Environment - Belgium

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • Belgium registered a KEA performance of 3.35% compared to its local breakdown value of 3.50%. Whilst the local target for FABEC was not achieved, Belgium contributed positively towards Union-wide performance. The NSA states that the target was achieved mainly due to the implementation of FRA.

  • Both KEP and KES improved in comparison with 2024. The improvement shows that Belgium has improved environmental efficiency.

  • The average time in level flight during climb and descent remained stable with minor variations compared to 2024.

  • VFE of the actual trajectory was at 75.90%, which was below the average Union-wide average.

  • Additional taxi-out time was 2.98 min/flight, and additional taxi-in time was 1.28 min/flight, with both stable compared to 2024.

  • Additional time in the arrival sequencing and metering area was at 2.47 min/flight, which degraded compared to 2.27 min/flight in 2024.

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 (KES) (PI#2) and vertical flight efficiency of the actual trajectory (VFE) (PI#3)

KEA

Belgium has been improving both in terms of KEA and corrected KEA to consider the influence of war in Ukraine. The values for KEA are 3.59% in 2023, 3.48% in 2024 and 3.35% in 2025. For the corrected KEA the values are 3.51% in 2023, 3.39% in 2024 and 3.25% in 2025.

These values place Belgium as 18th for KEA and 24th for corrected KEA in 2025.

Belgium contributes 2.13% of the total additional distance in the SES area, 18th.

Regarding the assessment of the achieved level of actual performance in the environment KPA, the NSA reports: “Free Route Airspace (FRA) is considered the largest enabler for improving KEA. However, upper airspace in Belgium (above FL245) is delegated to MUAC and is therefore out of scope for skeyes. Additionally as KEA is a horizontal en-route flight efficiency indicator, an area of 40 nm around the origin & destination airport is excluded from the calculation. This leaves only little room for improvement within skeyes airspace.”

Regarding the implementation of major operational or structural changes during the calendar year impacting performance in this key performance area, the NSA reports: “cf. comment above - therefore no stuctural or operational change has been planned by skeyes.”

Regarding progress on the implementation of the measures committed to in the ERNIP, the NSA reports: “skeyes: Over the past years AUP and UUP procedures have been updated in line with ERNIP Part 3, ensuring that any airspace made available is immediately published to NM through a UUP.”

KEP

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “skeyes is monitoring the performance by using the SES dashboards, even though there is limited room for improvement within Belgian airspace; skeyes contributing to improvements of en-route flight efficiency by establishing a CIV-MIL AMC, co-located at skeyes premises, which aims at optimising the airspace management between CIV and MIL and contestant improvements of FUA on local level.”

KES

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “skeyes is monitoring the performance by using the SES dashboards, even though there is limited room for improvement within Belgian Airspace; skeyes contributing to improvements of en-route flight efficiency by establishing a CIV-MIL AMC, co-located at skeyes premises, which aims at optimising the airspace management between CIV and MIL and contestant improvements of FUA on local level.”

Vertical flight efficiency

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “Upper airspace in Belgium (above FL245) is delegated to MUAC and is therefore out of scope for skeyes.”

Terminal performance

Additional taxi-out time (AXOT) (PI#4), Additional taxi-in time (AXIT) (PI#5) & Arrival Sequencing and Metering Area (ASMA) time (PI#6)

Airport level
Airport
Additional taxi-out time (PI#4)
Additional ASMA time (PI#6)
Additional taxi-in time (PI#5)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Brussels 2.98 NA NA NA NA 2.47 NA NA NA NA 1.28 NA NA NA NA

AXOT

The additional time in 2025 was equal to 2.98 min/dep, very close to the 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 2.92 min/dep (using the new methodology).

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of this indicator across Member States in 2025 was 3.61 min/dep.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “skeyes has its own taxi indicators. As the actual performance for this indicator is good, no specific action is planned.”

AXIT

The additional time in 2025 was equal to 1.28 min/arr.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of this indicator across Member States in 2025 was 1.71 min/arr.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “skeyes has its own taxi indicators. As the actual performance for this indicator is good, no specific action is planned.”

ASMA

The additional time in 2025 increased in 2.47 min/arr, 9% higher than 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 2.27 min/arr (using the new methodology).

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of this indicator across Member States in 2025 was 2.98 min/arr.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “no initiative is currently planned at skeyes.”

Vertical flight efficiency of the descent (PI#7) and of the climb (PI#8)

Vertical flight efficiency of the descent

Compared to the overall RP4 average value (149.2 seconds per flight), the average time flown level during descent is 51.4 seconds per flight higher in Belgium. Brussels (EBBR) has an average time flown level of 200.6 seconds per flight during descent.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “skeyes established recurrent monitoring of the CDO performance, in order to improve monitoring and to be able to identify where and to which extent inefficiencies are taking place. Since ToD is outside skeyes AoR, skeyes developed its own indicators. In addition to binary indicators, skeyes is using non-binary CDO indicators based on average level-off time. The statistics are presented and discussed with the main Airlines during quarterly CEM meetings at airports.”

Vertical flight efficiency of the climb

Compared to the overall RP4 average value (34.8 seconds per flight), the average time flown level during climb is 23.6 seconds per flight higher in Belgium. Brussels (EBBR) has an average time flown level of 58.4 seconds per flight during climb.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “for monitoring skeyes relies on the data published by the AIU portal; the results there indicate that no major inefficiencies are detected. Continuous climb operations are being flown and facilitated as long as traffic situation permits. Since ToC is outside skeyes AoR, currently there is a work being done to develop an internal indicator for monitoring.”

Airport level
Airport
Avg. duration in climb (PI#8)
Avg. duration in descent (PI#7)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Brussels 58.4 NA NA NA NA 200.6 NA NA NA NA

Civil-Military dimension

Effective use of reserved or segregated local airspace

BELGIUM and LUXEMBOURG report a ratio of 66.32% - Total number of hours allocated & notified to NM: 1,550 - Total number of hours used: 1,028

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “Over the past years AUP and UUP procedures have been updated in line with ERNIP Part 3, ensuring that any airspace made available is immediately published to NM through a UUP. Belgium is also developing Flight Buffer Zones (FBZs) for all the major areas with linked FUA restrictions to maximise the accommodation of traffic flows. In parallel, Belgium and the Netherlands are redesigning EBTRA North, moving from static area structures to configuration based airspace, with implementation foreseen in 2027. EUROCONTROL supports initiatives through tools such as the GRRT (Group rerouting tool) and working groups with CFSPs and AOS to promote optimal use of ASM opportunities.”

Rate of planning via available airspace structures

BELGIUM and LUXEMBOURG report that: - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 8% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 51% (via available conditional routes – CDR) BRUSSELS ACC - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 13% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 99% (via available conditional routes – CDR)

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “Over the past years AUP and UUP procedures have been updated in line with ERNIP Part 3, ensuring that any airspace made available is immediately published to NM through a UUP. Belgium is also developing Flight Buffer Zones (FBZs) for all the major areas with linked FUA restrictions to maximise the accommodation of traffic flows. In parallel, Belgium and the Netherlands are redesigning EBTRA North, moving from static area structures to configuration based airspace, with implementation foreseen in 2027. EUROCONTROL supports initiatives through tools such as the GRRT (Group rerouting tool) and working groups with CFSPs and AOS to promote optimal use of ASM opportunities.”

Rate of using available airspace structures

BELGIUM and LUXEMBOURG report that: - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 17% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 86% (via available conditional routes – CDR) BRUSSELS ACC - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 34% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 126% (via available conditional routes – CDR) IMPORTANT NOTE: The ratios reported by BELGIUM are not aligned with existing NM data. It will be useful to know the source of this data reported by BELGIUM.

Regarding initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI and how does the NSA intend on monitoring their effectiveness on performance, the NSA reports: “Over the past years AUP and UUP procedures have been updated in line with ERNIP Part 3, ensuring that any airspace made available is immediately published to NM through a UUP. Belgium is also developing Flight Buffer Zones (FBZs) for all the major areas with linked FUA restrictions to maximise the accommodation of traffic flows. In parallel, Belgium and the Netherlands are redesigning EBTRA North, moving from static area structures to configuration based airspace, with implementation foreseen in 2027. EUROCONTROL supports initiatives through tools such as the GRRT (Group rerouting tool) and working groups with CFSPs and AOS to promote optimal use of ASM opportunities.”