PRB monitoring
▪ Sweden registered 0.04 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2022, thus achieving the local target value of 0.07.
▪ The average number of IFR movements was still 29% below 2019 levels in Sweden in 2022.
▪ An increase in the number of ATCOs in OPS is expected in both ACCs by the end of RP3. The actual 2022 values remain lower than the 2022 plan in both ACCs, due to fewer-than-planned ATCO students passing their on-the-job training.
▪ Delays were highest in June and July, mostly due to ATC Capacity reasons.
▪ The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in Sweden increased by 29.63 p.p. compared to 2021 and was lower than 2019 values.
▪ The yearly total of sector opening hours in Stockholm ACC was 29,123 in 2022, showing an 18.8% increase compared to 2021. Sector opening hours are 34.2% below 2019 levels. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Malmo ACC was 52,565 in 2022, showing a 17.8% increase compared to 2021. Sector opening hours are 8.6% below 2019 levels.
▪ Stockholm ACC registered 9.74 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2022, being 5.1% over 2019 levels. Malmo ACC registered 7.94 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2022, being 21.1% below 2019 levels.
▪ Sweden registered an average airport arrival ATFM delay of 0.09 minutes per flight in 2022, achieving the local target of 0.15 minutes.
▪ Compared to 2021, average arrival ATFM delays in Sweden were 5141.69% higher in 2022, while the number of IFR arrivals increased by 87.24%.
▪ The main reasons for delays were weather, accounting for 78% of delays, and ATC disruptions, responsible for 22%.
Summary of capacity performance
Sweden experienced an increase in traffic from 380k flights in 2021, with practically zero ATFM delay, to 585k flights in 2022, with 22k minutes of en route ATFM delay.
Traffic levels were still substantially below the 823k flights in 2019.
NSA’s assessment of capacity performance
From an operational point of view the war in Ukraine had of course had an important impact where Sweden lost a lot of the overflights (-29% compared to 2019).
Lower levels of traffic have of course contributed to capacity targets being met. However, new flying paths have hindered an even better result.
Monitoring process for capacity performance
Continuous overview during the year to see if there are any anticipated deviations from targets. Contact with provider on the topic if necessary
Capacity planning
There are no indications that there needs to be any measures addressed to be consistent or better than the target.
ANSP is concerned that a higher traffic level than expected in LFV and STATFOR forecasts could result in a shortage of ATCOs.
Application of Corrective Measures for Capacity (if applicable)
Additional Information Related to Russia’s War of Aggression Against Ukraine
More overflying traffic in southeast Baltic Sea last summer (June-Aug) due to closure of Kaliningrad airspace caused capacity shortage in some sectors at Malmö ATCC. Apr. 17000 min delay. Code ATC capacity.
To mitigate this situation, the ANSP ensured that more ATCO staff were on duty during the summer.
Fewer ATCO Students than planned passed their OJT (On the Job Training).
4 ATCOs retired in advance (2022 instead of planned 2023).
6 ATCOs left En Route for other appointments within LFV or to work for other ANS providers.
Sweden only has Stockholm (ESSA) airport subject to RP3 monitoring for which the APDF is successfully established and the monitoring of the capacity indicators can be performed. Traffic at this airport in 2022 was still 27% lower than the 2019 levels, but showed an increase of 87% with respect to 2021.
Average arrival ATFM delay in 2022 was 0.09 min/arr, slightly higher compared to 0 min/arr in 2021. ATFM slot adherence remained very high at almost 98% (2022: 97.8%; 2021: 97.9%).
Average arrival ATFM delay at Stockholm in 2022 is for the first time in RP3 above zero, although still very low (ESSA: 2022: 0.09 min/arr). 78% of these delays were attributed to Weather (mostly in November) and ATC Equipment issues (December).
The national target on arrival ATFM delay in 2022 was met.
| 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 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
| Stockholm/Arlanda |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.09 |
NA |
NA |
98.2% |
97.9% |
97.8% |
NA% |
NA% |
0.06 |
0.13 |
0.13 |
NA |
NA |
8.3 |
11.5 |
15.1 |
NA |
NA |
ATFM slot adherence
Stockholm’s ATFM slot compliance was 97.8%, slightly worse than the performance in 2020 (97.9%). With regard to the 2.2% of flights that did not adhere, 0.5% was early and 1.7% was late. The Swedish monitoring report adds: The ATC provider LFV reports the actual performance which is monitored by the NSA. There is no present risk at the awareness of the NSA that there will be a violation to EU 255/2010.
ATC pre-departure delay
The calculation of the ATC pre-departure delay is based on the data provided by the airport operators through the Airport Operator Data Flow (APDF) which is properly implemented at Stockholm. The quality of the airport data reported by ESSA has improved after the COVID crisis and it is possible to calculate this indicator. At Stockholm the annual value in 2022 has not changed with respect to previous year but it is higher than before the pandemic (ESSA: 2019: 0.09 min/dep; 2021: 0.13 min/dep; 2022: 0.13 min/dep).
All causes pre-departure delay
The total (all causes) delay in the actual off block time at Sweden increased in 2022 (ESSA: 2020: 8.34 min/dep.; 2021: 11.48 min/dep.; 2022: 15.14 min/dep.), with the highest delays observed in June-July and December.
According to the Swedish monitoring report: It should be noted that performance for 2020/2021 was affected of the very low traffic levels.