Capacity - Belgium

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • Belgium registered 0.08 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2025, which remained 0.08 after the post-ops adjustment process, thus achieving the local target value of 0.22. Delays in Belgium remained stable year-on-year. Delays were highest in January and October due to disruptions (technical issues and industrial action), and in June and July, mostly driven by weather.

  • The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in Belgium decreased by -2 percentage points compared to 2024

  • The number of ATCOs in OPS was 88, being below the 2025 plan in Brussels ACC by -8 FTE.

  • The yearly total of sector opening hours in Brussels ACC was 28,234, showing a -1% decrease compared to 2024.

  • Brussels ACC registered 21.48 IFR movements per sector opening hour in 2025, 6% above the 2024 level.

  • Belgium registered an average airport arrival ATFM delay of 0.77 minutes per flight in 2025, thus achieving the local target of 1.5 minutes. Compared to 2024, average arrival ATFM delays in Belgium were 0.49 minutes per flight higher in 2025.

  • The main drivers of delays were other non-ATC causes, accounting for 0.48 of the total delays, and weather, responsible for 0.27.

En route performance

En route ATFM delay (KPI#1)

En route ATFM delay

  • Belgium had 1,270k flights in 2025, up from 1,200k flights in 2024.

  • The en route ANSPs in Belgium: skeyes and MUAC (Brussels sector group), applied en route ATFM regulations resulting in 494k minutes of delay in 2025, an increase from the 254k minutes in 2024.

  • Following the NM post operations re-attributions process, en route ANSPs in Belgium were responsible for 458k minutes of en route ATFM delay.

Regarding the reasons and circumstances resulting in the achieved level of actual performance of the en route ATFM delay per flight KPI, the NSA reports: “skeyes achieved the target set with a yearly performance of 0.08 minute per flight. This performance is similar to 2024 (0.08 min per flight), despite a 4.4% increase in traffic, demonstrating that skeyes has been able to demonstrate greater capacity.”

Regarding the description of the adjustments to the capacity plan included in adopted performance plan, the NSA reports: “According to the latest Network Operations Plan (NOP 2026), no capacity bottleneck is expected for EBBUACC. The level of performance achieved in 2025 shows that capacity should be sufficient in 2026.”

Regarding remedial measures that have been / will be taken by the ANSP to rectify the situation, the NSA reports: “According to the latest Network Operations Plan (NOP 2026), no capacity bottleneck is expected for EBBUACC. The level of performance achieved in 2025 shows that capacity should be sufficient in 2026.”

En route capacity incentive scheme

The FABEC NSAs report neither a financial penalty, nor a financial bonus, for either of the en route ANSPs operating over Belgium & Luxembourg, because of the 2025 performance.

Individual en route incentive targets were set for both skeyes and MUAC (global).

For skeyes, the local incentive target for en route ATFM delays, due to CRSTMP causes only, was set at 0.17 mins/flight, (with a deadband of +/- 0.03 mins).

The FABEC NSAs report an achieved CRSTMP performance, for skeyes, of 0.05 mins/flight using data from the ansperformance.eu dashboard including post ops adjustments. [NB The attribution of original delay causes on the ansperformance.eu dashboard is unverified.]

Although the local incentive target was surpassed, no bonus is applicable due to FABEC missing the overall capacity target.

For MUAC, the local incentive target for en route AFTM delays, due to CRSTMP causes only, was set at 0.19 mins/flight, (with a deadband of +/- 0.04 mins).

The FABEC NSAs report an achieved CRSTMP performance, for MUAC, of 0.18 mins/flight using data from the ansperformance.eu dashboard including post ops adjustments. [NB The attribution of original delay causes on the ansperformance.eu dashboard is unverified.]

The en route incentive capacity performance for MUAC fell inside the deadband, therefore no malus is applicable.

En route performance indicators at ACC level (PI#4-5)

Percentage of total en route ATFM delay that occurred on days when the daily throughput was above the expected daily traffic

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Regarding skeyes, there is too little historical data available to conduct monitoring. An analysis would require data from previous years, but the SES dashboard only provides only 2025 itself as baseline.”

Annual weighted average of the daily peak throughput

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Regarding skeyes, the daily peak throughput of Brussels ACC increased in 2025 compared to 2024; this is mainly due to the accommodation of the higher the traffic demand.”

Other en route information

ATCOs in operations

As additional comments to ATCOs in the scope of the performance scheme, the NSA reports: “The actual ATCO figures for en-route are in line with the performance plan. For APP, the difference comes from ATCO trainees failure and ATCOs having left the company. For TWR, the actual is above the planning.

skeyes was able to deliver the required operational performance and met the delay targets.”

Regarding the training process, including details on the effective failure rate and the process used to allocate newly qualified ATCOs between ACC, APP and TWR positions, the NSA reports: “The return on training investments and the impact of the additional training effort is clearly reflected in the training results and the total number of trainees in the training program.”

Terminal performance

Arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)

Arrival ATFM delay

Average ATFM arrival delay in Belgium was 0.77 min/arr in 2025, the first year of RP4. The performance has worsened compared to 2024, last year of RP3, when there were 0.28 min/arr.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATFM Arrival delay across Member States in 2025 was 0.97 min/arr.

Regarding the reasons and circumstances resulting in the achieved level of actual performance of the arrival ATFM delay per flight KPI, the NSA reports: “The target has been achieved with a yearly performance of 0.77 minute per flight. The delay increased compared to 2024 due to runway works at the airport. Aerodrome Capacity and Weather led to 95% of total delay. No capacity issue.”

Terminal capacity incentive scheme

In the first year of RP4, with an ATFM arrival delay of 0.77 min/arr, Belgium achieved the national target of 1.50 min/arr. However, the pivot value for incentives (0.09 min/arr) is limited to CRSTMP delay causes. As CRSTMP delay of 0.03 min/arr falls beyond the end of the bonus sliding range for the incentive scheme, meaning that the maximum bonus of 0.5% applies. As such, the NSA computes a bonus of EUR 55,297.

Other terminal performance indicators (PI#1-3)

Airport level
Airport name
Avg arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)
Slot adherence (PI#1)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Brussels 0.77 NA NA NA NA 95.6% NA NA NA NA
Airport name
ATC pre departure delay (PI#2)
All causes pre departure delay (PI#3)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Brussels 0.78 NA NA NA NA 18.97 NA NA NA NA

ATFM slot adherence

ATFM slot adherence in 2025 was equal to 95.6%, very close to 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 95.5%. With regard to the 4.5% of flights that did not adhere, 3.1% were early and 1.4% were late.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATFM slot adherence across Member States in 2025 was 96.3%.

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “EBBR is in line with requirements. Performance is quite stable over years, and slightly improved by +0.1% compared to 2024.”

ATC pre-departure delay

Delay in 2025 increased to 0.78 min/dep, 20% above 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 0.65 min/dep.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATC pre-departure delay across Member States and for which enough data is available in 2025 was 0.74 min/dep.

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Those data are not collected by skeyes as they are generated by the airport. No specific action is planned by skeyes.”

All causes pre-departure delay

Delay in 2025 was equal to 18.97 min/dep, very close to 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 19.07 min/dep.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of all causes pre-departure delay across Member States in 2025 was 16.47 min/dep.

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Those data are not collected by skeyes as they go beyong ATC and are generated by the airport. No specific action is planned by skeyes.”

Regarding the absence of data at airport level, the NSA reports: “All cause departure delay is very generic and ATFM delay is only a small contributor. Departure delay can be generated by ATFM en-route delay (not only local airport, but the complete Network) but also reactionary and turnaround delay, technical issues with the aircraft, airport operations, problems with passengers and or luggage, etc. In other words, it is not always possible to address a specific reason as this delay is quite generic. It would be more interesting to check the overall ANSP share against the share of the other network stakeholders (airports and AOs) and also show the weather induced subshare.”