See attached
MGMT 651 – Analytics for Managerial Decision-Making MGMT 651 – Analytics for Managerial Decision Making Homework 2 – Part 1 Worth 85 points Complete each question within a single Word document. For problems involving POM-QM, be sure to include screen captures for your input and output and provide an interpretation of your results. NOTE: Define variables carefully as and when needed. PART 1 1. (10 points) Chapter 1 Problem 12 2. (10 points) Chapter 1 Problem 14 3. (10 points) Burger Prince is considering opening a new restaurant in Colton, Loma Linda, or, Upland. The following fixed and variable cost data have been assembled. Variable Costs per customer Location Fixed Cost per year Material Labor Overhead Colton $200,000 $0.20 $0.40 $0.40 Loma Linda $180,000 $0.25 $0.75 $0.75 Upland $170,000 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 Over what range of annual demand is each facility going to have a competitive advantage? 4. (15 points) Chapter 2 Problem 13. First read Section 2.2 of textbook, then attempt this questions. You can search in Google for free graph papers. You can draw the graph on a graph-paper by hand, then take a photo, and insert the image to your homework document. 5. (20 points) Chapter 2 Problem 39. Save your solutions because you may need them for HW #3. 6. (20 points) Chapter 2 Problem 41. PART 2 This question relates to the journal article: Reducing flight delays through better traffic management. The complete reference is as follows: Article title: Reducing Flight Delays Through Better Traffic Management Authors: Sud et al. Journal Name: Interfaces Volume: 39 Issue: 1 Year: Jan/Feb 2009 Pages: 35-45 The article has been attached above. Read the article and based on your understanding, write a one-page (12 font size, single line spacing) extended abstract that (a) describes the problem, (b) solution methodology developed, and (c) summarizes the benefits. 1 Submit your homework as one single attachment. Include POM-QM input and output screenshots wherever applicable. If you submit your homework as an MS-Excel document, make sure that it is properly formatted to 8.5x11 page size!! 1 of 1 Journal Article.pdf Vol. 39, No. 1, January–February 2009, pp. 35–45 issn 0092-2102 �eissn 1526-551X �09 �3901 �0035 informs ® doi 10.1287/inte.1080.0417 © 2009 INFORMS THE FRANZ EDELMAN AWARD Achievement in Operations Research Reducing Flight Delays Through Better Traffic Management Ved P. Sud, Midori Tanino, James Wetherly Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC 20591 {ved.sud@faa.gov, midori.tanino@faa.gov, james.wetherly@faa.gov} Michael Brennan, Miro Lehky Metron Aviation, Sterling, Virginia 20166 {brennan@metronaviation.com, lehky@metronaviation.com} Ken Howard, Rick Oiesen Volpe Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142 {howardk@volpe.dot.gov, oiesen@volpe.dot.gov} As air traffic in the United States has grown over the last several years, traffic demand has begun to outstrip capacity. As of 2005, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had no effective approach for strategically man- aging a weather event that has been very disruptive to the national aviation system—large-scale thunderstorms that block the major flight routes in the northeastern United States. The operations research team that supports the FAA’s efforts to provide innovations in air traffic management, led by researchers at Metron Aviation, Inc. and the Volpe Transportation Center, recognized the consequence of this operational deficiency and set out to resolve it. In this paper, we show how this team (1) developed and applied system-simulation models to quantify the extent of the traffic flow management problem and convey its magnitude to the FAA and to the aviation industry; (2) designed the Airspace Flow Program (AFP), a new approach to managing air traffic that could correct the problem within the limitations of a short development cycle and a change-resistant culture; (3) designed and developed an interactive simulation system that could be and was used to refine and perfect this concept prior to deployment by developing policies on the use of a decision support system; (4) engaged FAA and airline traffic management experts in a series of interactive exercises using the simu- lation system to develop the final software design, operational procedures, and decision rules for deployment and use; and (5) provided a clear and convincing postdeployment benefits assessment for the new traffic management approach. The deployment of this new capability was an enormous success that both the FAA and the airline community heralded widely. The postdeployment impact assessment showed benefits to the aircraft operators and the flying public of almost $190 million in 2006 and 2007, the first two years of use, compared to less than $5 million in design and development costs. Broader usage of AFPs and new applications for them show a projected 10-year benefit of approximately $2.8 billion. Key words : simulations: applications; transportation: models, assignment, scheduling, vehicle routing. Amajor responsibility of the Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) is to provide air traffic management services for the national airspace. Air traffic management fills the real-time role of ensur- ing that airplanes and passengers travel safely and efficiently from the departure airport, through the airspace, to their destination. Air traffic management has two interrelated func- tions: (1) air traffic control and (2) traffic flow manage- ment (TFM). The better-known function is air traffic 35 Sud et al.: Reducing Flight Delays Through Better Traffic Management 36 Interfaces 39(1), pp. 35–45, © 2009 INFORMS control, a role that the familiar air traffic controller fills largely by using a radar scope and a headset to manage aircraft within a defined volume of airspace. Each controller is responsible for keeping each flight in his or her volume safely separated from every other flight. TFM’s role, and the subject of this article, is to keep the amount of traffic each controller must direct to a manageable level by anticipating future traffic demand and strategically controlling aggregate flows of flights to keep the demand within tolerable bounds. To support its TFM function, the FAA has developed the Enhanced Traffic Management System (ETMS), a software and communications system that collects and integrates real-time data from FAA and airline sources to identify future demand and capacity imbal- ances at airports and in the airspace. ETMS includes decision-support tools that help FAA traffic man- agers prevent these imbalances by issuing structured directives known as traffic management initiatives. These actions redistribute traffic demand over time and space by delaying and rerouting flows of traffic. Metron Aviation, Inc. and the Volpe Transportation Center support the FAA’s System Operations Services Programs Office by helping to sustain and improve existing ETMS software, and by designing, develop- ing, and deploying new concepts and approaches for the next generation of TFM. The operations research (OR) practitioners at Metron Aviation and Volpe, the “TFM OR team,” work with the FAA and the airlines to identify TFM operational problems and to solve them by developing new concepts and approaches. In this paper, we will describe how this team used the principles and practices of OR to design and help deploy a new type of traffic management initiative, and thus identified and solved a major TFM problem in the national airspace. This new type of traffic management initiative, the Airspace Flow Program (AFP), is a powerful TFM capability that was introduced in June 2006 with extensive public exposure from the most senior execu- tives in both the FAA and the aviation industry (Levin 2006). The innovation is projected to save aircraft operators $1 billion to $3 billion in operating costs by reducing delays and cancellations over the next decade, and is projected to reduce passenger delays by more than a million hours each year. Identifying and Illustrating the Key TFM Problem Traffic-Flow Management Before Airspace Flow Programs As of 2004, the FAA had developed and deployed effective ETMS-based solutions for two key TFM prob- lems (1) controlling high-arrival demand at airports with limited capacity and (2) managing moderate- scale thunderstorm systems. To monitor and control high-arrival demand at airports, traffic managers use the Flight Schedule Monitor (FSM), an ETMS decision support tool first deployed in 1998. When the FSM projects a future demand or capacity imbalance at any major US or Canadian airport, managers can use algorithms in the tool to compute and assign a delayed departure time for each flight; this traffic management initiative, known as the Ground Delay Program (GDP), extends the arrival demand safely and fairly. ETMS commu- nicates the assigned departure times, which the FSM has computed, to the airlines for planning and to air- port control towers for enforcement. To manage moderate-scale convective weather (thunderstorms) in the en route portion of a flight’s path, the FAA developed the ETMS-based Flow Con- strained Area (FCA) tool (Figure 1), which was intended to be used for rerouting traffic. Using this tool, traffic managers can geographically define con- gested areas in the airspace, such as a region of thun- derstorm activity. ETMS will then produce a list of (2) ETMS generates lists of flights in the FCAs. (3) Airlines route flights on the lists around FCAs. (1) FAA creates FCAs over small-scale weather systems. Figure 1: The FAA uses FCAs to manage traffic during small-scale en route weather events. Sud et al.: Reducing Flight Delays Through Better Traffic Management Interfaces 39(1), pp. 35–45, © 2009 INFORMS 37 flights expected to traverse each area. Traffic man- agers use these lists to decide which flights must be routed around the weather and congestion. As of 2004, the FAA had no effective approach for managing one key TFM problem: wide-scale convec- tive weather fronts, i.e., extended lines of thunder- storms blocking major flight routes. These weather systems typically occur during the busy summer travel season and cause severe problems when they occur over the heavily traveled Northeast. This traffic management problem regularly resulted in enormous, system-wide disruptions, leading to billions of dollars annually in increased operating costs and revenue loss to the airlines and to general aviation operators, and inconvenience to the flying public. Such severe weather systems substantially reduce en route capacity and are too large for much of the traffic to fly around. In the early 2000s, to reduce the traffic flow through these systems, the FAA began to employ a traffic management approach that could be implemented using the then-available ETMS tools. The FAA recognized that holding flights on the ground had to be part of reducing demand. It had only one tool that could impose ground delay, namely, airport GDPs. Therefore, it began to issue GDPs to manage en route problems. Although they were designed as an airport tool, GDPs were drafted into use for en route severe weather under the theory