelled on a 50% utilisation rate. This equates to the availability of four passport control positions within an existing installation of eight units. All other elements remain at a 100% utilisation level. FARO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT % UTILISATION SCHENGEN & NON-SCHENGEN TRAFFIC SECTORS LOS - (C ) - 50% KEY SURVEY DATE = 2005 CURRENT MAXIMUM CURRENT PASSENGER LEVEL OF SERVICE (C ) PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR UTILISATION SYSTEM UTILISATION % DEMAND CAPACITY FACTOR A B C CHECK-IN DESKS 1,737 2,626 66% SECURITY CHECK POSITIONS 1,737 3,039 57% DEPARTURES PASSPORT CONT. 1,580 1, % GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENG & NON-SCHENGEN 1,737 2,760 63% D E GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENGEN ONLY 832 1,649 50% F GATE HOLD ROOMS - NON-SCHENGEN ONLY 1,580 1,936 82% G ARRIVALS PASSPORT CONTROL 1, % H BAGGAGE CLAIM AREA 1,745 2,181 80% J LANDSIDE CONCOURSE 1,745 1, % K A/C STAND PROVISION 1,661 2,453 68% MEAN VALUES - DIRECTIONAL PEAK HOUR 1,727 2,433 90% COMBINED PEAK HOUR DEMAND 2,878 4,054 DESIGN INDEX - CHARTER OPERATIONS 0.063% 0.069% EQUIVALENT ANNUAL CAPACITY 4,568,783 5,876,006 10

215 CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) - 50 % UTILISATION AT PASSPORT CONTROLS 3,500 3,000 Peak Hour Demand Max, Available Capacity 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, A B C D E F G H J K TERM INAL SUB-SY STEM CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) - 50 % UTLISATION AT PASSPORT CONTROLS 250% Utilisation Factors 200% 150% 100% 50% 0% A B C D E F G H J K TERM INAL SUB-SY STEM 11

216 System Capacity Full System Utilisation The following numerical and graphical tabulation illustrates and compares both the CURRENT (2005 Busy day) peak Hour demand and the MAXIMUM saturation capacities of the respective installed terminal sub-systems. The results reflect a capacity profile consistent with both the target LOS (C) and 100% SYSTEM UTILISATION parameters. FARO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 2005 SCHENGEN & NON-SCHENGEN TRAFFIC SECTORS LOS - (C ) - 100% KEY SURVEY DATE = 2005 CURRENT MAXIMUM CURRENT PASSENGER LEVEL OF SERVICE (C ) PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR UTILISATION SYSTEM UTILISATION % DEMAND CAPACITY FACTOR A CHECK-IN DESKS 1,737 2,626 66% B SECURITY CHECK POSITIONS 1,737 3,039 57% C DEPARTURES PASSPORT CONT. 1,580 2,528 63% D GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENG & NON-SCHENGEN 1,737 2,760 63% E GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENGEN ONLY 832 1,649 50% F GATE HOLD ROOMS - NON-SCHENGEN ONLY 1,580 1,936 82% G ARRIVALS PASSPORT CONTROL 1,463 1, % H BAGGAGE CLAIM AREA 1,745 2,181 80% J LANDSIDE CONCOURSE 1,745 1, % K A/C STAND PROVISION 1,661 2,453 68% MEAN VALUES - DIRECTIONAL PEAK HOUR 1,727 2,433 74% COMBINED PEAK HOUR DEMAND 2,878 4,054 DESIGN INDEX - CHARTER OPERATIONS 0.063% 0.069% EQUIVALENT ANNUAL CAPACITY 4,568,783 5,876,006 12

217 CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) % UTILISATION 3,500 3,000 Peak hour Demand Max. Available Capacity 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, A B C D E F G H J K TERM INAL SUB-SYSTEM CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) % UTLISATION 120% Utilisation Factors 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% B C D E F G H J K TERM INAL SUB-SYSTEM 13

218 Recommendations and Mitigation Measures System Enhancement and Remedial measures The capacity audit has highlighted potential areas for quantitative and qualitative improvement in the following areas of the passenger terminal. These sub-systems can be identified under three separate categories: (1) Operational Remedial Measures Outbound passport control area Inbound passport control area (2) Short / intermediate Term Tactical Infrastructure Remedial Measures Inbound passport control area The landside arrivals concourse (3) Long term Infrastructure Strategic Remedial Measures Non-Schengen gate lounge facilities Baggage reclaim area Outbound security area Outbound Passport Control - Operational Remedial Measures The utilisation factor of 63% under current peak demand conditions for the eight passport control positions at the head of the Non-Schengen gate lounge is within the margin of acceptable balanced capacity with regard to other adjacent sub-system components. The first tabulation indicates, however, that if only four of the eight positions are available at the time of peak demand (50% facility utilisation), the overall utilisation factor of this system component rises to 125%. In other words the area at the head of the passport control positions becomes critically congested. The fewer desks are available, the greater the level of congestion which will extend into the main body of the airside departures concourse. This will not only frustrate access to the Non-Schengen gate lounge, but also have an adverse impact on the airside lounge environment and compromise commercial opportunities within the same area. The location and severity of the congestion as identified in the model reflects the current experience at the airport. Although there is no immediate requirement for a physical infrastructure enhancement in this area, it is very much to the benefit of both the airport and its end users, that all the installed positions are made available during peak demand periods. Immigration Control area - Operational and immediate Infrastructure Remedial Measures The situation at the arrivals passport control area is similar to that within the departures concourse. The main difference is, however, that even with all eight positions open, this facility already enjoys a 100% utilisation factor based on the 2005 peak demand profile. If the number of available positions is halved to four units, the utilisation factor reaches 200%. This is supported by on site experience, whereby passengers are held within aircraft on arrival, in order to ease the demand conditions and the ensuing congested conditions within the immigration corridor. Bearing in mind that the area is also served by an escalator descending from the distributor pier, such levels of congestion are likely to result in hazardous conditions for the passengers. The recommended remedial actions are twofold. All eight positions should be immediately restored to full use at peak demand periods, followed by a commitment to provide additional positions to accommodate future demand. Since it is not possible to expand eastwards into the area currently occupied by the baggage reclaim concourse, the optimal solution would appear to be a relocation of the existing Schengen airside toilet block. The relocation of the toilet block into the area currently occupied by the airside play area would allow for the provision of the four additional immigration desks, required to restore the system capacity balance. The airside Schengen transfer security inspection point would also need to be relocated westwards within the existing link corridor. This proposal is indicated in the sketch enclosed in Appendix-A to this report. 14

219 The Landside Arrivals Concourse Immediate Infrastructure Remedial Measures The existing landside arrivals concourse is subject to cyclic loading by passenger groups, which are assembled within the area prior to coach embarkation to their final hotel destination. The dwell time for these passengers is greater that that for independent travellers or business traffic and the spatial distribution is sharply focused within specific areas. The existing landside area with a nominal depth of 20 m from customs exit to the terminal frontage is not ideally suited to this kind of traffic. This is borne out by the utilisation factor of 114% relative to the 2005 peak demand profile. There are substantial benefits to be gained by extending the landside building frontage 20 metres to the north, along the entire east west axis, namely: Increased landside concourse area with enhanced cross flow provisions Improved communication between the two check-in concourses at the western end of the building Additional opportunity to extend the airside concourse and the commercial facilities within it. This is illustrated in Appendix A to this report. Non-Schengen Gate Lounge facilities (toilets) Immediate Infrastructure Remedial Measures Once the Non-Schengen passengers pass through the outbound passport control at the head of the boarding gate(s), they have to remain segregated from the main body of the airside concourse, which lies in the Schengen zone. The drawings indicate a bar / coffee shop within the Non-Schengen gate area, but there is no specific reference to dedicated Noon-Schengen toilet facilities. A relocation of the airside toilets to facilitate an expansion of the immigration facilities will also provide an opportunity for providing dedicated sanitary functions to the Non-Schengen concourse. Non-Schengen Gate Lounge facilities (total areas) Long Term Infrastructure Remedial Measures The capacity of the Non-Schengen gate lounge has been evaluated on the assumption that two of the three available lounges are dedicated to this traffic stream at the peak demand period. The same assumption has been made for the capacity of the Schengen traffic stream. It is clear therefore, that while the Schengen and Non-Schengen peak periods occur at different times of the day, the gate lounge system at Level 2 is able to operate within an acceptable level of service (relative to the 2005 demand), bearing in mind that there is also some additional unassigned capacity within the pier envelope at Level 3. If, however, future revised scheduling requirements create concurrent Schengen and Non-Schengen peak demand periods, the gate lounges shall immediately become critically saturated. Baggage reclaim Area Long Term Infrastructure Remedial Measures Following the implementation of the immediate infrastructure remedial works, the utilisation factor of the baggage reclaim area remains at 80% of the available system capacity. As illustrated in the following chapter this is relatively high to the aggregate utilisation level of 64% experienced by the other component sub-systems. This area is consequently likely to be the first part of the terminal to experience congestion in line with rising demand, once all the other key development issues have been addressed. Outbound Security Area Long Term Infrastructure Remedial Measures The outbound security area is located at the confluence of the traffic streams emanating form the two check-in concourses. Assuming a queuing time of 3 minutes the area may be expected to accommodate a queue depth in the order of 11.0 m. While the current demand remains at 57% of the available capacity, this is not likely to be a problem. As demand rises, however, towards the ultimate system capacity, the queuing and circulation provisions within the existing area will come under increasing pressure. Since the check-in desks are of a pass through type, there is no opportunity for an overspill into an open concourse. Any excess demand shall ultimately extend into the collector corridor at the rear of the check-in desks, frustrating the operation of those desks nearest the point of entry into the security area. 15

220 The sketch enclosed in Appendix-A indicates one possible solution, whereby the X-ray machines and security gates are re-located further into the body of the existing airside concourse. Should this initiative be combined with the extension of the airside concourse as discussed under the previous heading, the relocated installation would have no adverse effect on the overall performance of the airside areas. Enhanced System Capacity The following numerical and graphical tabulation illustrates and compares both the CURRENT (2005 Busy day) peak Hour demand and the MAXIMUM saturation capacities of the respective terminal sub-systems in their ENHANCED CONFIGURATION, corresponding to the above observations and recommendations. The results are expressed in terms of the utilisation levels of each system component. FARO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FUTURE SCHENGEN & NON-SCHENGEN TRAFFIC SECTORS LOS - (C ) - 100% KEY SURVEY DATE = 2005 CURRENT MAXIMUM CURRENT PASSENGER LEVEL OF SERVICE (C ) PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR UTILISATION SYSTEM UTILISATION % DEMAND CAPACITY FACTOR A B C D E F G H J K CHECK-IN DESKS 1,737 2,626 66% SECURITY CHECK POSITIONS 1,737 3,039 57% DEPARTURES PASSPORT CONT. 1,580 2,528 63% GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENG & NON-SCHENGEN 1,737 2,760 63% GATE HOLD ROOMS - SCHENGEN ONLY 832 1,649 50% GATE HOLD ROOMS - NON-SCHENGEN ONLY 1,580 1,936 82% ARRIVALS PASSPORT CONTROL 1,463 2,194 67% BAGGAGE CLAIM AREA 1,745 2,181 80% LANDSIDE CONCOURSE 1,745 3,830 46% A/C STAND PROVISION 1,661 2,419 69% MEAN VALUES - DIRECTIONAL PEAK HOUR 1,727 2,809 64% COMBINED PEAK HOUR DEMAND 2,878 4,682 DESIGN INDEX - CHARTER OPERATIONS 0.063% 0.069% EQUIVALENT ANNUAL CAPACITY 4,568,783 6,785,427 16

221 CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) % UTILISATION 4,500 4,000 Peak Hour demand Max. Availbale Capacity 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, A B C D E F G H J K TERMINAL SUB-SYSTEM CAPACITY AUDIT - LOS (C) % UTLISATION 90% 80% Utilisation Factors 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D E F G H J K TERM INAL SUB-SYSTEM 17

222 Conclusions The mean utilisation factor of the existing system 100% facility utilisation levels) relative to the 2005 peak demand profile stands at 75%. IATA has been advised, however, that current operating conditions are seriously compromised by the limited availability of the in- and out-bound passport control positions. This is supported by the model results, which indicate that when the availability of the passport positions is halved the utilisation factors within those specific areas exceed critical conditions. It is recommended therefore that prior to any commitment for additional infrastructure development, the full availability levels at these specific locations be restored. Once the primary operational process flow requirements have been met, the strategic development of the airport should address the issues relating to the physical enhancement of the immigration facilities and landside concourse areas. An integrated design approach, within this context, should also provide additional space in the airside concourse and improve the passenger comfort in the Non-Schengen gate lounge areas. Upon completion of the recommended remedial actions the mean utilisation of the enhanced system is reduced to 64% relative to the 2005 peak demand profile. The component sub-systems remain within an acceptable level of capacity equilibrium. Following the implementation of the immediate remedial measures, the pressure points within the Non-Schengen gate lounge area and the baggage reclaim hall become more prominent. The long-term development strategy of the airport should address the future enhancement of both the gate lounge and baggage reclaim areas, in order to avoid premature constraint conditions. System Saturation and Strategic Development Plan The final graph is based on a notional extrapolation of the aggregate directional peak hour demand within three distinct future growth scenarios (low, median and high). Although this is a very generic approximation, it does give some indication as to the date when the existing terminal system as a whole will reach saturation capacity at Passenger Service Level (C). According to the graph, subject to the instigation or appropriate remedial measures to restore the system capacity balance, a median (baseline) growth of 10% per annum, would require the commissioning of additional facilities within the 2010 time frame PEAK HOUR DEMAND GROWTH SCENARIO 4000 DIRECTIONAL PEAK HOUR PAX SATURATION CAPACITY 15 % ANNUAL GROWTH 10 % ANNUAL GROWTH 6 % ANNUAL GROWTH YEAR 18

223 Baggage Handling System The evaluation of the outbound and inbound baggage handling systems focussed upon the following principal considerations: System capacity to satisfy the busy peak hour demand based upon system variables and data used in the capacity audit described elsewhere in this document; Calculation of the maximum reliable throughput of the BHS; and Qualitative review of the system configuration and arrangements for Hold Baggage Screening of outbound baggage. System Capacity The capacity evaluation was based upon data and information provided by ANA and the results of the schedule analysis. In addition it was necessary to make a number of operational assumptions, which are summarised below: Peak hour departing passenger volumes are 1737 passengers / hour (includes both Schengen and Non- Schengen); The number of aircraft movements in the peak hour is currently 9; Bag Factors are 1.4 for Schengen passengers, and 2.0 for Non-Schengen passengers; Maximum size of Standard baggage items is 1200 x 750 x 650 mm; Spacing between bags on the transport conveyors is approximately 150 mm; The Level 1 EDS screening machines have a throughput capacity of up to 1500 bags per hour; The Level 3 CT screening machines have a throughput capacity of up to 180 bags per hour; Average speed of the slowest segment of the in-line transport conveyor system is 1.0m/s. Peaking of throughput demand within the peak hour has been assumed to be of medium severity suggesting a Peaking Factor of 1.25 Based upon the assumptions listed above the peak hour demand placed upon the outbound system was calculated to be approximately: Scenario A: 100% Schengen traffic: 3,040 bags per hour; and Scenario B 100% Non-Schengen traffic: 4,343 bags per hour. Baggage Characteristics It has been assumed that the baggage to be handled by the system will conform to the following characteristics. These dimensions are governed by the static and dynamic load capacities of hold baggage screening equipment, the building structural clearances within the allocated BHS spaces together with the anticipated capabilities of BHS elements such as powered turns, vertical sortation devices and pushers. The figure and table below illustrate the baggage measurement conventions used to determine the transport system capacity. Width Standard Bag Dimensions Maximum Average Minimum Weight [kg] Length Length [mm] Width [mm] Height [mm] Height 1 Normal size Golf Bag. 19

224 Capacity: Transport conveyors It has been assumed that bags will always be loaded onto the Collector Belt with their long side laid along the axis of the belt in the direction of travel as illustrated below The transportation system capacity using the belt speed and baggage configuration illustrated was calculated for each of the primary baggage lines: Zone 1 (at the merge point of C4 and C5 transport conveyors) and Zone 2 (merge point of C1 and C2 together with the independent C3 transport conveyor) to be approximately 44 bags per minute (2660 bags per hour). Total system transportation capacity: Capacity: Hold Baggage Screening System 44 x 3 = 132 bags per minute (7900 bags per hour). It has been estimated that each of the three parallel multi-level screening lines (Line 1, 2 and 3) will be capable of processing up to 1500 bags per hour, based upon currently available screening system product information, providing a total screening throughput capacity of 9000 bags per hour. Each of the in-line Level 3 CT machines have been assumed to have throughput capacity in the order of 180 bags per hour, based upon currently available screening system product information, providing a total Level 3 screening capacity of 540 bags per hour. Similarly, in the absence of data to the contrary, it has been assumed that Hold baggage screening processing and clear / reject rates are in accordance with IATA recommendations, which are summarised below: HBS LEVEL # Definition of Screening Within Level Fully Automatic Explosive Detection System (EDS) inline X-ray Machine. Staff Operated X-ray Screening image Processor workstation using enhanced Image Processing software. CT X-Ray Machine Or Staff Operated Electronic Trace Detection (ETD) System. (NOTE Level 2 reject Image replicated at Level 3 position in parallel to ETD system) Reconciliation of Threat Baggage with Passenger (Pax and Bag Brought to Special Area) Passenger asked to account for threat image and ETD trace presence concern. Passenger asked to Open Bag Cleared Baggage Directed to: (Target % of Baggage) Automatic or Manual Baggage Sortation System (70% of Total Flow) Automatic or Manual Baggage Sortation System (25% of Total Flow) Automatic or Manual Baggage Sortation System (4.8% of Total Flow) Automatic or Manual Baggage Sortation System ( % of Total Flow) Reject Baggage Directed to: HBS Level 2 (30% of Total Flow) HBS Level 3 (5% of Total Flow) Reconciliation of Higher Threat Status Baggage with Passenger (0.2% Of Total Flow) Very High threat Baggage Sent to Baggage Bomb Disposal Unit. ( % of Total Flow) 20

225 Capacity: Baggage Make-up Area The baggage Make-up facilities should be able to process the allocation of narrow and wide body aircraft proposed to be resident within the weekly flight schedules. The following summarises IATA recommendations regarding the number and length of make-up facilities required to process individual narrow and wide-body flights. Total Make-up Ref Flight Characteristics Number of Make-up devices length Required to service each Flight 1 Wide Body 1 st Class / Business 2 Economy Class Wide Body Single class Narrow Body 1 st Class / Business 1 Economy Class Narrow Body Single Class 3 28 The schedule identified up to 9 aircraft movements within the current peak hour, comprising nine narrow-body, and a single wide-body aircraft. Based upon current IATA recommendations this would require a total make-up capacity of: 42 + (8 x 28) = 266 m to be provided by up to (3 x 8) + (6) = 30 individual sort laterals The BHS has a total of 33 sort laterals, each with a presentation length of approximately 10 metres: It was noted that an additional 2 carousels were indicated by dotted lines on the drawings. It was assumed that these represent capacity yet to be installed to collect problem baggage prior to manual processing or expediting. The total makeup length available to support peak hour operations is therefore 330 metres provided by 33 devices. Based upon IATA recommendations, this indicates a capacity excess of 64m of presentation length and 3 individual sort laterals. Capacity: Inbound System IATA recommendations regarding inbound system capacity maybe summarised in the table below: Aircraft Type And Flight(s) Serviced (I Off) Wide Body Aircraft Passenger Reclaim Presentation Length 70m 90m Comments / Recommendations Upper limits should be used where the bag to passenger ratio are often 1.5 Bags / Pax. (1-2 Off) Narrow Body Aircraft 40m 70m Upper limits should be used where the bag to passenger ratios are often 1.5 Bags / Pax. Upper limits should be used where two business type flights are allocated to a single reclaim. 21

226 Given the current demand and aircraft movement profile for Faro, and assuming an average bag factor of less than 1.5, this would require a minimum of the following: One long (70m) reclaim device to service the widebody flight together with; Four shorter (40m) devices. This would provide a total presentation length of up to (1 x 70) + (4 x 40) = 230m The current inbound BHS facilities include: Four inclined plate reclaim devices, each of which is approximately 32m long and has an estimated presentation length of 64m; and One flat plate device with an estimated presentation length of 37m. Total presentation length is approximately: (4 x 64) + 37 = 293m. Based upon IATA recommendations, this provides a reasonable inbound system capacity that comfortably exceeds minimum IATA presentation length requirements and has a utilisation factor of approximately 78%. Capacity Conclusion The following summarises the outcomes of the BHS capacity analysis: System Element Identified Peak Hour Demand Calculated Maximum Peak Hour Capacity Check-In (62 Counters) 1,737 passengers 2,626 passengers 66% 100% Schengen 3,040 bags per hour 4,712 bags per hour 65% 100% Non-Schengen 4,343 bags per hour 4,712 bags per hour 92% Transportation System (Zone 1 and Zone 2) 100% Schengen 3,040 bags per hour 7,900 bags per hour 39% 100% Non-Schengen 4,343 bags per hour 7,900 bags per hour 55% Hold Baggage Screening Level 1 (100% of total bag flow) Assumes individual EDS capacity of 1500 bags per hour 100% Schengen 3,040 bags per hour 9000 bags per hour 34% 100% Non-Schengen 4,343 bags per hour 9000 bags per hour 48% Level 3 (5% of total bag flow) Assumes individual CT capacity of 400 bags per hour 100% Schengen 152 bags per hour 540 bags per hour 28% 100% Non-Schengen 217 bags per hour 540 bags per hour 40% Baggage Make-up 33 sort laterals 9 Movements per peak hour (8 Narrow and a single wide-body) Evaluation against IATA recommendations IATA Recommendation 42m + (8 x 28m) = 266m Baggage Reclaim (5 reclaim devices) Evaluation against IATA recommendations 70m + (4 x 40m)= 230m Actual Capacity (33 x 10) = 330m 80% (4 x 64) + 37 = % Current Utilisation Utilisation In conclusion, it may be stated that the check-in, transportation and hold baggage screening elements of the BHS have a significant amount of unused capacity: Average system utilisation may be considered to be in the order of 50-65%, depending on the mix of Schengen and Non-Schengen passengers. The outbound baggage make-up and inbound reclaim facilities are well matched to the current demand placed upon the system with an overall utilisation factor of approximately 80% which provides a reasonable degree of contingency or surge capacity. 22

227 System Configuration The general design and layout of the BHS has been carefully considered to align with current industry norms and best practices. There are no apparent constrictions or bottlenecks in the flow path and all major components have been configured to provide good working conditions for baggage handling staff and screening system operators. The transportation system belt width of approximately 950mm will ensure that the system can transport a wide range of baggage items including standard sized golf bags without risk of blockage: However it was noted that the system does include a separate belt system for Oversize baggage. The separation of the check-in collector belts promotes more effective induction of baggage to the main system and provides operational contingency capability in the event of partial system failure: Similarly, the inclusion of cross-over transportation links between Zone 1 and Zone 2 outbound system is an excellent way of balancing load and providing operational contingencies in the event of a downstream planned or unplanned maintenance event. The sortation and make-up facilities provide a high degree of baggage sortation, which promotes more efficient and effective reconciliation and aircraft loading processes: The planned inclusion of a problem bag carousel in both Zone 1 and Zone 2 sub-systems will promote effective isolation and management of bags that must be processed manually. Provision for tug and cart / dolly movement within the make-up and inbound drop-off areas is in accordance with IATA recommendations for traffic flow and loading / unloading operations. 23

228 Hold Baggage Screening System: The arrangements for Hold Baggage Screening are in accordance with industry norms and best practices. The multilevel in-line approach will ensure that baggage screening does not impose any restriction upon baggage flow during peak hour operations and the inclusion of four screening lines provides a high degree of redundant capacity in the event of a failure an individual screening machine (Level 1 or Level 3): Of particular note is the potential threat evacuation system. Conclusion The design of the outbound and inbound baggage handling system has been carefully considered to conform to current industry norms and best practices, including IATA recommendations regarding system performance, and configuration to promote a safe, secure and efficient operating environment. The current traffic schedule imposes a projected outbound demand of between 3000 and 4300 bags per hour, which is dependant upon the mix of Schengen and non-schengen flights being processes concurrently. The hold baggage screening configuration provides an impressive processing capability with a high degree of contingency capacity in the event of a partial system failure: Of particular note is the potential threat evacuation facility. A conservative estimation of the overall system capacity is in the order of 4700 bags per hour based upon the checkin desk configuration, which indicates that the transportation, and screening and make-up facilities have a 35-40% utilisation rate during peak hour operations. However, the baggage make-up and reclaim facilities are more closely matched to the current traffic volume and mix, with an overall utilisation of both system elements of approximately 80%. 24

229 Aircraft Stand System The aircraft stand (gate) system is a key interface between the aircraft flow and the passenger flow. The number of aircraft and where the aircraft are processed will affect the performance and capacity of the apron and passenger terminal. Realistic stands requirements are essential to develop efficient and cost-effective apron/terminal concepts. Determining aircraft stand capacity and requirements largely depend on predicting the impact of projected airline schedule. Therefore a typical busy summer day was selected to conduct the capacity analysis. Please refer to the appendix B for more detailed information on the hourly distribution of aircraft movements in The next figure illustrates the overview of the available apron areas and the gate supply (2005) used for the analysis. Code E1 Code E2 Code D Code C1 Code C2 Code C3 Code B As evident in the illustration above, there are several stands capable of handling upto code E aircrafts. There are also a number of stands that can accommodate code D aircraft. The remote apron to the left of the terminal building has the largest number of stands but they can only accommodate upto code C aircraft. Because of the Terminal configuration all stands (contact and non-contact stands) can serve the Schengen and the non-schengen flight sector. The apron stand allocations are not only based on aircraft size, but configuration, rules and procedures are also important factors determining the practical capacity of the system. The next figure shows the fleet mix derived from the typical 2005 summers busy day. Code B 1% Code E 2% Code D 3% Code C1 31% Code C2 63% 25

230 The assignment of the individual flights was governed by the priority list that was provided by ANA for Faro. The main aircraft assignment rules included were: Gate restrictions and gate adjacency restrictions as provided by ANA Priority to larger aircraft on contact stands A blocking time of 30 minutes is added to the aircraft occupation time at the stand to take into account normal schedule variation. Preference of Low Cost carriers to be assigned to remote stands. IATA includes virtual overflow in the model to manage the residual capacity. Guided by ANA operational parameters and gating needs, and using the approved gate definitions and the planning schedules, an assignment of flights have been undertaken. It provides an assessment of the ability of the facility to handle the proposed flight schedule. IATA s model (Total AirportSim) was used to assign the aircraft demand to stands determining requirements and limitations. The peaking in the schedule as illustrated in Appendix B, is translated to a spike in gate requirements during the peak period. The graph below shows the hourly stand utilization for the peak day Stands To accommodate all the flights during the peak period, 17 aircraft stands are required. A breakdown of the requirement per aircraft category is as follows: 1 code E2 (61M) 2 code D (51m) 12 code C1 (36m) 2 code C2 (32m) Even with the spike in number of stands required during the peak periods, the existing inventory of aircrafts is only at approximately 77% of its maximum capacity. Therefore, the existing stands can handle some growth in airside activity. 26

231 The capacity of the aircraft stands is reached when the schedule is grown by approximately 30%. The following graph illustrates the hourly stand utilization throughout the peak pay at % level. As evident, the utilization reaches 22 stands which is the capacity of the existing apron Stands Increasing the 2005 schedule beyond the 30% leads to a shortage of aircraft stands during the peak periods. At the 2005 schedule +40%, two (2) additional code C stands would be required to satisfy the peak demand. The illustration below shows an aerial view of the Faro apron during the peak period when the 2005 peak day demand is increased by40%. The virtual overflow area contains the aircrafts that can t be gated at the exiting stands. : Incoming arrival or an aircraft has just left within 30 minutes. : The stand aircraft type restrictions/ regulations do not permit any of the overflow flights to be parked at the stand. Virtual Overflow Area 27

232 The aircraft gating system will be at capacity when the number of aircraft movements reaches 25 movements during the peak hour. The following graphic illustrates the daily hourly aircraft movements based on the peak day 2005 schedule as well as the baseline schedule increase by 30 and 40% Sep-05 30% 40% CAPACITY Conclusions Aircraft Movements (05-06) (06-07) (07-08) (08-09) (09-10) (10-11) (11-12) (12-13) (13-14) (14-15) (15-16) (16-17) (17-18) (18-19) (19-20) (20-21) (21-22) (22-23) (23-24) (24-25) The aircraft stand system with twenty-two (22) stand positions can handle the 2005 schedule. The existing stands reach their capacity when the 2005 peak day schedule is increased by 30%. With an additional 10% growth beyond capacity (2005 schedule +40%), two (2) additional code C stands would be required to meet the demand. By adding some flexibility to the actual apron usage such as introducing MARS (Multiple Apron Ramp System) at the remote East stands (see the picture on the right) the apron stand system would be able to handle a 40% traffic increase with only minor investments. This figure shows that 6 Code C1 aircrafts can be parked where 3 Code D aircrafts are parked. All the stand assignment Gant charts can be found in the appendix C1 to C3, where C1 is the actual 2005 demand, C2 the % demand and the appendix C3 the % demand. The next pages figures shows as for example, part of the Gantt chart of the % stands allocation. 28

233 G-A01 G-A02 G-A03 G-A04 G-A05 GA-06 G-A07 G-A08 G-A09 G-A10 G-A11 G-A12 G-A13 South East Apron G-A14 G-A16 G-A18 G-A20 G-A22 G-A24 Contact Stands 29

234 EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Edition : 1.0 Edition Date : August 2001 Status : Released Issue Class : Restricted The information contained in this document is the property of the EUROCONTROL Agency and no part should be reproduced in any form without the Agency s permission. EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME

235 DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Document Title EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport EWP DELIVERABLE REFERENCE NUMBER: PROGRAMME REFERENCE INDEX: EDITION: 1.0 Project Manager : Bruno Desart Project Team : Bruno Desart, Laura Serrano Martin, Dave Hogg Abstract EDITION DATE: August 2001 In a letter dated 22 nd May 2000, Mr. Fernando Melo Antunes, President of the ANA Board, requested EUROCONTROL to conduct a runway capacity study for four Portuguese Airports, namely Lisboa, Faro, Funchal and Porto. The purpose of this request was to assist the Airport Authorities in Strategic Airport Planning and to support them in the implementation of the EC Regulation 95/93 on airport Slot Co-ordination. This document concerns the second airport, Faro. It reports the runway capacity values which have been assessed based on a specific baseline scenario and estimated using the analytical runway system capacity model RunSysCap. It also provides preliminary apron capacity values based on the current and planned environment. Both the baseline scenario and the analytical model were reviewed and accepted by the Technical Team that included representatives from ANA, NAV and EUROCONTROL. Keywords Capacity Runway System Faro Airport RunSysCap Apron(s) CONTACT PERSON: Bruno Desart TEL: DIVISION: DSA/AOP DOCUMENT STATUS AND TYPE STATUS CATEGORY CLASSIFICATION Working Draft Executive Task General Public Draft Specialist Task EATMP Proposed Issue Lower Layer Task Restricted Released Issue INTERNAL REFERENCE NAME: ELECTRONIC BACKUP H:\FAOFinalReport1.0.doc HOST SYSTEM MEDIA SOFTWARE Microsoft Windows Type: Hard disk Word 97 SR2 Media Identification:

236 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport DOCUMENT APPROVAL The following table identifies all management authorities who have successively approved the present issue of this document. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page iii

237 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport DISTRIBUTION LIST The following table identifies the direct stakeholders as well as all the other participants to the study. Their co-operation is gratefully acknowledged. ANA NAV INAC EUROCONTROL Mr. Fernando Augusto de MELO ANTUNES President of ANA Board Mrs. Maria Aliete BARRAL BARRIGANA RAMOS DA COSTA Member of the ANA Board Capt. João Ivo DA SILVA Technical Services Director ANA/DSTE Mr. João NUNES Head of Operations Division Mr. Franciso SEVERINO Director Faro Airport Mr. António Ricardo CORREIA MENDES Faro Technical Manager Mrs. Maria Helena VEIGA Senior Specialist Accounting and Statistics Mr. Americo MARQUES Airport Operations Mrs. Paula PAQUIM Statistical Service Mr. Sergio RIBEIRO Faro Airport Operations Mr. Paulo ROMAO Faro Airport Operations Manager Mr. Fernando MESQUITA Faro Ground Operations Supervisor Mrs. Clara ANDRADE Faro Marketing Mr. Luis ROSA Faro Ground Operations Mr. Nuno GONCALVES Faro Ground Operations Mrs. Paula LIVRAMENTO Faro Marketing Mr. Abel PARAIBA Director Mr. Américo MELO Mr. Alvaro FERRAO Mr. Fernando CESAR Head of ATS Faro TWR Mr. Manuel COSTA Mrs. Paula SANTOS Radar Data Processing Engineer Mrs. Maria Isabel CYSNEIROS Slot Co-ordinator Mr. George PAULSON Director EATMP/DSA Mr. Jaime VALADARES Head of Airport Operations Unit, a.i. Mr. Bruno DESART Airport Planning and Modelling Ms. Laura SERRANO MARTIN Airport Modelling & Statistics Mr. Dave HOGG Airport Operations & Ground Handling Mr. Yvan ZEEBROEK SASS-C Support Officer Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page iv

238 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In a letter dated 22 nd May 2000, Mr. Fernando Melo Antunes, President of the ANA Board, requested EUROCONTROL to conduct a runway capacity study for four Portuguese Airports, namely Lisboa, Faro, Funchal and Porto. The purpose of this request was to assist the Airport Authorities in Strategic Airport Planning and to support them in the implementation of the EC Regulation 95/93 on airport Slot Co-ordination. This document addresses capacity assessment for the second of these airports, Faro. It reports the runway capacity values which have been assessed based on specific baseline scenarios and estimated while using the analytical runway system capacity assessment model RunSysCap. It also provides preliminary apron capacity values based on the current infrastructure. Both the baseline scenarios and the analytical model were reviewed and accepted by the Technical Team that included representatives from ANA, NAV and EUROCONTROL. This study shows that the runway capacity for Faro Airport ranges from 19 aircraft movements per hour in arrival peak to 25 movements per hour during balanced period and 27 movements per hour in departure peak. It is noted that departure capacity available at the airport is much higher than arrival capacity, representing a relatively unbalanced and unstable system. Arrival capacity should therefore be prioritised if any investment is performed in the scope of runway capacity increase. This document also reports the potential benefits of reducing radar separation (through the use of an on-site radar), reducing arrival runway occupancy time (through a better design of the current exits), reducing departure-arrival capture distance, and optimising departure sequencing on diverging tracks. A preliminary estimate of sustained apron capacity shows that 20 aircraft can be accommodated per hour on the prime Apron A of Faro Airport. Some physical and operational improvements were also recommended in order to reduce turnaround times and enhance apron capacity and safety. These recommendations address the use of multifunctional drive-through stands, as well as the design of splittable stands on A14, A26, A28 and A30, enhanced baggage and cargo container storage areas, and service road extension. COPYRIGHT NOTICE This document has been produced by the EUROCONTROL Agency for the ANA Board. Copyright is vested with the EUROCONTROL Agency. Copy or disclosure to any other party is subject to prior consent in writing by the EUROCONTROL Agency. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page v

239 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport ACRONYMS ANA ApronCap AROT CAMACA CTOT DROT FAO LUT LVO LVP MARS MLSS MTOW NAV RAT (P)RET RRET REDIM RunSysCap RWY TAP THR TORA TOT TWY Portuguese Airport Authorities SA Aeroportos de Portugal EUROCONTROL Apron Capacity assessment model (part of CAMACA) Arrival Runway Occupancy Time, defined as the time elapse measured between the crossing of the threshold and the aircraft s tail vacating the runway edge (AOT4 WP3 RACE TF) EUROCONTROL Commonly Agreed Methodology for Airport airside Capacity Assessment Calculated Take-Off Time Departure Runway Occupancy Time, defined as the time elapse measured between the crossing of the holding stop bar and the main gear off the runway. (AOT4 WP3 RACE TF) FArO airport Line-up Time, defined as the time elapse measured between the crossing of the stop bar and the moment that the aircraft is fully lined up. (AOT4 WP3 RACE TF) Low Visibility Operations Low Visibility Procedures Multiple Aircraft Ramp System MultiLevel Storage System Maximum Take-Off Weight Navegação Aèrea de Portugal, E.P. Runway Access Taxiway (Perpendicular) Runway Exit Taxiway Rapid Runway Exit Taxiway Runway Exit Design Interactive Model EUROCONTROL Runway System Capacity assessment model (part of CAMACA) RunWaY Transportes Aéreos Portugueses Runway THReshold Take-Off Run Available Take-Off Time, defined as the time elapse measured between the moment that the departure is fully lined up and the moment that the main gear is off the runway, (including pilot response times, ATC clearance time equivalent and separation time equivalent). (AOT4 WP3 RACE TF) TaxiWaY Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page vi

240 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the present document. Edition Date Reason for Change Sections/Pages Affected /07/2001 Working draft report All /07/2001 Proposed Issue /08/2001 Released Issue Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page vii

241 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport TABLE OF CONTENTS DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET...ii DOCUMENT APPROVAL...iii DISTRIBUTION LIST...iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...v TABLE OF CONTENTS...vi 1. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND DOCUMENT STRUCTURE FARO AIRPORT SCOPE DEFINITION BASELINE SCENARIOS SENSITIVITY ANALYSES FOR RUNWAY CAPACITY ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS ENVIRONMENT THE COMMONLY AGREED METHODOLOGY FOR AIRSIDE CAPACITY ASSESSMENT (CAMACA) DATA COLLECTION & INPUTS Aircraft Classification Traffic Sample & Operational Window Fleet Mix Runway Occupancy Time Data Collection and Reduction ATC Separations Stands and Critical Aircraft Turnaround and Stand Occupancy Times RUNWAY SYSTEM CAPACITY ASSESSMENT BASELINE SCENARIOS SENSITIVITY ANALYSES Impact of radar separation Impact of change in fleet mix Impact of Arrival Runway Occupancy Time Runway Exit Location and Type Impact of Departure-Arrival Capture Separation Minima Impact of Inter-departure Separation Minima Optimisation of Departure Sequencing on Diverging Tracks PRELIMINARY APRON CAPACITY ANALYSIS APRON CAPACITY ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TURNAROUND OPTIMISATION POTENTIAL APRON LAYOUT IMPROVEMENTS Multi-functional Drive-Through Stands Splittable Stands (MARS) Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page viii

242 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Enhanced Baggage and Cargo Container Storage Areas Service Road Extension CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ANNEX 1. TRAFFIC SAMPLE AND ARRIVAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION ANNEX 2. FLEET MIX DISTRIBUTION ANNEX 3. SEPARATION MINIMA ANNEX 4. TURNAROUND ANALYSIS ANNEX 5. TURNAROUND PROCESS ANALYSIS ANNEX 6. CAPACITY ENVELOPES FOR BASELINE SCENARIOS ANNEX 7. GROUND HANDLING PROCEDURAL RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND BENEFICIARIES ANNEX 8. APRON SAFETY ISSUES Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page ix

243 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background In a letter dated 22 nd May 2000, Mr. Fernando Melo Antunes, President of the ANA Board, requested EUROCONTROL to conduct a runway capacity study for four Portuguese Airports, namely Lisboa, Faro, Funchal and Porto. The purpose of this request was to assist the Airport Authorities in Strategic Airport Planning and to support them in the implementation of the EC Regulation 95/93 on airport Slot Co-ordination. This technical report addresses capacity assessment for the second of these airports, Faro. It presents the context in which the runway capacity assessment study was performed as well as the scenario definition. It also reports the runway capacity values which have been assessed based on specific baseline scenarios and estimated using the analytical runway system capacity assessment model, RunSysCap. This report also provides preliminary apron capacity values based on the current and planned infrastructure as well as some potential apron operational and physical improvements. Both the baseline scenarios and the analytical model were reviewed and accepted by the Technical Team that included representatives from ANA, NAV and EUROCONTROL. 1.2 Document Structure Section 1 of this document reports some background information related to Faro Airport. This information is required in order to get a comprehensive view of the baseline scenarios and sensitivity analyses described in Section 2. Section 3 reports the context and environment in which the study has been performed, including the data used in the input of the analyses. The results of the preliminary study for apron capacity assessment as well as some operational and physical capacity enhancements are proposed in Section 4, while the results of the runway capacity assessment analyses are reported in Section 5. Lastly, Section 6 reports the major conclusions and recommendations of this Airport airside Capacity Assessment project. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 1

244 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 1.3 Faro Airport 4.7 million passengers flew from and/or to Faro Airport in 2000, and 32,339 movements were accommodated during the same period of time. Faro Airport can be best characterised as a destination airport focusing on non-scheduled holiday traffic; 85% of the traffic was charter in June and July are the two busiest months during which 600,000 passengers are served at the airport. The vast majority of the passenger movements are generated in northwestern European countries. The declared capacity, mainly constrained by apron, was 18 movements per hour in The airport currently accommodates about 80% medium-jet aircraft (mainly B737 s and A319/320 s). Figure 1-1 Faro Airport Layout As shown in Figure 1-1, Faro Airport is equipped with a single runway 10/28 that is 2490 meters long. Both runway thresholds are displaced by 45 meters. Statistics showed that the runway-use distribution is 85% for RWY 28 and 15% for RWY 10. RWY 28 is planned to be ILS-equipped by September Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 2

245 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport As shown on Figure 1-2, Faro Airport includes 3 parking areas. A prime parking position, located close to the terminal, includes 22 nose-in stands. Visual docking guidance systems as well as air-bridges are being installed on 6 of these stands. A secondary apron is located close to the fire brigade, including 3 additional stands. A GA parking area is located opposite to the prime parking area. Figure 1-2 Faro apron layout Two handling agents are currently authorised to operate on ground at the airport, namely TAP Air Portugal Handling, and PORTWAY Handling de Portugal S.A. Because Faro Airport is mainly a non-scheduled traffic airport, forecasts are strongly influenced by demand for holidays in the North-western European countries as well as by tour operators strategies. A forecast increase in holiday by pensioners may result in increased traffic demand through the year whilst smoothing the current June and July peaks. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 3

246 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Faro s attraction as holiday destination is rather unpredictable and is relatively beyond control of local airport authorities. However, based on the assumption that attraction remains the same, the annual traffic is expected to grow from 32,339 movements in 2000, up to about 40,000 in 2010 and 46,000 by 2020 (medium case forecast), representing an average annual growth of 1.4%. Forecasts also indicate that 6 million passengers are expected to use Faro Airport facilities in 2010, and 7.6 million by 2020, representing an average annual growth of 2.7% for passengers. 2. SCOPE DEFINITION 2.1 Baseline Scenarios Two baseline scenarios have been defined, reviewed and approved by the Technical Team members to reflect as closely as possible the actual operations at the airport. 1. FAO2001_RWY28 : West wind, RWY 28 used in mixed mode operations, based on current infrastructure, current operational practices and procedures, including separations between aircraft, current SIDs and STARs. This currently represents 85% of operations. Although RWY 28 is planned to be ILS-equipped by September 2001, the impact of ILS on capacity is out of scope of this study. 2. FAO2001_RWY10 : East wind, RWY10 used in mixed mode operations, based on current infrastructure, current operational practices and procedures, including separations between aircraft, current SIDs and STARs. This currently represents 15% of operations. The operations on these two runway orientations may slightly differ because of the location and type of runway exits. All the exits are perpendicular, except D, which is a 135 exit. The critical ground operations mainly take place on the prime apron area. The baseline scenario for apron capacity assessment (FAO2001_APR) aims at reflecting the capacity that can be provided by the current 22 parking positions with the respective critical aircraft they can accommodate. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 4

247 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 2.2 Sensitivity Analyses for Runway Capacity Assessment In order to illustrate the impact of changes to the input parameters used in the baseline scenarios, a set of sensitivity analyses were performed. As shown in Figure 2-1, 6 different factors are identified. S2 S14 Optimum Departure Sequencing No Traffic Mix Forecast Current FAO2001 A2 A3 A4 A5 S1 Traffic Mix Forecast Current 5 NM A1 3 NM 150 Inter-departure Separations NM Inter-arrival Separations S13 Dep.-Arr. Separation & Rolling Take-off S12 4 NM 7 NM -20% S11-10% AROT New RETs S10 +10% S9 Figure 2-1 Sensitivity Area Definition FAO Airport currently uses an en-route mono-pulse secondary radar. The current inter-arrival spacing is 10 NM (used in the baseline scenarios). However, this separation may be reduced to 5 NM in the vicinity of the airport. The first sensitivity analysis quantifies the impact of such reduction. The annual traffic is expected to grow from 32,339 movements in 2000, up to about 40,000 in 2010 and 46,000 by 2020 (medium case forecast). Accordingly, the related ratio between the number of passengers and movements is expected to increase from 146 in 2000 up to 192 in 2020, which represents a considerable change in traffic mix. The impact of such changes in traffic mix is analysed in the second sensitivity area (S2 to S8), based on statistics provided by ANA up to In order to identify the real impact of this factor, some auxiliary sensitivity analyses (A1 to A5) have been performed in addition to S2-S8. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 5

248 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Runway 10/28 is currently equipped with four exits : one perpendicular exit at each runway end, the 90 -exit C and the 135 -exit D. The third sensitivity area, including analyses S9 to S11, aims at analysing the impact of arrival runway occupancy and quantifying the benefit of reducing AROT. It also aims at analysing the potential benefits and the locations of new RET s. The separation minima between arrivals in order to release a departure is 7 NM (used in the baseline scenarios). However, this separation can be reduced to 4 NM for rolling take-off s. The reduction of the departure-arrival capture distance is analysed in Sensitivity Analysis S12. The inter-departure separation minima used by default are 2 minutes. However, these separation minima can be increased to two and half minutes in certain conditions (radar checking mode C, for instance). Sensitivity Analysis S13 quantifies the negative impact that this inter-departure separation increase can have on capacity. Departure sequencing and outbound traffic distribution on diverging SID s have certainly a major impact on departure capacity. In the assessment of the baseline scenarios, it is assumed that outbound traffic is on same track. However, optimising outbound traffic sequence on diverging tracks can potentially result in another source of capacity gain. This is the subject of Sensitivity Analysis S14. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 6

249 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 3. ANALYSIS ENVIRONMENT This Section reports on the analytical runway system capacity model as well as the inputs to this model. Both were reviewed and accepted by the Technical Team members. 3.1 The Commonly Agreed Methodology for Airside Capacity Assessment (CAMACA) Under Article 3 of the EEC Regulation 95/93 on Airport Slot Co-ordination, one of the conditions for an airport to be considered as fully co-ordinated is that : The Member State shall ensure that a thorough capacity analysis is carried out, having regard to commonly recognized methods The analysis shall be updated periodically. Both the analysis and the method underlying it shall be made available to interested parties. In order to meet this EC requirement, and so that airport-related objectives of the EUROCONTROL ATM Strategy could be fulfilled, EUROCONTROL was requested to undertake the development of a Commonly Agreed Methodology for Airside Capacity Assessment (CAMACA). The major objective of CAMACA is to provide a transparent, neutral and nondiscriminative airside capacity assessment model that is commonly agreed and recognised by stakeholders. CAMACA is composed of three modules, each of them addressing an airside component : the Runway System Capacity assessment model (RunSysCap), the Apron System Capacity assessment model (ApronCap) and the Taxiway System Capacity assessment model (TaxiCap). While RunSysCap has already demonstrated to be a valuable decision-making assistance tool, ApronCap and TaxiCap are still under development. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 7

250 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport RunSysCap has been recognised by the EUROCONTROL Airport Operations Team 1 as a valid tool to support EC Regulation 95/93 on Slot Co-ordination and to assist decision-makers in strategic airport planning. RunSysCap has also been demonstrated as especially beneficial in the analysis of a wide range of possible scenarios and planning options, whilst optimising cost and effort. A very limited number of promising scenarios can then be identified at lower cost, and can be analysed into further details with fast-time simulation, if required. Strategic Tactical Pre-Operational Operational Analytical Modeling Fast-Time Simulation Real-time Simulation Figure 3-1 Airport Capacity Study Fine Tuning Process In the scope of this study, and in order to identify and analyse the potential benefit and location of new rapid exit taxiways, the Runway Exit Design Interactive Model (REDIM) has been used in interaction with RunSysCap. 1 The Airport Operations Team (AOT) is a European panel of experts including airport managers, ATS providers, airlines, and international organisations (EC, IATA, IACA, ). Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 8

251 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 3.2 Data Collection & Inputs Aircraft Classification Table 3-1 shows the aircraft classification used for runway capacity assessment purposes. This classification is based on the maximum take-off weight as well as the wake turbulence classification recommended in PANS- RAC 4444, Paragraph As medium class represents in average more than 80% of demand at Faro Airport during peaks, this class has been split in order to better reflect aircraft performance and improve accuracy of the analysis results. Because of their special aerodynamic performance, B757 s are usually considered as heavy when leading and medium when trailing; they therefore constitute a special aircraft class. Aircraft Wake MTOW (T) Engine Example Mix Turbulence L Light 7 Piston- D228, C500, H25B TurboProp MT Medium 7 <... < 136 TurboProp C91 MJ Medium 7 <... < 136 Jet A319/320/321, B737, F100, MD80 B757 MH when Trailing Jet B757 H when Leading H Heavy 136 Jet A310/330/340, MD11, B747/767 Table 3-1 Aircraft Classification for Runway System Capacity Assessment For the purpose of apron capacity assessment, the classification in use is based on wing span as well as outer main gear wheel span (Annex 14, Sections , ). Aircraf t Mix Wing Span (m) Outer Main Gear Wheel Span (m) Clearance Minima with Buildings (m) A < 15 < Example B < < 6 3 C < < A319/320/321, B737, MD80 D < < A300/310, B757/767, AB6 E < < A330/340, B747/777, MD11 Table 3-2 Aircraft Classification for Apron Capacity Assessment Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 9

252 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Traffic Sample & Operational Window Fleet Mix The choice of a representative traffic sample is sensitive in any airport study and is specific to the airport under investigation. Because of the forecast significant change in traffic mix, the Technical Team agreed to use two different sources of information for traffic demand. The first source is traffic accommodated on 23 rd July 2000, while the second source are based on yearly statistics and forecasts. As shown in Annex 1, 72 movements were accommodated on 23 rd July 2000, including 31 arrivals and 41 departures. This traffic distribution includes several peak hours. The busiest peak during that day was between 17:00 and 19:00 local time. During that period, 20 movements were accommodated, including 6 arrivals and 14 departures. The busiest arrival peak occurred between 16:00 and 18:00, during which 10 arrivals were accommodated at the airport. This arrival peak is characterised by a percentage of arrivals of 83% between 16:00 and 17:00 that becomes more balanced (50%) between 17:00 and 18:00. This distribution also shows two departure peaks : between 09:00 and 10:00, and between 18:00 and 19:00, characterised by an arrival percentage of 14% and 10% respectively. The wide operational window of this traffic sample reflected by a high arrival percent fluctuation (from 10% to 83%) is characteristic of charter traffic demand. Although non-scheduled traffic demand is strongly dependent of factors beyond the control airport authorities (for instance, tourism attractiveness, tourists profile, and tour operators strategies), a major change is forecasted in fleet mix. The yearly average fleet mix experienced in 1999 was 2% turboprops (MT), 84% medium jets (MJ), 5% B757 s and 10% heavies (H). This fleet mix is used in the baseline scenario in the scope of this study. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 10

253 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport As reported in Table 3-3, heavies are expected to significantly increase in the coming years up to 21% by Aircraft Classes Traffic Mix (%) L MT MJ B757 H Table 3-3 Forecast Traffic Mix Runway Occupancy Time Data Collection and Reduction In order to be as close as possible to reality, data were collected for each RWY orientation, on 10 th and 11 th April Although RWY 28 is usually the most used runway throughout the year, RWY 10 was more used during that period, because of wind conditions. 53 AROTs and 51 DROTs were measured on RWY, whilst 21 AROTs and 23 DROTs were collected on RWY 28. Approach and touch-down speeds were also collected during that period. Only data in strictly delimited arrival and departure peak periods were reduced and ROT values outside of a +/-5% confidence interval were excluded from analyses. For departures, both the line-up times and take-off times were measured. In the sample collected, 2% of the aircraft performed a back-track on RWY10 in order to vacate the runway at the exit C. That increased AROT up to 125 seconds. In order to avoid that back-tracking biases the results, these measures have also been rejected. Table 3-4 shows the averaged values that have been subjected to expert judgement and approved by the Technical Team members. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 11

254 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Although light and turbo-props aircraft are not representative in the traffic accommodated at Faro Airport (measures have not been collected for these categories), averaged values have been calculated based on aircraft performance and REDIM. These values are shown in italic in Table 3-4. RWY 10 RWY 28 Aircraft L MT MJ B757 H L MT MJ B757 H Classes Approach Speed (Kts) Touch-down Speed (Kts) AROT (sec) Line-up Time (sec) Take-off Time (sec) DROT (sec) ATC Separations Table 3-4 Runway Occupancy Time Values The inter-arrival separation is based on wake vortices limitations, as recommended in PANS-RAC 4444, and the minimum radar separation. Because FAO Airport currently uses an en-route mono-pulse secondary radar, this latter separation is 10 NM in the baseline scenarios. However, these separation minima may be reduced to 5 NM in the vicinity of the airport. As shown in Annex 3, the separation used between successive departures on the same track is 2 minutes by default. However, this separation is increased up to 3 minutes when a medium or heavy aircraft is following a light aircraft for first climb performance reasons. When departures are following diverging tracks, the separation between departures can be reduced to 1 minute, except when wake vortex protection applies. In this latter case, 2 minutes must be used, as shown in Annex 3 Table A-3. The minimum departure-arrival separation applied to release departures between consecutive approaches is 4 NM if the next take-off is rolling, or 7 NM otherwise. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 12

255 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Stands and Critical Aircraft The prime parking position at Faro Airport includes 22 nose-in stands. The stand allocation strategy includes the following preferential levels : 1. The stand are first allocated based on the critical aircraft, as reported in AIP AGA 2-1-5A. Table 3-5 reports of the number of stands available as well as the critical aircraft for each of these stands. Critical Aircraft Number of Stands A300 1 A320 2 B733 4 B735 1 B747 6 B757 6 MD11 2 Total 22 Table 3-5 Critical Aircraft per Stand on the FAO prime parking area 2. The proximity to the Terminal for commercial flights including 3 different levels : 1 st level : stands A14 to A24 2 nd level : stands A26 to A30 3 rd level : other stands (old apron area) 3. The flight nature, with priority to regular flights, then to charters, and finally to technical/positioning flights 4. Cargo flights are preferably allocation on Stands A2, A4 and A6. 5. Night stops are preferably allocated on Stands A14 to A Specific stand allocation can be made by handler request (e.g. to avoid unnecessary handling equipment movement from one stand to another). All the stands are nose-in and hydrant fuel equipped. Stands A14 to A24 are being equipped with visual docking guidance systems and with air-bridges. As far as gates are concerned, gates 7 to 20 are Schengen while gates 1 to 6 are mixed. Gates 1 to 20 can also be used for both international and domestic traffic. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 13

256 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Turnaround and Stand Occupancy Times In order to be as close as possible to reality in the scope of apron capacity assessment as well, ground operations data were collected at Faro Airport on 16 th and 17 th June On 16 th June, 114 movements 2 were accommodated at the airport and 44 turnaround times 3 were collected. On 17 th June, 29 turnarounds were measured over a total of 90 movements. Amongst the data collected, 74% were related to class C aircraft while 26% were class D aircraft. As shown on the turnaround time histogram on Figure A3, Annex 4, the average turnaround time is about 60 minutes. The average turnaround times measured during these two days are reported per aircraft type in Table 3-6. Aircraft Type Average Measured Turnaround times (min) Aircraft Type Average Measured Turnaround times (min) Aircraft Type Average Measured Turnaround times (min) AB6 116 Table 3-6 Turnaround time measured per aircraft type 2 It is to be noted that a movement is either an arrival or a departure. 3 Turnaround is defined from the Hold doors open event up to the time when the aircraft is fully ready to leave the stand. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 14

257 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Stand occupancy times 4 were also measured. An analysis per stand shows that stands A13, A18, and A24 are the ones with highest occupancy times while stands A03 and A05 can enable relatively high turnover. 160 STANDS OCCUPANCY FARO AIRPORT 16th and 17th June AVERAGE MAXIMUM TIME (min) A01 A02 A03 A04 A05 A06 A07 A08 A09 A10 A11 A12 A13 A14 A16 A18 A20 A22 A24 A26 A28 STANDS Figure 3-1 Measured stand occupancy times per stand The turnaround processes of the observed flights have been desegregated. The results of the analyses are reported in Annex 5. 4 Stand occupancy time is the time between on-block and end of push-back. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 15

258 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 4. RUNWAY SYSTEM CAPACITY ASSESSMENT The following results and recommendations have been based on the input values provided by, reviewed with and agreed with the technical team including ANA and NAV. 4.1 Baseline Scenarios Table 4-1 shows the runway capacity values for the two baseline scenarios defined in Section 2.1, based on the inputs defined in Section 3.2. The figures in these tables have been rounded to the nearest integers. As shown on Figure A5, Annex 6, the capacity envelope might vary between 13 arrivals and 30 departures per hour. As mentioned in Section 3.2, the operational window is relatively wide at FAO Airport, which is characteristic of a non-scheduled traffic airport. The capacity figures are reported in Table 4-1 for an average arrival percentage of 25% and 75% for departure and arrival peaks respectively. In these conditions, the capacity is expected to range from 27 aircraft operations per hour during a departure peak to 19 aircraft per hour during inbound traffic peak. It is to be noted that departure capacity is much higher than arrival capacity, making the system relatively unbalanced and unstable. Relatively high capacity deviation can indeed be observed depending on possible fluctuation of the percentage of inbound traffic demand with regards to total demand in the system. Arrival capacity should therefore be prioritised if any investment is performed in the scope of runway capacity increase. Table 4-1 Capacity Assessment Results for FAO2001 baseline scenario Because the departure-arrival separation minima (i.e. 7 NM) is less than the minimum inter-arrival separation (10 NM), the capacity envelope does include a major inflexion point close to 52% arrival percent. This phenomenon enable to release departures without decreasing inbound traffic demand. In these conditions, the likelihood to release a departure between successive arrivals is 90%. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 16

259 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport The major difference between the operations on RWY 28 and RWY 10 is the locations and types of rapid exit taxiways, and therefore arrival runway occupancy time. However, this AROT variation does not significantly affect capacity because airborne separation is much higher than runway occupancy times. 4.2 Sensitivity Analyses S1 S2- S8 S2- S8 A1 Sensitivity analyses was performed with each sensitive factor identified by the Technical Team and reported in Section 2.2. The results of these sensitivity analyses are summarised in Table 4-2, in which capacity benefits are represented in green and capacity losses in red. All the relative figures must be considered with regard to a reference basis with which comparison is made. This reference basis is referred to in column 4 of Table 4-2, and is usually the baseline scenario FAO2001. Each of the results are detailed in Annex 7, in which the absolute capacity figures are reported in the top table while the capacity gain/loss relative to the reference scenario are shown in the bottom table. Denomination Gain/Loss Reference Reducing Inter-arr. separation Max 41% capacity gain in Baseline to 5 NM arrival peak Change in traffic mix No gain, no loss Baseline Change in traffic mix Insignificant loss (-0.2% in arrival peak) S1 Reducing Inter-arr. separation Max 94% capacity gain in to 3 NM arrival peak A2 Change in traffic mix for % capacity loss in arrival peak A1 A3 Change in traffic mix for % capacity loss in arrival peak A1 A4 Change in traffic mix for % capacity loss in arrival peak A1 A5 Change in traffic mix for % capacity loss in arrival peak A1 S9 Increase AROT by 10% 1% capacity loss in balanced period S10 Decrease AROT by 10% Max 4% capacity gain in balanced period S11 Decrease AROT by 20% Max 4% capacity gain in balanced period S12 Rolling take-off s Max 5% capacity gain in balanced period S13 Increase of inter-departure 12% capacity loss in departure separations to 150 peak S14 Optimum departure Max 16% capacity gain in sequencing departure peak Table 4-2 Sensitivity Analyses - Results Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 17

260 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Impact of radar separation FAO Airport currently uses an en-route mono-pulse secondary radar. The current inter-arrival separation is therefore 10 NM (baseline scenario). The use of a primary radar installed on the airport field would enable to use 5 NM inter-arrival separation (except when wake vortex require higher separation). Reducing this separation in such a way results in a 6% and 41% capacity gain during departure and arrival peaks respectively. This reduction increases capacity from 19 to 27 movements per hour in inbound traffic peak. Although less significant in departure peak, hourly capacity is also increased from 27 to 29 movements. As shown by the capacity envelope resulting from the sensitivity analysis S1, reducing radar separation considerably improves capacity balance and stability at Faro Airport Impact of change in fleet mix As shown in Table 3-2 and Figure 4-1, traffic mix is expected to dramatically change by 2020 : medium aircraft traffic is forecasted to drop from 85,5% to 69% in favour of B757 s (increasing from 5% to 11%) and heavies (from 10% to 21%). The second sensitivity area (Sensitivity Analysis S2 to S8) aims at quantifying the impact of changes in traffic mix, based on statistics for 2002 (Sensitivity Analysis S2), 2003 (S3), 2004 (S4), 2005 (S5), 2010 (S6), 2015 (S7) and 2020 (S8). Preliminary runs demonstrated that change in traffic mix does not affect capacity if 10 NM is used as inter-arrival separation minima. Therefore, the analysis was based on the usage of 5 NM between arrivals. Two conclusions can be drawn from this analysis : As shown in Annex 3, the separation minima used between successive departures on same track is independent of traffic mix 5. In-trail separation is the maximum between radar separation (5 NM) and wake vortex. Because the likelihood that heavies lead light aircraft on approach is insignificant with respect to the current and forecast fleet mix, 5 NM is used independently of traffic mix. Therefore, the impact on capacity itself is insignificant. 5 Leading light aircraft require 3 minutes separation when followed by faster aircraft. However, the proportion of light aircraft (0.1%) is insignificant. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 18

261 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport In order to better understand this phenomenon, the same analysis was performed while assuming a reduction of the radar separation to 3 NM (Auxiliary analysis A1) 6. Figure 4-1 shows the direct impact of the current and forecast fleet mix on in-trail separation in 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015 and Should 3 NM be used as radar separation, the increased proportion of heavy aircraft forecasted for the coming year 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020 will lead to a capacity reduction by 4%, 5%, 6% and 8% respectively during arrival peaks. Aeroporto de Faro Runway Capacity Assessment Study Sensitivity Analysis on Forcasted Traffic Mix In-trail separation Distribution RunSysCap Airport Operations Unit EUROCONTROL 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 86% 1% 13% 76% 4% 20% 72% 5% 23% 70% 6% 24% 67% 6% 26% 3NM 4NM 5NM 6NM 0% Forecast Fleet Mix Figure 4-1 In-trail separation distribution versus fleet mix change Unless radar separation is less than 5 NM, any change in traffic mix induces insignificant arrival capacity loss. With the current inter-departure separations in use, departure capacity is not affected either as long as outbound traffic is on same track. 6 While comparing with the baseline scenario S1 in which 10 NM is considered, it is to be noted that reducing the radar separation to 3 NM results in a 18% and 94% capacity gain during departure and arrival peaks respectively. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 19

262 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Impact of Arrival Runway Occupancy Time The third sensitivity area, including analyses S9 to S11, aims at analysing the impact of arrival runway occupancy and quantifying the benefit of reducing AROT on capacity. As in-trail separation exceeds runway occupancy time, this factor affects capacity in pure mixed mode operations only, i.e. when departure are released between successive arrivals. The collected values for AROT are reported in Table 3-4. Runway occupancy may vary depending on various factors including human factor, individual aircraft performance and airline policy. Should the measures collected be too optimistic, Sensitivity Analyses S9 shows that an increase of AROT by 10% has a relatively insignificant impact on capacity. Indeed, increasing AROT by 10% results in decreasing total capacity by half a movement only in balanced period, when as many arrivals are accommodated as departures. The likelihood to release a departure between successive arrivals decreases from 91% to 86%. When AROT is decreased by 10% (Sensitivity Analyses S10), one departure can be released between successive arrivals at any time. Therefore, capacity in balanced period increases by 1 movement per hour. Decreasing AROT further (Sensitivity Analyses S11) does not result in additional gain in capacity. Although AROT drops from 61 (in S10) to 56 seconds (in S11), the likelihood to release departures between successive approaches remains unchanged, and so does capacity Runway Exit Location and Type Based on the data collected, 53% of the arrivals vacated RWY 10 at exit C and 47% went to stop end. In terms of aircraft type, 50% of the medium jets used C while the other 50% vacated at runway end 7. When landing on RWY 28, 57% of arrivals vacated the runway at exit D while the remaining 43% left at stop end. The same proportion was observed per aircraft type, except for heavies which used the runway end. As there is an opportunity to increase capacity by decreasing AROT, auxiliary analysis was performed in order to identify the optimum location of RETs 8. As shown on Figure 4-2, the optimum location for potential new RETs is relatively similar to the current C and D exits, but with a 30 angle. 7 It is to be noted that, in some conditions, pilots may not be under pressure to exit the runway as soon as possible. 8 Because of its higher exit speed, a rapid exit can logically be located slightly upstream with regards to a perpendicular exit in order to catch the same proportion of vacating traffic. However, locating a rapid exit downstream increases the proportion of flights that use it. The aim of this exercise is therefore to find the optimum balance between location and traffic capture. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 20

263 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Figure 4-2 Optimum RET Locations Based on the REDIM built-in aircraft performance data, the AROT should decrease by 2 seconds (3%) for medium jets and heavies, and by 4 seconds (6%) for turbo-props and B757 s in dry conditions, because of higher exit speed. In addition, the traffic captured by these new exists increases, what therefore decreases the number of aircraft vacating the runway by its extreme. It is to be noted that capacity gain is not the only benefit from building new RETs at Faro Airport : Exit D requires low exit speed because of its 135 angle. Building a new 30 -angle exit at that location will obviously increase safety and avoid aircraft overruns. To some extent, similar conclusion can be drawn for exit C. Taxi time can be reduced with a new C exit if additional stands are planned next to stand A30. These two latter recommendations are subject to further investigation Impact of Departure-Arrival Capture Separation Minima 7 NM is the separation minima currently required at Faro Airport in order to release a departure between successive approaches. However, this separation can be reduced to 4 NM when the departure operates a rolling take-off. Sensitivity Analysis S12 shows that 5% capacity can be gained during balanced periods, representing 1.5 movement per hour. By doing so, the average number of departure released between arrivals increases from 0.9 to more than 1. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 21

264 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Impact of Inter-departure Separation Minima The inter-departure separation minima used by default in the baseline scenario FAO2001 is 2 minutes. However, this separation minimum may be increased to two and half minutes in certain local conditions. As shown in Sensitivity Analysis S13, this increase results in a loss of the theoretical departure capacity by 6 movements per hour, i.e. 20%. During departure peak, this represents an hourly capacity loss of 5 departures or 12% Optimisation of Departure Sequencing on Diverging Tracks. Optimum departure sequencing on diverging tracks depends upon many factors, including ATC practices as well as slot co-ordination and the commercial strategy of the major airline. Sensitivity Analysis S13 demonstrates a potential of 16% capacity gain during departure peak, i.e. 5 additional departures per hour, due to a general decrease of inter-departure separation minima (as reported in Annex 3). Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 22

265 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 5. PRELIMINARY APRON CAPACITY ANALYSIS This section reports the results of the apron capacity assessment as well as some recommendations for apron operation enhancements based on a 2-days observation at Faro Airport. 5.1 Apron Capacity Assessment Many components make up turnaround times including airline/airport procedures, servicing requirements, home base versus away base airlines, fuel prices and weather. Stand occupancy times and turnaround times were measured for all the stands except A01, A20 and A22. In default of real collected data, it has been assumed that these three latter stands have similar stand occupancy time when compared with other stands with a similar critical aircraft type. This means that the average stand occupancy times for stands A01, A20 and A22 are 61, 74 and 74 minutes respectively. Based on this assumption and the measures reported on Figure 3-1, sustainable stand capacity can be calculated for each stand, as shown on Figure 5-1. The total sustainable capacity for the prime apron area is therefore 20 aircraft per hour, that is slightly less than the total number of stands available. Aeroporto de Faro Apron Capacity Assessment 1,3 1,2 1,1 Stand Capacity (Aircraft/hour) 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0,0 A01 A02 A03 A04 A05 A06 A07 A08 A09 A10 A11 A12 A13 A14 A16 A18 A20 A22 A24 A26 A28 A30 Sustained Stand Capacity Critical Stand Capacity Figure 5-1 Apron Capacity Assessment Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 23

266 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Turnaround times were measured for each critical aircraft type characterising the stands, except for B747 and MD11 (Table 3-6). In default of local data collected for these two latter aircraft types, ground operations expertise at several other European airports was used. 85 and 100 minutes are recognised as realistic turnaround times for MD11 and B747 respectively. Based on these turnaround times and the critical aircraft types for each stand (Table 3-5), the critical stand capacity can also be calculated, as shown on Figure 5-1. The total critical apron capacity for apron A is 18 aircraft per hour. 5.2 Recommendations for Turnaround Optimisation Based on a relatively short period of observation (2 days), this Section reports some complementary information related to apron capacity, through recommendations to minimize turnaround times. These recommendations may be subject to further investigation. Turnaround and stand occupancy times may be reduced with the following issues addressed: Delaying various steps of turnaround operations when flights are delayed (for instance, by ATC restrictions) may be ineffective. Aircraft need to be fully serviced and prepared for departure, regardless of the CTOT slot. To action Ready status applications by the flight crew, aircraft need to be fully closed up and available for immediate pushback clearance if instructed. Late ground handling personnel and equipment to meet arriving aircraft have knock-on effect on ground operations (for instance, passenger deplaning is frequently delayed waiting for aircraft steps or coaches). Therefore, passing aircraft finals (updated landing time: touchdown 10 minutes) to ground handling co-ordinators enables them to optimise ground handling resource and equipment allocation. Appropriate ground services training and supervision, coupled with ramp discipline enhancement programmes, will enhance co-ordination management of all ground service personnel and equipment. For instance, improved supervision and internal target settings will speed up baggage handling delivery and onload practices. Significant time can be wasted when gate staff are awaiting dispatchers instruction for the commencement of aircraft passenger acceptance. 10 to 15 minutes can have passed before the passengers physically start boarding the aircraft. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 24

267 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Automatic execution of gate boarding procedures at pre-set times subject to aircraft type mitigates that risk, and has demonstrated to be beneficial at several airports. It ensures that passenger coaches are at the aircraft side in sufficient time to allow immediate boarding at the crews request. The requirement for delayed boarding should be advised by the dispatcher prior to these pre-set agreed times. With the gate areas being common areas, with no secure areas of segregation, gate reconciliation is not possible until passenger boarding commences. Automatic execution of gate boarding procedures at pre-set times will give early indication of any passenger discrepancies and additional time for gate staff to react, investigate and resolve the situation. Additional time will be available for cabin baggage checks and collection by gate staff, in turn reducing valuable time lost onboard the aircraft whilst cabin crew try to find additional storage for excessive cabin baggage. Setting-up a computerised or manual back-up procedure for gate reconciliation mitigates the risk of computer boarding system failure. Upon passenger acceptance, the sequence number from boarding cards can be annotated onto a numbered check sheet. Any missing numbers can then be matched against the manifest compiled at check-in to establish name, seat number and baggage details. Ensuring appropriate co-ordination between gate staff and coach drivers will avoid passengers boarding and freely roaming apron areas unsupervised. A staff member can be specially dedicated to co-ordinate boarding and coach dispatching. Ensuring consistency with cabin baggage collection both at check-in and at the gate enables to mitigate cabin delays due to excessive amounts of hand baggage. The introduction of cabin baggage tags at check-in can contribute to this mitigation. Additional information related to these recommendations can be found in Annexes 7 and 8. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 25

268 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport 5.3 Potential Apron Layout Improvements This Section reports some complementary information related to apron capacity, through potential improvements of apron layout. The following recommendations are subject to further investigation Multi-functional Drive-Through Stands As shown on Figure 5-1, six additional stands opposite to current stands A20 up to A30 are planned by Figure 5-1 Multi-functional Drive-Through Stands In addition to increasing flexibility and stand availability, operating these new stands in various operational modes offers the following benefits for the various stakeholders : For Airport Operators and ATS Provider : Aircraft can self manoeuvre, ingress and egress from either direction. Aircraft with delayed CTOT s can vacate prime stands and move to drive through stands. Doing so, they are well situated to expeditiously respond to CTOT s improvements with no push back restrictions, while leaving prime stands for other aircraft to occupy. Arriving aircraft can occupy these areas awaiting stands to become available and reduce taxiway congestion and controllers workload. Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 26

269 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport Extension of taxiway systems if needed (work in progress and emergency and weather disruptions). Utilised for aircraft overnight parking, aircraft transit stops (fuel uplift only) and long layover flights. Used for emergency situations and security threats. For Handling Agents No additional staffing and equipment resources required as aircraft selfmanoeuvre. Prime stand availability preserved. Emphasis is placed on Airline Operator to comply with airport schedules and be fully ready for CTOT improvements and not to delay turnaround activities due delayed CTOT s Splittable Stands (MARS) As shown on Figure 5-2, stands A14, A26, A28 and A30 can be spit and be utilised for various traffic mixes and seasonal variations. Figure 5-2 MARS Splittable Stands Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 27

270 EUROCONTROL Assistance to ANA Airports Airside Capacity Assessment of Faro Airport The benefits for the various stakeholders are the following : For Airport Operators and ATS Provider : Increasing capacity flexibility by increasing stand allocation dynamics. Accommodating aircraft with long layovers. For Handling Agents : Enhancements to staffing and equipment resource management by closer proximity and adjacent stand use. Resources and equipment can easily be moved between aircraft by enhanced situational awareness. Facilitating Airline Operators requested down route aircraft change which require crew and catering changes. Valuable ground time not lost with close aircraft parking locations Enhanced Baggage and Cargo Container Storage Areas Storing containers at single level on different locations throughout the movement area may decrease apron capacity by occupying valuable areas of pavements, which can be used in a more effective way for aircraft parking and turnarounds. With the limited apron space available, two potential areas could be planned for some multi-level storage system, as shown on Figure 5-3 (in blue). Figure 5-3 Container Storage Areas and Service Road Extension Edition : 1.0 Released Issue Page 28

1.2 Some of the figures included in this publication may be provisional only and may be revised in later issues.

1.2 Some of the figures included in this publication may be provisional only and may be revised in later issues. FOREWORD 1 CONTENT 1.1 UK Airports (Including Channel Islands and Isle of Man) - Monthly Statements of Movements, Passengers and Cargo is prepared by the Civil Aviation Authority with the co-operation

More information

The business of Gatwick Airport Limited

The business of Gatwick Airport Limited APPENDIX C The business of Gatwick Airport Limited C1 This appendix provides an overview of the current ownership and history of Gatwick and the business of Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL). In particular,

More information

Sixteenth Meeting of the Cross Polar Trans East Air Traffic Management Providers Work Group (CPWG/16) (Ottawa, Canada 3-6 December 2013)

Sixteenth Meeting of the Cross Polar Trans East Air Traffic Management Providers Work Group (CPWG/16) (Ottawa, Canada 3-6 December 2013) CPWG/16 IP/19 03/12/13 Sixteenth Meeting of the Cross Polar Trans East Air Traffic Management Providers Work Group (CPWG/16) Agenda Item 5: Status on CPWG/15 Actions (Ottawa, Canada 3-6 December 2013)

More information

WHAT ARE YOUR EU RIGHTS WHEN TRAVELLING ACROSS THE EU?

WHAT ARE YOUR EU RIGHTS WHEN TRAVELLING ACROSS THE EU? WHAT ARE YOUR EU RIGHTS WHEN TRAVELLING ACROSS THE EU? Europeans make about 1.5 billion trips a year, with 90% of those trips taking within the EU. A large part of those trips are for holiday and as many

More information

2. Is registration with PARAFES free? Yes.

2. Is registration with PARAFES free? Yes. Automated Border Control 1. What does PARAFES stand for? PARAFES (translated from French) means Automated Fast Track Crossing at External Schengen Borders. 2. Is registration with PARAFES free? Yes. 3.

More information

DEBRECEN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. Prepared by Tamás Sápi Technical Director

DEBRECEN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. Prepared by Tamás Sápi Technical Director DEBRECEN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Prepared by Tamás Sápi Technical Director Location of the Debrecen Airport Debrecen International Airport Abandoned Russian military airport The Municipality took over the

More information

Energy Efficiency Directive Article 8

Energy Efficiency Directive Article 8 Fourth Project Workshop Monitoring of energy efficiency in the EU ODYSSEE-MURE 21-22 May 2015, Den Haag, The Netherlands Energy Efficiency Directive Article 8 Energy audits and energy management systems

More information

Airport Charges and Handling Fees. AIRPORT DEBRECEN Kft.

Airport Charges and Handling Fees. AIRPORT DEBRECEN Kft. Airport Charges and Handling Fees AIRPORT DEBRECEN Kft. Valid between 01 MAY, 2014 and 30 SEPTEMBER, 2014 Approved by Mr Tamás Sápi, Managing Director OLDAL: 1 / 22 LIST OF MODIFICATIONS Line number of

More information

The Mayor of London s Submission:

The Mayor of London s Submission: Inner Thames Estuary Feasibility Study Response to Airports Commission Call for Evidence The Mayor of London s Submission: Supporting technical documents 23 May 2014 Title: Runway utilisation Author: Atkins

More information

New Level of Service Concept. IATA & ACI 2014 NEW Airport Level of Service Concept 1

New Level of Service Concept. IATA & ACI 2014 NEW Airport Level of Service Concept 1 New Level of Service Concept IATA & ACI 2014 NEW Airport Level of Service Concept 1 New Airport Development Reference Manual In March 2014, IATA in collaboration with ACI and other key aviation industry

More information

> Current Operations & Business Context. Bankstown Airport Master Plan 2004/05. Bankstown Airport / Master Plan > 29

> Current Operations & Business Context. Bankstown Airport Master Plan 2004/05. Bankstown Airport / Master Plan > 29 Bankstown Airport Master Plan 2004/05 Bankstown Airport / Master Plan > 29 8.1 Bankstown Airport s Role in the Sydney Basin Bankstown Airport is the premier GA airport in NSW. In addition to servicing

More information

Applying for a Schengen visa

Applying for a Schengen visa Applying for a Schengen visa If you have any questions about this information booklet, please contact the International Student Advisers on internationalstudentsupport@glasgow.ac.uk or (0141) 330 2912.

More information

Airport Master Plan Demand/Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements Summary

Airport Master Plan Demand/Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements Summary Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport Airport Demand/Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements Summary PREPARED FOR: City of Atlanta, Department of Aviation PREPARED BY: RICONDO & ASSOCIATES,

More information

ENTERING THE EU BORDERS & VISAS THE SCHENGEN AREA OF FREE MOVEMENT. EU Schengen States. Non-Schengen EU States. Non-EU Schengen States.

ENTERING THE EU BORDERS & VISAS THE SCHENGEN AREA OF FREE MOVEMENT. EU Schengen States. Non-Schengen EU States. Non-EU Schengen States. ENTERING THE EU BORDERS & VISAS THE SCHENGEN AREA OF FREE MOVEMENT An area without internal borders where EU citizens and non-eu nationals may move freely EU Schengen States Non-Schengen EU States IS Azores

More information

Description of Airport Charges. Swedavia AB 2015. Appendix 3 to Conditions of Services, Swedavia AB

Description of Airport Charges. Swedavia AB 2015. Appendix 3 to Conditions of Services, Swedavia AB Description of Airport Charges Swedavia AB 2015 Appendix 3 to Conditions of Services, Swedavia AB Contents 1 Swedavias Charges... 3 2 Aircraft Related Charges... 4 2.1 Take-Off Charge... 4 2.2 Emission

More information

NOTAM. Pilots from Aboard. Flight Information Service

NOTAM. Pilots from Aboard. Flight Information Service Pilots from Aboard - You must file a flightplan, check if your flightplan is closed in at operations corner in the big white tent. - Customs is available during operations hours - Pilots coming from NON-Schengen

More information

VAT Refunds Irrecoverable Tax A Country by Country Detailed Guide

VAT Refunds Irrecoverable Tax A Country by Country Detailed Guide VAT Refunds Irrecoverable Tax A Country by Country Detailed Guide EC VAT refunds Irrecoverable Tax VAT incurred in other EC Member States may be recovered in certain circumstances. However, some claims

More information

RULES FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES FOR EXCHANGE OF OFFICIALS

RULES FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES FOR EXCHANGE OF OFFICIALS EUROPEAN COMMISSION CONSUMERS, HEALTH AND FOOD EXECUTIVE AGENCY Consumers and Food Safety Unit RULES FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES FOR EXCHANGE OF OFFICIALS CONSUMER PROGRAMME

More information

Dublin Airport Terminal 2. Ian Taylor 20 November 2007

Dublin Airport Terminal 2. Ian Taylor 20 November 2007 Dublin Airport Terminal 2 Ian Taylor 20 November 2007 Ian Taylor Director, Arup (Ove Arup and Partners Ltd) Fellow of the ICE Civil Engineer 25+ years experience of large multi-disciplinary projects Hong

More information

Aerodrome Advisory Circular

Aerodrome Advisory Circular Aerodrome Advisory Circular AC(AD) NO-13 Integration of International Aviation Security (AVSEC) Measures into Designs and Constructions of New Facilities and alterations to Existing Facilities. CIVIL AVIATION

More information

First estimate for 2014 Euro area international trade in goods surplus 194.8 bn 24.2 bn surplus for EU28

First estimate for 2014 Euro area international trade in goods surplus 194.8 bn 24.2 bn surplus for EU28 30/2015-16 February 2015 First estimate for 2014 Euro area international trade in goods surplus 194.8 bn 24.2 bn surplus for EU28 The first estimate for the euro area 1 (EA18) trade in goods balance with

More information

Inbound Tourism: December 2014

Inbound Tourism: December 2014 30 January 2015 1100 hrs 021/2015 Total inbound tourist trips for December 2014 were estimated at 66,619, an increase of 1.4 per cent when compared to the corresponding month of 2013. Excluding the passengers

More information

Key Facts. Passenger growth at the airport is projected to grow to approximately 3 million passengers per annum by 2030.

Key Facts. Passenger growth at the airport is projected to grow to approximately 3 million passengers per annum by 2030. Bournemouth Airport & Business Park 7 7 Bournemouth Airport & Business Park Introduction 7.1 Bournemouth Airport is a key asset for the region, one of the UK s fastest growing regional airports and is

More information

Content correct as of 23 July Incheon Intl - ICN

Content correct as of 23 July Incheon Intl - ICN SEOUL Incheon Intl - ICN Concourse A KAL Airside - after the Customs, Immigration and Quarantine Area, proceed down to the terminal basement and take the 'Starline'. The lounge is located on the 4th Floor

More information

12.0 SAFETY AND SECURITY

12.0 SAFETY AND SECURITY 12.0 SAFETY AND SECURITY 12.0 SAFETY AND SECURITY Key points The development plan within this Master Plan: Will improve airfield safety by reducing the towed aircraft runway crossings and other airfield

More information

168/2014-4 November 2014. At risk of poverty or social exclusion 2 rate in the EU28, 2008-2013 (% of total population)

168/2014-4 November 2014. At risk of poverty or social exclusion 2 rate in the EU28, 2008-2013 (% of total population) 168/2014-4 November 2014 At risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU28 More than 120 million persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2013 Almost 1 out of every 4 persons in the EU in this

More information

PROJECT PROPOSAL FOR THE SUPPLY AND OF A MULTI-PURPOSE AIRCRAFT HANGAR, A PARALLEL TAXI-WAY, NEW TERMINAL BUILDING AND

PROJECT PROPOSAL FOR THE SUPPLY AND OF A MULTI-PURPOSE AIRCRAFT HANGAR, A PARALLEL TAXI-WAY, NEW TERMINAL BUILDING AND PROJECT PROPOSAL FOR THE SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF A RADAR SYSTEM, CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-PURPOSE AIRCRAFT HANGAR, A PARALLEL TAXI-WAY, NEW TERMINAL BUILDING AND PRESIDENTIAL LOUNGE AT BANJUL INTERNATIONAL

More information

EGTR ELSTREE EGTR AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME EGTR AD 2.2 AERODROME GEOGRAPHICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA

EGTR ELSTREE EGTR AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME EGTR AD 2.2 AERODROME GEOGRAPHICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA UNITED KINGDOM AIP AD 2.EGTR-1 8 Jan 2015 EGTR ELSTREE EGTR AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME EGTR ELSTREE EGTR AD 2.2 AERODROME GEOGRAPHICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA 1 ARP coordinates and site

More information

CO2 BASED MOTOR VEHICLE TAXES IN THE EU IN 2015

CO2 BASED MOTOR VEHICLE TAXES IN THE EU IN 2015 CO2 BASED MOTOR VEHICLE TAXES IN THE EU IN 2015 COUNTRY AT (AUSTRIA) BE (BELGIUM) BG (BULGARIA) CO2/FUEL CONSUMPTION TAXES A fuel consumption tax (Normverbrauchsabgabe or NoVA) is levied upon the first

More information

The total estimated PFC revenue for the application is $266,900,000. The estimated charge effective date for this application is December 1, 2016.

The total estimated PFC revenue for the application is $266,900,000. The estimated charge effective date for this application is December 1, 2016. Public Notice of Application for Authority to Impose and Use Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) at EWR, LGA, JFK and SWF and Amendment to Approved PFC Applications at EWR, LGA, and JFK The Port Authority

More information

WHICH AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER TO CONTACT

WHICH AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER TO CONTACT WHICH AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER TO CONTACT 1. Introduction This article is written in order to explain to all beginners in the IVAO network the basics for any pilot to contact the correct air traffic controller.

More information

MASTER PLAN DRAFT RECOMMENDED PLAN

MASTER PLAN DRAFT RECOMMENDED PLAN MASTER PLAN DRAFT RECOMMENDED PLAN City of Atlanta, Department of Aviation September 19, 2014 Draft Recommended Plan This document presents an overview of the findings and recommendations from the Master

More information

LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN April 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 03. INTRODUCTION 04. PURPOSE AND NEED 06. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 10. KEY ELEMENTS

More information

ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS

ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS Ref. Ares(2015)660570-17/02/2015 ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS Erasmus+ Master Loan: opening up access to more affordable lending for cross-border studies The Erasmus+ programme makes it possible for students

More information

TOYOTA I_SITE More than fleet management

TOYOTA I_SITE More than fleet management EMPOWERING YOUR BUSINESS TOYOTA I_SITE More than fleet management www.toyota-forklifts.eu TOYOTA I_SITE More than fleet management Toyota I_Site is a unique combination of technology, information, expertise

More information

Existing Facilities. Current and Forecast Demand

Existing Facilities. Current and Forecast Demand Existing Facilities JIA is served by a number of airside and landside facilities. There are two runways that serve the airport in an open V configuration. The Annual Service Volume (ASV) of the runway

More information

Current and Forecast Demand

Current and Forecast Demand Existing Facilities A new terminal opened in September 2005 at the Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW), replacing the 17-gate original terminal that opened in 1983. The $438 million Midfield

More information

MASTER PLAN PREPARATION

MASTER PLAN PREPARATION Located in the East Valley of the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport is a former military airfield that has successfully made the transition to a full service commercial passenger

More information

Statewatch Briefing ID Cards in the EU: Current state of play

Statewatch Briefing ID Cards in the EU: Current state of play Statewatch Briefing ID Cards in the EU: Current state of play Introduction In March 2010, the Council Presidency sent out a questionnaire to EU Member States and countries that are members of the socalled

More information

COMMITTEE ON AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (CAEP)

COMMITTEE ON AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (CAEP) International Civil Aviation Organization WORKING PAPER 26/1/10 English and Spanish only 1 COMMITTEE ON AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (CAEP) EIGHTH MEETING Montréal, 1 to 12 February 2010 Agenda Item

More information

Ministry of Civil Aviation EHCAAN

Ministry of Civil Aviation EHCAAN Ministry of Civil Aviation Egyptian Holding Company for Airports and Air Navigation EHCAAN Introduction Arab Republic of Egypt is one of the leading countries signed the International Civil Aviation Organization

More information

Driving in Great Britain (GB) as a visitor or a new resident

Driving in Great Britain (GB) as a visitor or a new resident INF38 Driving in Great Britain (GB) as a visitor or a new resident For more information go to www.direct.gov.uk/driving 11/08 Contents 1 European Community/European Economic Area (EC/EEA licences) 3 2

More information

187/2014-5 December 2014. EU28, euro area and United States GDP growth rates % change over the previous quarter

187/2014-5 December 2014. EU28, euro area and United States GDP growth rates % change over the previous quarter 187/2014-5 December 2014 This News Release has been revised following an error in the data for Gross Fixed Capital Formation. This affects both the growth of GFCF and its contribution to GDP growth. All

More information

ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS

ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS ERASMUS+ MASTER LOANS Erasmus+ Master Loan: opening up access to more affordable lending for cross-border studies The Erasmus+ programme makes it possible for students who want to take a full Masters level

More information

The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2015

The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2015 The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2015 James Rogers Cécile Philippe Institut Économique Molinari, Paris Bruxelles TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Background 2 Main Results 3 On average, a respite

More information

LRSM AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME LRSM - SATU MARE / Satu Mare

LRSM AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME LRSM - SATU MARE / Satu Mare AIP AD 2.121 25 JUL 2013 LRSM AD 2.1 AERODROME LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME LRSM SATU MARE / Satu Mare LRSM AD 2.2 AERODROME GEOGRAPHICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA 1 ARP coordinates and site at AD 474212N

More information

99/2015-9 June 2015. EU28, euro area and United States GDP growth rates % change over the previous quarter

99/2015-9 June 2015. EU28, euro area and United States GDP growth rates % change over the previous quarter 2005Q1 2005Q2 2005Q3 2005Q4 2006Q1 2006Q2 2006Q3 2006Q4 2007Q1 2007Q2 2007Q3 2007Q4 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 2009Q1 2009Q2 2009Q3 2009Q4 2010Q1 2010Q2 2010Q3 2010Q4 2011Q1 2011Q2 2011Q3 2011Q4 2012Q1

More information

Definition of Public Interest Entities (PIEs) in Europe

Definition of Public Interest Entities (PIEs) in Europe Definition of Public Interest Entities (PIEs) in Europe FEE Survey October 2014 This document has been prepared by FEE to the best of its knowledge and ability to ensure that it is accurate and complete.

More information

Terminal - Ashgabat. International Airport. Turkmenistan

Terminal - Ashgabat. International Airport. Turkmenistan Terminal - Ashgabat International Airport Turkmenistan Terminal Ashgabat International Airport Location Location A new passenger terminal building (PTB) and related facilities such as aprons, roads and

More information

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 17.9.2014 C(2014) 6767 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Updating of data used to calculate lump sum and penalty payments to be proposed by the Commission to the Court

More information

Eindhoven Airport Catchment MIDT Analysis and business cases

Eindhoven Airport Catchment MIDT Analysis and business cases May 28 Eindhoven Airport Eindhoven Airport Catchment MIDT Analysis and business cases 1 Introduction The following analysis is based upon MIDT data for bookings made within the immediate catchment area

More information

WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CITY OF WATSONVILLE, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 3. AVIATION FORECASTS REVISED APRIL 2010

WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CITY OF WATSONVILLE, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 3. AVIATION FORECASTS REVISED APRIL 2010 WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CITY OF WATSONVILLE, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 3. AVIATION FORECASTS REVISED APRIL 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN

More information

Airport GHG and Other Environmental Management

Airport GHG and Other Environmental Management Airport GHG and Other Environmental Management ICAO International Aviation and Environment Seminar and State Action Plan Workshop 28-29 October 2014 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Ir Khairiah Salleh MAHB 1 1.

More information

MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT MAY 2015. gatwickairport.com/performance

MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT MAY 2015. gatwickairport.com/performance MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT gatwickairport.com/performance At Gatwick we are committed to ensuring all areas of our business live up to the expectations of our passengers, our partners and our regulator.

More information

Size and Development of the Shadow Economy of 31 European and 5 other OECD Countries from 2003 to 2015: Different Developments

Size and Development of the Shadow Economy of 31 European and 5 other OECD Countries from 2003 to 2015: Different Developments January 20, 2015 ShadEcEurope31_January2015.doc Size and Development of the Shadow Economy of 31 European and 5 other OECD Countries from 2003 to 2015: Different Developments by Friedrich Schneider *)

More information

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Customs and Border Protection, Transborder and Facilitation Issues. September 7, 2014

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Customs and Border Protection, Transborder and Facilitation Issues. September 7, 2014 Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Customs and Border Protection, Transborder and Facilitation Issues September 7, 2014 At the end of 2010, 9 Airlines Flew to 40 Different International Destinations

More information

Departures to the south from Runways 16L and 16R.

Departures to the south from Runways 16L and 16R. Mode 5 Method of operation Departures to the south from Runways 16L and 16R. Arrivals from the east on Runway 25. Arrivals from the north for those aircraft requiring to use the long runway. This runway

More information

Energy prices in the EU Household electricity prices in the EU rose by 2.9% in 2014 Gas prices up by 2.0% in the EU

Energy prices in the EU Household electricity prices in the EU rose by 2.9% in 2014 Gas prices up by 2.0% in the EU 92/2015-27 May 2015 Energy prices in the EU Household electricity prices in the EU rose by 2.9% in 2014 Gas prices up by 2.0% in the EU In the European Union (EU), household electricity prices 1 rose by

More information

Quality Standards for the provision of service for Persons with Reduced Mobility

Quality Standards for the provision of service for Persons with Reduced Mobility Quality Standards for the provision of service for Persons with Reduced Mobility (April 2014. V7) Definition of Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM) A PRM is understood to mean any person whose mobility

More information

Labour Force Survey 2014 Almost 10 million part-time workers in the EU would have preferred to work more Two-thirds were women

Labour Force Survey 2014 Almost 10 million part-time workers in the EU would have preferred to work more Two-thirds were women 75/2015-27 April 2015 Labour Force Survey 2014 Almost 10 million part-time workers in the EU would have preferred to work more Two-thirds were women Among the 44.1 million persons in the European Union

More information

The Importance of Accident Statistics

The Importance of Accident Statistics The Importance of Accident Statistics 1 Introduction 2 3 4 Statistics and Gaps Good Reasons for Statistics Conclusions Published Le Figaro Nov 11 th, 2012 Le Parisien Nov 11 th, 2012 TF1 France News Ouest

More information

41 T Korea, Rep. 52.3. 42 T Netherlands 51.4. 43 T Japan 51.1. 44 E Bulgaria 51.1. 45 T Argentina 50.8. 46 T Czech Republic 50.4. 47 T Greece 50.

41 T Korea, Rep. 52.3. 42 T Netherlands 51.4. 43 T Japan 51.1. 44 E Bulgaria 51.1. 45 T Argentina 50.8. 46 T Czech Republic 50.4. 47 T Greece 50. Overall Results Climate Change Performance Index 2012 Table 1 Rank Country Score** Partial Score Tendency Trend Level Policy 1* Rank Country Score** Partial Score Tendency Trend Level Policy 21 - Egypt***

More information

IN AN EMERGENCY / 2016

IN AN EMERGENCY / 2016 PEUGEOT OPEN EUROPE Assistance 24/24 7/7 From France: 01 47 89 24 24 From abroad: +33 1 47 89 24 24 IN AN EMERGENCY / 2016 www.peugeot-openeurope.com CONTENTS / 2016 WHAT TO DO IN CASE OF BREAKDOWN, ACCIDENT,

More information

Título ponencia: RNP APCH Implementation

Título ponencia: RNP APCH Implementation Título ponencia: RNP APCH Implementation Organizado por: Index Introduction RNP APCH implementation process PBN Europe plans Introduction RNP APCH Without vertical guidance With vertical guidance LNAV

More information

SURVEY ON THE TRAINING OF GENERAL CARE NURSES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. The current minimum training requirements for general care nurses

SURVEY ON THE TRAINING OF GENERAL CARE NURSES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. The current minimum training requirements for general care nurses SURVEY ON THE TRAINING OF GENERAL CARE NURSES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION This survey serves as a background document for the discussion of the Commission's legislative proposal to modernize the minimum requirements

More information

EUROPE 2020 TARGETS: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

EUROPE 2020 TARGETS: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EUROPE 2020 TARGETS: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Research, development and innovation are key policy components of the EU strategy for economic growth: Europe 2020. By fostering market take-up of new, innovative

More information

Training program for S2 (TWR) rating

Training program for S2 (TWR) rating Training program for S2 (TWR) rating Introduction This is the official Vatsim Scandinavia training program for students training for the TWR (S2) Rating. Each mentor is expected to take his student through

More information

Family benefits Information about health insurance country. Udbetaling Danmark Kongens Vænge 8 3400 Hillerød. A. Personal data

Family benefits Information about health insurance country. Udbetaling Danmark Kongens Vænge 8 3400 Hillerød. A. Personal data Mail to Udbetaling Danmark Kongens Vænge 8 3400 Hillerød Family benefits Information about health insurance country A. Personal data Name Danish civil registration (CPR) number Address Telephone number

More information

Dnata Airport Operations

Dnata Airport Operations Dnata Airport Operations Dnata Airport Operations, the ground handling agent at the Dubai International Airport and employer of more than 6,500 people, has played a significant and leading role in the

More information

TENTH SESSION OF THE STATISTICS DIVISION

TENTH SESSION OF THE STATISTICS DIVISION International Civil Aviation Organization STA/10-WP/7 16/10/09 WORKING PAPER TENTH SESSION OF THE STATISTICS DIVISION Montréal, 23 to 27 November 2009 Agenda Item 1: Civil aviation statistics ICAO classification

More information

INNOBAROMETER 2015 - THE INNOVATION TRENDS AT EU ENTERPRISES

INNOBAROMETER 2015 - THE INNOVATION TRENDS AT EU ENTERPRISES Eurobarometer INNOBAROMETER 2015 - THE INNOVATION TRENDS AT EU ENTERPRISES REPORT Fieldwork: February 2015 Publication: September 2015 This survey has been requested by the European Commission, Directorate-General

More information

Los Angeles International Airport North Airfield Assessment

Los Angeles International Airport North Airfield Assessment Appendix H-3 LAX SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY REPORT Los Angeles International Airport North Airfield Assessment May 2007 Prepared for: Los Angeles World Airports One World Way Los Angeles, California

More information

New environmental liabilities for EU companies

New environmental liabilities for EU companies New environmental liabilities for EU companies The ELD applies to all businesses that operate within the EU, even if the parent company is located outside of the EU. The ELD applies to all businesses,

More information

OVERVIEW OF PURCHASE AND TAX INCENTIVES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN THE EU

OVERVIEW OF PURCHASE AND TAX INCENTIVES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN THE EU 01.04.2014 OVERVIEW OF PURCHASE AND TAX INCENTIVES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN THE EU This table provides an overview of the incentives that are granted in the Member States of the European Union for the

More information

International Compliance

International Compliance YOUR FREE COPY - NEW - Additional countries outside European Union LEGAL WHITE PAPER International Compliance Legal requirements international einvoicing European Union & Selected Countries Worldwide International

More information

The European Union Savings Tax Directive. An historic guide

The European Union Savings Tax Directive. An historic guide The European Union Savings Tax Directive An historic guide Do you have any questions? This guide will tell you more If you are resident in an EU Member State and earn interest on deposits or investments

More information

COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL AVIATION

COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL AVIATION Existing Facilities Daytona Beach International Airport is served by a number of airside and landside facilities. The airport has three asphalt runways: Runway 7L/25R (10,500 feet long by 150 feet wide),

More information

Premium Data Centre Europe - 2012 Pricing, Business Model & Services

Premium Data Centre Europe - 2012 Pricing, Business Model & Services Premium Data Centre Europe - 2012 Pricing, Business Models & Services Premium Data Centre Europe - 2012 Pricing, Business Model & Services Table of Contents A list of figures used in this report 5 Methodology

More information

IT Service Continuity Management

IT Service Continuity Management Service Continuity Management Service Continuity Components and Approach to the Activities Roberto Giaffreda, Service Continuity Manager CISA, CISM, CISSP, ISO27001LA, BS25999LA, ILv2 Pisa, 22 Maggio 2009

More information

Construction Traffic Management Plan

Construction Traffic Management Plan Introduction This (CTMP) has been prepared in order to discharge Condition 20 of planning permission ref 07/02879/EFUL for the enabling site works associated with the wider Bath Western Riverside development.

More information

TPI: Traffic Psychology International on a common European curriculum for postgraduate education in traffic psychology

TPI: Traffic Psychology International on a common European curriculum for postgraduate education in traffic psychology TPI: Traffic Psychology International on a common European curriculum for postgraduate education in traffic psychology Sucha, M.*, Sramkova, L.** DeVol, D.* * TPI - Traffic Psychology International **

More information

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF EAST TIMOR GOVERNMENT. Decree Law 6/2006 REGIMEN FOR ACCESS TO RESTRICT AND RESERVED AREAS AT AIRPORTS

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF EAST TIMOR GOVERNMENT. Decree Law 6/2006 REGIMEN FOR ACCESS TO RESTRICT AND RESERVED AREAS AT AIRPORTS DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF EAST TIMOR GOVERNMENT Decree Law 6/2006 REGIMEN FOR ACCESS TO RESTRICT AND RESERVED AREAS AT AIRPORTS The need to protect air transportation and aviation in general makes it indispensable

More information

Adobe Public Relations (PR) Guidelines

Adobe Public Relations (PR) Guidelines Adobe Public Relations (PR) Guidelines Adobe Partner Connection Reseller Program and Adobe Partner Connection Distributor Program Thank you for participating in the Adobe Partner Connection Reseller or

More information

COUNCIL OF EUROPE BRIGHTON CONFERENCE 18-20 APRIL 2012

COUNCIL OF EUROPE BRIGHTON CONFERENCE 18-20 APRIL 2012 COUNCIL OF EUROPE BRIGHTON CONFERENCE 18-20 APRIL 2012 Conference Programme Wednesday 18 April 2012 18:30 20:30 Welcoming Reception Brighton Museum and Art Gallery Thursday 19 April 2012 08:00 09:00 Arrival

More information

Electricity, Gas and Water: The European Market Report 2014

Electricity, Gas and Water: The European Market Report 2014 Brochure More information from http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/2876228/ Electricity, Gas and Water: The European Market Report 2014 Description: The combined European annual demand for electricity,

More information

THE EVOLUTION AND THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE BRANCH IN DISTRIBUTION OF THE BANKING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

THE EVOLUTION AND THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE BRANCH IN DISTRIBUTION OF THE BANKING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES Annals of the University of Petroşani, Economics, 11(3), 2011, 15-22 15 THE EVOLUTION AND THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE BRANCH IN DISTRIBUTION OF THE BANKING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES CĂTĂLIN NICOLAE BULGĂREA * ABSTRACT:

More information

The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2014 Edition. James Rogers & Cécile Philippe May 2014. (Cover page) Data provided by

The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2014 Edition. James Rogers & Cécile Philippe May 2014. (Cover page) Data provided by (Cover page) The Tax Burden of Typical Workers in the EU 28 2014 Edition NEW DIRECTION Page 1 of 17 James Rogers & Cécile Philippe May 2014 New Direction aims to help shift the EU onto a different course

More information

NEW PASSENGER CAR REGISTRATIONS BY ALTERNATIVE FUEL TYPE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 1 Quarter 4 2015

NEW PASSENGER CAR REGISTRATIONS BY ALTERNATIVE FUEL TYPE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 1 Quarter 4 2015 NEW PASSENGER CAR REGISTRATIONS BY ALTERNATIVE FUEL TYPE IN THE Quarter 4 2015 Alternative fuel vehicle (AFV) registrations: +20.0% in 2015; +21.1% in Q4 In the fourth quarter of 2015, total alternative

More information

Reported Road Accident Statistics

Reported Road Accident Statistics Reported Road Accident Statistics Standard Note: SN/SG/2198 Last updated: 24 October 2013 Author: Matthew Keep & Tom Rutherford Social and General Statistics Section This Note provides a range of data

More information

FUSIONS Food waste data set for EU-28. New Estimates and Environmental Impact

FUSIONS Food waste data set for EU-28. New Estimates and Environmental Impact FUSIONS Food waste data set for EU-28 New Estimates and Environmental Impact 15 October 2015 Food waste is an issue of importance to global food security and good environmental governance, directly linked

More information

Business Cooperation Database Profile Extraction

Business Cooperation Database Profile Extraction Business Cooperation Database Profile Extraction Produced the 23/05/2013 General Information Profile ID 20111230018 Summary Creation Date 30/12/2011 Last Update 12/01/2012 Expiration Date 02/01/2014 Intermediary

More information

Visa Information 2012

Visa Information 2012 Visa Information This document is intended to provide you with information on obtaining the correct visa to enter Australia to attend the Global Eco Asia-Pacific Tourism Conference however it is a guideline

More information

The Total Economic Value. Its application to the Single European Sky 2nd Reference Period

The Total Economic Value. Its application to the Single European Sky 2nd Reference Period The Total Economic Value Its application to the Single European Sky 2nd Reference Period 1. The idea of Total Economic Value. The Total Economic Value (TEV) is a term introduced officially into the Single

More information

Nanaimo Airport Business Plan Summary June 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nanaimo Airport Business Plan Summary June 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Nanaimo Airport Commission (NAC) engaged Jacobs Consultancy Canada Inc. (JC) to develop a Business Plan for the airport. The Business Plan incorporates the findings of

More information

SESAR. Luftfahrttechnologie - Auftaktveranstaltung zum 7. EU-Forschungsrahmenprogramm Wien, 4 Dezember 2006

SESAR. Luftfahrttechnologie - Auftaktveranstaltung zum 7. EU-Forschungsrahmenprogramm Wien, 4 Dezember 2006 Luftfahrttechnologie - Auftaktveranstaltung zum 7. EU-Forschungsrahmenprogramm Wien, 4 Dezember 2006 SESAR Christian Pusch EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre European page 1Organisation of 22 for the Safety

More information

CABINET OFFICE THE CIVIL SERVICE NATIONALITY RULES

CABINET OFFICE THE CIVIL SERVICE NATIONALITY RULES ANNEX A CABINET OFFICE THE CIVIL SERVICE NATIONALITY RULES Introduction The Civil Service Nationality Rules concern eligibility for employment in the Civil Service on the grounds of nationality and must

More information

Welcome Back! Presentation March 8, 2012. Content may be subject to change.

Welcome Back! Presentation March 8, 2012. Content may be subject to change. Welcome Back! 1 Number of passengers Stockholm Arlanda + 8% Feb11 Feb12 2 Passenger satisfaction Highest scores in ASQ Q4: Efficiency of check-in staff Courtesy, helpfulness of check-in staff High scores

More information

INTRODUCTION... 2. I. Participation in the 2014 European elections... 3

INTRODUCTION... 2. I. Participation in the 2014 European elections... 3 ?? Directorate-General for Communication PUBLIC OPINION MONITORING UNIT 2014 EUROPEAN ELECTIONS DESK RESEARCH Brussels, April 2015 Profile of voters and abstainees in the European elections 2014 INTRODUCTION...

More information

Replacement Migration

Replacement Migration Population Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs United Nations Secretariat Replacement Migration United Nations ST/ESA/SER.A/206 Population Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs

More information