AAI ROUND 3 / AUDITABLE BID ASSISTANCE STUDY
AAI Bid Assistance Study
Five proposed airport groups. Eleven airports. A transparent investment case with explicit evidence, assumptions and funding obligations.
Published by Aeronova TIA Consultancy. Research basis and model snapshot: 3 November 2026.
Published layouts and future masterplans
Inspect 84 attributed map plates across all eleven airports: aerodrome and parking layouts, obstacle charts, located safeguarding maps and dated authority expansion drawings. Existing configurations, AAI proposals and Aeronova TIA study options carry separate labels. Certified as-built sets and missing current approved masterplans remain explicit evidence requests. Varanasi distinguishes the 6 MPPA new terminal from the 9.9 MPPA airport-wide target.
Executive decision flow
Open a management briefing with the current investment verdict, portfolio signals and decision gates. Move through bundle intelligence, capital and bid strategy, growth projects, the spatial twin and the evidence library. Single-variable NPV tests, funding timelines and a committee-note export connect the findings to action. Detailed controls and source tables open when needed; the analyst laboratory and continuous study remain available.
Investment and operating decisions
- Compare conditional fee bands and distinguish protected bids from base-only negotiation diagnostics.
- Test the 15% default equity hurdle and explicit upfront/CWIP allowance scenarios, without treating unknown transaction terms as facts.
- Inspect project-linked capacity, explicit additional capital spend, debt service, retained cash and future sponsor calls. Lifecycle maintenance alone releases no capacity in the default case.
- Review 500 actual seeded stress paths per group, 2,500 in the default snapshot. Their assumed distributions are stress coverage, not calibrated probabilities or auction win odds.
- Review 86 reported AAI traffic observations, airport-specific cautious forecasts, 735 asset evidence records and 110 explicit system/title gaps. Assess capacity and service projects, catchment candidates and twenty-two proposed city transport links.
- Explore LOD 200 Blender-authored approximate assemblies and Three.js views: dated published runway geometry, mapped footprints and streets, reported equipment banks at assumed positions, illustrative OLS and project reservations.
- Export financial/bid scenarios and retain the assumptions behind every decision.
Accuracy and investment gates
The default protected conclusion is Hold / restructure at a hypothetical ₹500 crore total upfront/CWIP allowance per bundle. This is a model result, not a statement that the final transaction has those terms or is intrinsically unviable. Final Round 3 tender, concession, tariff, transferred-asset, land and mandatory-work conditions were not verified in the snapshot. Fees and business improvements remain conditional.
Maps, safeguarding and transport
Dated AAI primary runway geometry, mapped OSM footprints/streets, assumed heights, schematic equipment banks, flat terrain and conceptual project reservations are labelled separately. The LOD 200 coverage is incomplete and is not a surveyed as-built inventory. Illustrative OLS do not constitute height clearance, an approved airport masterplan or an engineering survey. Catchment rings are geographic assumptions rather than road-time isochrones or observed flyer origins. All transport fares, travel times, capture shares and operator costs are pilot assumptions. No unproven incremental air traffic is credited to the access programme.
Existing Aeronova workflows
The Sentient Bid Assistant, account workspace, planning tools and other suite modules retain their own workflows. The study uses explicit local exports/imports; it does not automatically approve an investment or save cases into the account workspace.