Environment - Croatia

PRB monitoring

Croatia registered a KEA performance of 1.47% compared to its target of 1.46%. KEA improved from 1.56% in 2024 and the target was nearly achieved. The NSA states the main reason for not meeting the target can be mainly attributed to factors beyond the ANSPs direct influence, like airline route adjustments in response to adverse weather conditions and constraints in congested airspace.
Both KEP and KES improved in comparison to 2024. The improvement in KES shows that Croatia has improved the element of horizontal flight efficiency that is under its control.
VFE of the actual trajectory was at 74.70%, which was below the average Union-wide average.
No airports are included in the performance plan for monitoring.

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)

Focus on en route performance

KEA

With respect to 2024, the value of the indicator has been improving in terms of both the KEA (from 1.56% in 2024 to 1.47% in 2025) and the KEA corrected to take into consideration the effect of the conflict in Ukraine (from 1.48% to 1.40%). In terms of “ranking” those values place Croatia amongst the top performers (2^nd and 4^th place among the States).

The additional distance for Croatia corresponds to 1.30% of the additional distance in the SES area (12^th contribution). This value has been decreasing from 1.36% in 2024 (the ranking was the same).

Regarding the assessment of the achieved level of actual performance in the environment KPA, the NSA reports: “The ANSP did not fully achieve the targets set out in the Performance Plan or meet the established KEA values. However, the deviation from the target remained minimal. It should also be noted that several influencing factors within the KPA environment—such as the increased utilisation of Free Route Airspace (FRA) by airspace users and adverse weather conditions—are beyond the direct control of the ANSP.”

Regarding the implementation of major operational or structural changes during the calendar year impacting performance in this key performance area, the NSA reports: “No major change”

Regarding progress on the implementation of the measures committed to in the ERNIP, the NSA reports: “The ANSP implemented LDZO optimisation measures aimed at adjusting the sector division levels on lower sectors to FL325 and FL335, as well as introducing new combined (Upper + High) sectors above FL375. These changes were successfully implemented in accordance with the ERNIP Plan.”

Regarding the identification and analysis by the NSA of the underlying reasons or circumstances having led to the performance target not being achieved, the NSA reports: “While the ANSP does not have full control over the KEA KPI, the slight increase and subsequent marginal exceedance of the defined target can be largely attributed to factors beyond its direct influence, notably airline route adjustments in response to adverse weather conditions and constraints in congested airspace.

Notwithstanding these external factors, the ANSP has undertaken significant measures to enhance airspace efficiency and flexibility, including the full and successful implementation of cross-border Free Route Airspace (FRA).”

Regarding recommendations to the ANSP to rectify the situation, the NSA reports: “None”

Regarding remedial measures that have been / will be taken by the ANSP to rectify the situation, the NSA reports: “Croatia Control has implemented and effectively operates FRA procedures in accordance with European ATM network objectives and operational requirements. Through active participation in operational coordination meetings and collaborative decision-making processes, measures aimed at further airspace improvements are regularly identified and implemented in line with the European Route Network Improvement Plan.

In addition, support to cross-border weather management processes contributes to increased flight predictability and operational resilience. This enables aircraft operators to receive more accurate and timely information for flight planning and execution, thereby supporting safer, more efficient, and environmentally sustainable operations across the network.”

Regarding the follow up of the remedial measures indicated in the previous monitoring report(s), the NSA reports: “The ANSP’s contribution to the improvement of horizontal flight efficiency is reflected through continuous system enhancements, airspace design optimisation, the implementation and effective utilisation of Free Route Airspace as well as close coordination with neighbouring ACCs and the Network Manager.”

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: “The Free Route Airspace (FRA) concept has been progressively implemented across a wider geographical area involving several ANSPs, including Slovenia Control, Austro Control, Croatia Control, SMATSA and BHANSA. The initiative was further expanded on 2 December 2021 with the inclusion of Albcontrol and M-NAV.

Building on this regional implementation, additional cross-border expansion enabling seamless FRA operations between SECSI FRA and FRA-IT was fully implemented in 2024, in accordance with the ERNIP.”

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: “In coordination with the Network Manager, en-route restrictions are systematically planned and implemented to assess and manage their impact on network performance. Such restrictions are driven by operational requirements and are introduced with the primary objective of maintaining traffic safety and reducing operational complexity.”

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: “The ANSP implemented a new Requested Flight Level (RFL) monitoring tool designed to support ATCOs in identifying aircraft not adhering to the flight levels specified in the accepted flight plan. Continuous monitoring of requested versus filed flight levels is performed, with corrective actions taken as necessary to improve flight level adherence at operational positions.”

Civil-Military dimension

Focus on Civil-Military dimension

Effective use of reserved or segregated local airspace

CROATIA reported that they had no data. After consulting NM, Croatia reported a ratio of 95%. Comment: This number (percentage) has been communicated by NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal The data regarding total number of hours allocated & notified to NM and total number of hours used have not been delivered by NM nor are available on the SES Performance Portal. This cannot be monitored at local level. The same applies to data per ACC.

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: “The data regarding ratio has been received from NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal. The data regarding total number of hours allocated & notofied to NM and total number of hours used have not been delivered by NM nor are available on the SES Performance Portal and cannot be monitored at local level.”

Rate of planning via available airspace structures

CROATIA reported the following ratios: - the ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 36% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - the ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 95% (via available conditional routes) Comment: The data regarding ratio of planning via available airspace structures has been received from NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal. The data regarding number of aircraft filing flight plans via available restricted or segregated airspace, number of aircraft filing flight plans via available conditional routes and number of aircraft that could have planned through those airspace structures are not available because such data have not been delivered by NM upon request nor are available on the SES Performance Portal and cannot be monitored at local level.

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: “The data regarding ratio of planning via available airspace structures has been received from NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal. The data regarding number of aircraft filing flight plans via available restricted or segregated airspace, number of aircraft filing flight plans via available conditional routes and number of aircraft that could have planned through those airspace structures are not available because such data have not been delivered by NM upon request nor are available on the SES Performance Portal and cannot be monitored at local level.”

Rate of using available airspace structures

CROATIA reported the following ratios: - the ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 49% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - the ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 95% (via available conditional routes) Comment: The data regarding ratio of using available airspace structures has been received from NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal. The data regarding number of aircraft flying via available restricted or segregated airspace, number of aircraft flying via available conditional routes and number of aircraft that could have planned through those airspace structures have not been delivered by NM upon request nor such data are available on the SES Performance Portal and cannot be monitored at local level.

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: “The data regarding ratio of using available airspace structures has been received from NM upon request and published on the SES Performance Portal. The data regarding number of aircraft flying via available restricted or segregated airspace, number of aircraft flying via available conditional routes and number of aircraft that could have planned through those airspace structures have not been delivered by NM upon request nor such data are available on the SES Performance Portal and cannot be monitored at local level.”