• 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. Environment
  • Year report
    • 2023 ✓
    • 2022
    • 2021
    • 2020

  • Netherlands
  • 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
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result

Environment - Netherlands

Download Report

PRB monitoring

▪ The Netherlands achieved a KEA performance of 2.94% compared to its target of 2.62% and did not contribute positively towards achieving the Union-wide target.

▪ Both KEP and SCR values improved compared to 2022. Despite the KEA target being missed, the improvement in SCR shows that The Netherlands has improved the environmental efficiency of its airspace when accounting for impacts outside of its control.

▪ The share of CDO flights decreased from 26.13% to 25.11% in 2023.

▪ During 2023, additional time in terminal airspace decreased from 1.12 to 1.10 min/flight, while additional taxi out time increased from 2.77 to 3.13 min/flight.

▪ The NSA states that the worsening environmental performance was due to internal and external issues such as weather effects, maintenance at Schiphol airport, and re-routing around the reserved areas for the military exercises for both MUAC and LVNL.

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 Amsterdam (EHAM; 2019: 3.11 min/dep.; 2020: 1.78 min/dep.; 2021: 2.19 min/dep.; 2022: 2.77 min/dep.; 2023: 3.13 min/dep.) increased in 2023 by 13% resulting in an annual value above the SES average 2.81 min/dep. and also above the pre-COVID value in 2019.
According to the Dutch monitoring report: No specific initiatives are planned. The performance is mainly influenced by the runway combination in use (e.g. taxiing around an active runway instead of crossing it - that only happens when the runway is not in use) or taxiway maintenance.

ASMA

Additional times in the terminal airspace of Amsterdam (EHAM; 2019: 1.78 min/arr.; 2020: 1.02 min/arr.; 2021: 0.86 min/arr.; 2022: 1.12 min/arr.; 2023: 1.1 min/arr.) decreased in 2023 by 2% resulting in an annual value just below the SES average 1.16 min/arr. and lower than the pre-COVID value in 2019.
According to the Dutch monitoring report: RECAT-EU and Time-Based Separation has been introduced at Amsterdam-Schiphol resulting in increased runway capacity under certain circumstances and reduced time in ASMA. Furthermore, implementation of fixed arrival routes in the Schiphol TMA are planned in RP4. Expected effects are reduced vectoring and more predictable times in the TMA.

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

Focus CDOs

All airport have shares of CDO flights below the overall RP3 value in 2023 (28.8%).
Amsterdam (EHAM), Groningen (EHGG) and Rotterdam (EHRD) have a lower share of CDO flights than in 2022 while it has increased at Maastricht-Aachen (EHBK) from 10.4% in 2022 to 12.1% of CDO flights in 2023.
According to the Dutch monitoring report: For the Netherlands, the percentage of arrivals performing a CDO is similar in 2023 compared to 2022, 2021, and 2020. Even with lower traffic levels arrivals have to fly a part of the approach in level flight e.g. due to procedures (vertical separation between parallel approaches, interception of glide slope from below).
Implementation of fixed arrival routes in the Schiphol and Rotterdam TMA in RP4 should improve predictability of distance to go for airspace users and thus a higher share of CDOs.

Airport level
Airport Name
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
Schiphol 1.78 2.19 2.77 3.13 NA 1.02 0.86 1.12 1.10 NA 30% 29% 27% 26% NA
Beek NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 11% 9% 10% 12% NA
Eelde NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 26% 28% 27% 25% NA
Rotterdam NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 20% 22% 19% 18% 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

For MUAC the ATMP will be used to propose improved routings to aircraft operators in pre-tract. The tool takes into account the expected airspace availability. This tool allows airlines to reduce the amounts of fuel used by proposing fuel-saving alternatives. MUAC is expanding their capacity to do these route suggestions.

Initiatives implemented or planned to improve PI#7

No data available.

Initiatives implemented or planned to improve PI#8

No data available.

 
  • © European Union, 2024

  • Disclaimer

  • [email protected]

  • Website published by EUROCONTROL for the European Commission