• 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
  • Investments
    • SES RP3

    • 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
  • About
  • Download
  • Data Portal
  • Publications
  1. Environment
  • Year report
    • RP3
    • 2024
    • 2023 ✓
    • 2022
    • 2021
    • 2020

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

  • Safety
    • PRB monitoring
    • EoSM
    • Safety occurrences
      • Runway incursions
      • Separation minima infringements
      • Occurrences reporting
    • ASDRS

  • 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
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result

Environment - Belgium

Download Report

PRB monitoring

▪ Belgium achieved a KEA performance of 3.59% compared to its target of 3.00% and did not contribute positively to the Union-wide target.

▪ The NSA states that given the limited size of the Belgium-Luxembourg airspace, the possibility of improving performance is limited.

▪ Both KEP and SCR improved in comparison with 2022’s performance. Despite the KEA target being missed, the improvement in SCR shows that Belgium has improved the environmental efficiency of its airspace when accounting for impacts outside of its control.

▪ The share of CDO flights marginally decreased from 16.91% to 16.20% in 2023.

▪ During 2023, additional time in terminal airspace increased from 0.57 to 0.75 min/flight, while additional taxi out time increased from 1.53 to 2.14 min/flight.

En route performance

Horizontal flight efficiency of the actual trajectory (KEA) (KPI#1), of the last filed flight plan (KEP) (PI#1) & shortest constrained route (SCR) (PI#2)

Terminal performance

Additional taxi-out time (AXOT) (PI#3) & Arrival Sequencing and Metering Area (ASMA) time (PI#4)

Focus on ASMA & AXOT

AXOT

Additional taxi-out times at Brussels (EBBR; 2019: 2.21 min/dep.; 2020: 1.36 min/dep.; 2021: 1.28 min/dep.; 2022: 1.53 min/dep.; 2023: 2.14 min/dep.) increased in 2023 but remained well below the SES average in 2023 of 2.81 min/dep.

According to the Belgian monitoring report: For Belgium, it is noted that some factors included in the Taxi-out time (for example: push-back time) influence this indicator but are beyond control of ANSP. A-CDM is implemented for many years, and continuously being improved. Latest improvements were focused on incorporating de-icing (and hence reducing taxi times).

Improvement of A-CDM is also part of Stargate (EU Green Deal Project for more sustainable aviation). Within this framework, skeyes will provide support to Brussels Airport in developing e-learning modules to create awareness and better understanding of the concept for the airport stakeholders and the fellow airports. The Lighthouse will also enhance reporting and monitoring of KPIs within A-CDM towards more efficient and, thus, more sustainable operations.

The monitoring report also mentions: The additional taxi-out time is computed by EUROCONTROL/PRU and can be retrieved on the SES e-dashboard (https://www.eurocontrol.int/prudata/dashboard/data/) but the indicator is not available for all airports. However, the methodology defined by PRU is still under discussion because it remains unclear what the time difference from year to year indicates, or the meaningfulness of an airport A versus airport B comparison, in particular when focussing on the ANSP influence on the performance.

ASMA

Additional ASMA times at Brussels increased in 2023 (EBBR; 2019: 1 min/arr.; 2020: 0.89 min/arr.; 2021: 0.47 min/arr.; 2022: 0.57 min/arr.; 2023: 0.75 min/arr.) but remain well below the SES average of 1.16 min/arr.

According to the Belgian monitoring report: For Belgium, ASMA is considered to be intended primarily to capture terminal holdings. Within EBBR, stacking aircraft in holding to absorb delays (similar to EGLL) is seldomly applied. Within a radius of 30 NM around EBBR, radar vectoring is most often applied. Depending on the traffic demand, shorter or longer trajectories are being flown (-> sequencing). However radar vectoring has the advantage that shortest routes can be issued, hence leading to ‘best possible’ ASMA values, while of course taking into account applicable restrictions (e.g. noise abatement).

Purely for the sake of ASMA, the current working methods (vectoring), probably leave very limited room for improvement. The real challenge is improving predictability in the arrival process (vectoring -> increased use of fixed routings), without deteriorating ASMA.

The monitoring report also mentions: The additional time in terminal airspace (ASMA) is computed by EUROCONTROL/PRU and can be retrieved on the SES e-dashboard (https://www.eurocontrol.int/prudata/dashboard/data/). However, the methodology defined by PRU is still under discussion. FABEC trials showed that changes of the ambient air temperature alone can significantly infuence the measured performance.

Share of arrivals applying continuous descent operations (CDOs) (PI#5)

Focus CDOs

The share of CDO flights for Brussels is 16.0% which is a decrease of 1.1 percentage points but still quite low compared to other airports with similar traffic numbers and the overall RP3 value in 2023 (28.8%).

According to the Belgian monitoring report: skeyes has been running several initiatives/projects to improve the facilitation of CDOs at EBBR. This includes implementation of PBN procedures, promotion of RNP (Required Navigation Performance) procedures (in the framework of Stargate project – see 2.2.2.(d)) and operational demonstration of ISGS (Increased Second Glide Slope) at Brussels airport (in the framework of HERON project, currently in its planning phase; demonstrations are planned to take place in 2024). Besides, skeyes maintains a collaboration with main OPS stakeholders at EBBR (ATC/airport/airlines) through CEM (Collaborative Environmental Management) platform to further reduce the environmental impact of airport operations.

Airport level
Airport
Additional taxi-out time (PI#3)
Additional ASMA time (PI#4)
Share of arrivals applying CDO (PI#5)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Brussels 1.36 1.28 1.53 2.14 NA 0.89 0.47 0.57 0.75 NA 18% 20% 17% 16% NA

Civil-Military dimension

Focus on Civil-Military dimension

Update on Military dimension of the plan

For obvious flight safety reasons, military activities must be segregated from civil flows which has an impact on both horizontal (HFE) and vertical flight efficiency (VFE). Because ASM manageable areas form an integral part of the nominal system, military airspace reservations shall be considered as part of the performance baseline rather than a key factor degrading environmental KPIs.

As a result of implementation of the FUA concept the impact of military activities using Restricted Airspace(RSA) on civil performance is highly minored when associated with an efficient ASM process:
- At strategic level (HLAPB) by designing areas in accordance with A-FUA concept (MVPA/VGA structures), especially for congested airspaces.
- At pre-tactical level (AMC), by managing these areas in a dynamic way, with an associated level 2 CDM process, validated by HLAPB.
- At tactical level (ACC/Regional Military Control Centre) by activating/deactivating areas as close as possible to actual use and allowing crossing or direct routes when possible (in accordance with TRA status), with an associated level 3 CDM process validated by HLAPB.
- At each level, HLAPB, AMC or ACC/Regional Military Control Centre, a key factor of efficiency is a trust-driven civil-military cooperation. As a counterpart, AOs and CFSPs must be reactive and take efficiently into account available or released airspaces. At last, ANSP have also to adapt the route network to create more DCTs within military areas.

Finally, local circumstances (e.g. constrained airspace, proximity of international hubs, etc….) as well as a large number of military missions that differ from one State to another must be taken into account. Therefore, airspace needs (e.g. airspace requirements for the 5th generation fighters) and related ASM procedures of the States differ and standardized objectives cannot be defined.

Military - related measures implemented or planned to improve capacity

FABEC States are working on mid-term improvements regarding implementation of ASM level 1. 2. and 3 procedures. Some local initiatives regarding ASM/ATFCM convergence, like the traffic Light Scheme concept in France are promoted at FABEC level, as well as at ECAC level in the EUROCONTROL OEP framework.

Another major improvement is the interconnection of the existing ASM tools (e.g. LARA, STANLY_ACOS) at FABEC Level, to enhance regional coordination among FABEC AMCs as well as with the NM.

Initiatives implemented or planned to improve PI#6

Since Jan 23 BEL implemented fully (after trial period) the advanced FUA principles whereby only planned activity is published via AUP on D-1. while extra bookings remain possible up to H-3; this results in a more stable network for the airline users and ANSPs without impacting too much the flexibility of the military. The BB-AUP was introduced in the Belgian Airspace.

Initiatives implemented or planned to improve PI#7

MIL is unable to provide this data.

Initiatives implemented or planned to improve PI#8

MIL is unable to provide this data as need for radar data.

 
  • © European Union, 2025

  • Disclaimer

  • Website published by EUROCONTROL for the European Commission