• Home
  • SES view
  • State view
    • Austria
    • Belgium
    • Bulgaria
    • Croatia
    • Cyprus
    • Czech Republic
    • Denmark
    • Estonia
    • FABEC
    • 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 RP4

    • 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. Capacity
  • Year report
    • 2025 ✓

    • RP3
      • 2024
      • 2023
      • 2022
      • 2021
      • 2020

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

  • Safety
    • PRB monitoring
    • EoSM
    • Safety occurrences
      • Separation minima infringements

  • Environment
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route performance
      • Flight efficiency
    • CIV-MIL

  • Capacity
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route performance
      • En route ATFM delay
      • En route performance indicators at ACC level
      • Other information

  • Cost-efficiency
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route CZ
      • Unit cost
      • AUCU
      • Regulatory Result

Capacity - Latvia

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • Latvia registered 0.01 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2025, which remained 0.01 after the post-ops adjustment process, thus achieving the local target value of 0.06. Delays in Latvia increased by 0.01 minutes per flight year-on-year.

  • The number of ATCOs in OPS was 44, being below the 2025 plan in Riga ACC by -3 FTE.

  • The yearly total of sector opening hours in Riga ACC was 23,997, showing a -2% decrease compared to 2024.

  • Riga ACC registered 10.03 IFR movements per sector opening hour in 2025, +8% year-on-year.

En route performance

En route ATFM delay (KPI#1)

NoteFocus on en route ATFM delay

En route ATFM delay

  • Latvia had 238k flights in 2025, up from the 224k flights in 2024.

  • LGS applied en route ATFM regulations resulting in 3k minutes of 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: “Active and pro-active approach to the ATCO planning and rostering, changes in planning and rostering procedure, additional ATCO training.”

En route capacity incentive scheme

The Latvian NSA reports a financial bonus for the ANSP of € 252,612 for en route capacity performance in 2025.

A local incentive target was set at 0.06 min/flight, for all causes of delay, and an actual value of 0.01 mins/flight was achieved.

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

NoteFocus en route performance indicators at ACC level

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: “Regular oversight inspections, monitoring of the capacity. Monitorung of the implementation of the Reg 2010/2150 requirement .”

Annual weighted average of the daily peak throughput

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Regular oversight inspections, monitoring of the capacity. Monitorung of the implementation of the Reg 2010/2150 requirement”

Other en route information

NoteFocus on other en route information

ATCOs in operations

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: “Training processes are strictly following EU2015/340 standards and local regulatons. Allocation between ACC/APP and TWR is perfomed based on actual demand ans staffing situation. The failure rate on the OJT phase is normally 0 due to possibility to re-allocate trainees to the position with less complexity”

 
  • © European Union, 2026