• Home
  • SES view
  • State view
    • Austria
    • Belgium
    • Bulgaria
    • Croatia
    • Cyprus
    • Czech Republic
    • Denmark
    • Estonia
    • Finland
    • France
    • Germany
    • Greece
    • Hungary
    • Ireland
    • Italy
    • Latvia
    • Lithuania
    • Luxembourg
    • Malta
    • MUAC
    • Netherlands
    • Norway
    • Poland
    • Portugal
    • Romania
    • Slovakia
    • Slovenia
    • Spain
    • Sweden
    • Switzerland
  • NM View
  • About
  • Download
  • Publications
  1. Capacity
  • Year report
    • 2023
    • 2022
    • 2021
    • 2020 ✓

  • France
  • Overview
    • Contextual information
    • Traffic
    • Safety
    • Environment
    • Capacity
    • Cost-efficiency

  • Safety
    • PRB monitoring
    • EoSM
    • Occurrences

  • Environment
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route performance
      • Horizontal flight efficiency
    • Terminal performance
      • AXOT & ASMA
      • CDO
    • CIV-MIL

  • Capacity
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route performance
      • En route ATFM delay
      • Other indicators
    • Terminal performance
      • Arrival ATFM delay
      • Other performance indicators

  • Cost-efficiency
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route CZ
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result
    • Terminal CZ - France Zone 1
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result
    • Terminal CZ - France Zone 2
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result

Capacity - France

Download Report

PRB monitoring

▪ France did not contribute positively towards the FABEC breakdown value: DSNA registered 0.61 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2020, thus not achieving the local breakdown value of 0.43.

▪ Bordeaux, Marseille and Reims ACCs produced significantly fewer delays than in 2019, Brest ACC generated only 0.03 minutes less average delay and Paris ACC generated 0.17 minutes more average delay than in 2019, mostly due to industrial action.

▪ Delays must be considered in the context of the traffic evolution: IFR movements in 2020 were 59% below the 2019 levels in France.

▪ The NSA reported that the new national pension scheme law introduced by the government was the reason DSNA staff used industrial action. The industrial action caused most of the delays in 2020.

▪ Based on the analysis of previous capacity profiles, the PRB estimates that France will face a capacity gap once IFR movements rise above 85% of 2019 levels. The PRB recommends that capacity improvement measures are implemented before traffic begins to recover.

▪ Delays were mostly driven by disruptions (ATC industrial actions).

▪ The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in France increased by 5.61 p.p. compared to 2019.

▪ The yearly total of sector opening hours in Bordeaux ACC was 62,604, showing a 14.7% decrease compared to 2019. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Reims ACC was 37,007, showing a 46.2% decrease compared to 2019. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Paris ACC was 58,905, showing a 42.7% decrease compared to 2019. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Marseille ACC was 68,661, showing a 31.8% decrease compared to 2019. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Brest ACC was 48,001, showing a 41.3% decrease compared to 2019.

▪ Bordeaux ACC registered 6.23 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2020, being 53.4% below 2019 levels. Reims ACC registered 11.58 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2020, being 22.1% below 2019 levels. Paris ACC registered 9.05 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2020, being 23.9% below 2019 levels. Marseille ACC registered 6.97 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2020, being 39.4% below 2019 levels. Brest ACC registered 8.62 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2020, being 36.2% below 2019 levels.

En route performance

En route ATFM delay (KPI#1)

Focus on en route ATFM delay

Summary of capacity performance

NSA’s assessment of capacity performance

Monitoring process for capacity performance

Capacity planning

Application of Corrective Measures for Capacity (if applicable)

Other indicators

Focus on ATCOs in operations

Terminal performance

Arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)

Focus on arrival ATFM delay

For France, the scope of the RP3 monitoring comprises a total of 58 airports. However, in accordance with IR (EU) 2019/317 and the traffic figures, only 6 of those airports must be monitored for pre-departure delays. 52 of these 58 airports are grouped into a basket (“LFXX”) for monitoring and target setting purposes.
The Airport Operator Data Flow, necessary for the monitoring of the pre-departure delays, is established for the 6 airports required. Nevertheless, the quality of the reporting does not allow for the calculation of the ATC pre-departure delay at 5 of those airports, with more than 60% of the reported delay not allocated to any cause.
The traffic at the ensemble of these 58 airports decreased in 2020 by 53% compared to 2019, which impacted the performance with almost no arrival ATFM delays as of the month of April. Nevertheless there are a couple of airports where delays in the rest of the year were also quite important, and in general terms the performance in terms of arrival ATFM delays in France improved less compared to other states (-28% vs 2019).
A few French airports had the lowest slot adherence among the SES monitored airports, and Marseille (LFML) did not even reach the 80% threshold. According to FABEC monitoring report, this low slot adherence was due to a technical issue that should be solved for 2021.

The massive traffic drop due to the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in Europe as from March 2020 (-53% for the whole 2020 compared to 2019 for the 58 French airports included in the Performance Plan) has reduced the 2020 traffic to a very low level (-64% in the April-December period). In line with the traffic reduction, arrival ATFM delays at most of these airports virtually disappeared as of April, with a few exceptions like Cannes (LFMD) or Le Bourget (LFPB). The national average arrival ATFM delay in 2020 was 0.30 min/arr, compared with 0.42 min/arr in 2019.
The biggest contributor to the delays in the year was Paris Orly, due mainly to Industrial Action (64% of the total delays in 2020 at LFPO) followed by Weather (22%).
After Orly, Cannes-Mandelieu was the airport that generated more minutes of arrival ATFM delay, mostly in July and August due to ATC Capacity (65%) and Aerodrome Capacity (30%) regulations. These delays made Cannes the airport with the highest average arrival ATFM delay in the SES area (LFMD; 2020: 2.97 min/arr.)
Paris Charles de Gaulle concentrated most of the delays in the first two months of the year, and 88% of the total delays were associated with Weather.
Bordeaux-Merignac was the 4th contributor to the total delays at these airports in 2020, mostly due to Industrial Action regulations in the first trimester generating 95% of the arrival delays.
And another of the smaller airports in terms of traffic, Le Bourget, was the 5th contributor to the total French arrival ATFM delays due to several reasons: ATC Staffing (36%), Industrial Action (32%) and Equipment (18%). These delays were generated not only in the first trimester, but also in the period from June to October.

The provisional national target on arrival ATFM delay in 2020 was met.

In accordance with Article 3 (3) (a) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1627: The incentive scheme shall cover only the calendar years 2022 to 2024.

Other terminal performance indicators (PI#1-3)

Airport level
Airport name
Avg arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)
Slot adherence (PI#1)
ATC pre departure delay (PI#2)
All causes pre departure delay (PI#3)
2020 2021 2023 2022 2020 2021 2023 2022 2020 2021 2023 2022 2020 2021 2023 2022
Agen/La-Garenne NA NA NA NA 79.2% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ajaccio/Napoléon-Bonaparte NA NA NA NA 76.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Albert/Bray NA NA NA NA 44.0% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Annecy/Meythet 0.16 NA NA NA 74.9% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Avignon/Caumont 0.23 NA NA NA 78.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Bale/Mulhouse 0.41 NA NA NA 87.4% NA% NA% NA% 0.13 NA NA NA 8.6 NA NA NA
Bastia/Poretta 0.00 NA NA NA 80.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Beauvais/Tillé 0.05 NA NA NA 72.6% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Bergerac/Roumanière NA NA NA NA 81.8% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Biarritz/Bayonne-Anglet 0.05 NA NA NA 88.8% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Bordeaux/Merignac 0.77 NA NA NA 91.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Brest/Bretagne NA NA NA NA 97.0% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Brive/Souillac NA NA NA NA 95.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Béziers/Vias NA NA NA NA 68.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Caen/Carpiquet NA NA NA NA 94.2% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Calvi/Sainte-Catherine 0.07 NA NA NA 82.1% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Cannes/Mandelieu 2.97 NA NA NA 93.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Carcassonne/Salvaza NA NA NA NA 81.8% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Chambéry/Aix-les-Bains 1.67 NA NA NA 89.3% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Châlons/Vatry 0.50 NA NA NA 78.0% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Châteauroux/Déols NA NA NA NA 86.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Clermont-Ferrand/Auvergne 0.00 NA NA NA 81.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Deauville/Normandie NA NA NA NA 90.0% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Dinard/Pleurtuit-Saint-Malo NA NA NA NA 61.3% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Dole/Tavaux NA NA NA NA 59.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Figari/Sud-Corse 0.18 NA NA NA 80.3% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Grenoble/Isère 0.50 NA NA NA 93.6% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Hyères/Le-Palyvestre 0.06 NA NA NA 81.1% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Istres/Le-Tubé NA NA NA NA 66.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
La-Rochelle/Ile de Ré NA NA NA NA 81.2% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Lille/Lesquin 0.33 NA NA NA 86.1% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Limoges/Bellegarde 0.19 NA NA NA 93.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Lorient/Lann-Bihoué NA NA NA NA 88.8% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Lyon 0.03 NA NA NA 84.5% NA% NA% NA% 0.17 NA NA NA 12.0 NA NA NA
Lyon/Bron 0.01 NA NA NA 89.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Marseille/Provence 0.10 NA NA NA 78.3% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA 9.6 NA NA NA
Metz-Nancy/Lorraine NA NA NA NA 82.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Montpellier/Méditerranée 0.01 NA NA NA 75.1% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Nantes 0.24 NA NA NA 91.6% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Nice 0.13 NA NA NA 87.7% NA% NA% NA% 0.21 NA NA NA 7.5 NA NA NA
Nîmes/Garons NA NA NA NA 83.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Paris/Charles-De-Gaulle 0.11 NA NA NA 95.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA 12.9 NA NA NA
Paris/Le Bourget 0.60 NA NA NA 94.2% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Paris/Orly 0.96 NA NA NA 87.3% NA% NA% NA% 0.33 NA NA NA 13.4 NA NA NA
Pau/Pyrénées 1.45 NA NA NA 85.9% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Perpignan/Rivesaltes 0.07 NA NA NA 77.4% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Poitiers/Biard NA NA NA NA 87.8% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Quimper/Pluguffan NA NA NA NA 84.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rennes/St-Jacques NA NA NA NA 78.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rodez/Marcillac NA NA NA NA 88.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rouen/Vallée-de-Seine NA NA NA NA NA NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Saint-Etienne/Bouthéon NA NA NA NA 79.6% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Saint-Nazaire/Montoir NA NA NA NA 97.2% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Strasbourg/Entzheim 0.03 NA NA NA 79.6% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tarbes-Lourdes/Pyrénées NA NA NA NA 90.5% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Toulouse/Blagnac 0.16 NA NA NA 90.2% NA% NA% NA% 0.17 NA NA NA 8.9 NA NA NA
Tours/Val-de-Loire 0.00 NA NA NA 50.0% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Toussus/Le-Noble 0.97 NA NA NA 77.7% NA% NA% NA% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Focus on performance indicators at airport level

ATFM slot adherence

Main national individual airports involved were above the 80% threshold of compliance except for LFML which was just under the threshold (78,3%).
The national average was 88.1%. With regard to the 11.9% of flights that did not adhere, 7.4% was early and 4.5% was late.

According to FABEC monitoring report:
DSNA identified that one reason generating this lack of measured adherence was wrong information sent to NMOC. Indeed, except in the two main Paris airports, the signal for activating the flight plan in the current FDPS system of DSNA (CAUTRA) is also used as the first system activation message (FSA) signal sent to the NMOC. However, this takes place at a time after off-block time (OBT), but well before the actual take-off, while it is interpreted by NMOC as Take-Off Time (TOT). Hence, NMOC detects a large percentage of regulated flights as taking off in advance of the tolerance window, although the actual take-off time is later and actually generally within the STW.

This appears in particular for Marseille airport. This is now acknowledged by DSNA as a clear deviation on many airports where the taxiing time is significant. This default has however been corrected in Paris-Charles-de-Gaulle and Paris-Orly through a specific local system that allows sending the NMOC a correct take-off time (TOT).

However, an in depth analysis of past results in Marseille has shown that the root causes were less operational in terms of ATC management but due to problems in calculating the correct CTOT; so the issue was more about the correct calibration of the CTOT calculation than about the accuracy of the detection of actual take-offs (as a reminder, either the ATS unit has an automatic take-off detection system and the “FSA” (First System Activation) message is sent to the NM as close as possible to this event, or the NM itself recalibrates the take-off time using the CPRs).

The LFML Operations Department has modified in coordination with the NM the parameters of the LFML taxi time thus the CTOT calculation has been improved and the CTOT compliance measurement has been more adequate; as a result, we can observe an increase in the CTOT compliance rate which brings LFML back to a good level: figures year up to date for 2021 to date (end of April 2021) show a compliance of 86.41% (data corroborated by the PRU).

DSNA is still preparing a device to correct the time sent to the NMOC on the other main airports. Since on smaller airports, the taxiing time is short, the deviation has little impact.

ATC pre-departure delay

The share of unidentified delay reported by the 6 French airports subject to this monitoring in 2020, except by Nice, was above 40% for more than 2 months in the year, preventing the calculation of this indicator. This is partially due to the special traffic composition for most months in 2020. Lyon, Paris Orly and Toulouse normally had proper reporting before the pandemic and only after April 2020 the share of unidentified delay exceeded the required minimum for the computation.
On the other hand the insufficient data quality provided by Marseille and Charles de Gaulle is a long standing issue prior to April 2020.
Nice is the only airport where this indicator can be calculated. The performance has slightly improved with respect to the previous year (LFMN; 2019: 0.31 min/dep.; 2020: 0.21 min/dep.)

All causes pre-departure delay

The total (all causes) delay in the actual off block time at French airports in 2020 was between 7.46 min/dep for Nice (LFMN) and 13.41 min/dep. for Paris Orly (LFPO) which is the 5th highest among the RP3 monitored airports.
The higher delays per flight were observed in the second trimester of the year, due to the lower traffic and extraordinary circumstances. In December there was also a general increase at most of these airports.

 
  • © European Union, 2024

  • Disclaimer

  • [email protected]

  • Website published by EUROCONTROL for the European Commission