Environment - Netherlands

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • Netherlands registered a KEA performance of 2.84% compared to its local breakdown value of 2.92%. Whilst the local target for FABEC was not achieved, the Netherlands contributed positively towards Union-wide performance.

  • KEP and KES remained stable in comparison with 2024.

  • VFE of the actual trajectory was at 78.5%, which was better than the Union-wide average.

  • The average time in level flight during descent improved marginally and during climb remained stable compared to 2024.

  • Additional taxi-out time was 3.25 min/flight which improved marginally compared to 2024, and additional taxi-in time was 1.87 min/flight which improved compared to 2.17 min/flight in 2024.

  • Additional time in the arrival sequencing and metering area improved marginally from 2.67 min/flight to 2.59 min/flight in 2025.

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

The Netherlands measure the same value of KEA of the previous year (2.84%), and a slight improvement for the KEA considering the effect of the war in Ukraine (2.69% in 2025 vs 2.72% in 2024). These values rank the Netherlands as 14th for KEA and 21st for corrected KEA.

In terms of the overall contribution to the additional distance in the SES area, the value is 1.9% (14th).

Regarding the assessment of the achieved level of actual performance in the environment KPA, the NSA reports: “The Netherlands achieved the KEA target in 2025. The performance slightly improved compared to 2024.”

Regarding the implementation of major operational or structural changes during the calendar year impacting performance in this key performance area, the NSA reports: “In March 2025 PYXIS 2A was implemented, an airspace redesign in the northeast of the Netherlands, northwest of Germany and south of Denmark. The change means a dualisation of two Amsterdam in and outbound routes but more important for this PI is that it is a preparation for the establishment of a cross border military area which will be the best compromise between improving the military mission effectiveness and minimising the impact on civil traffic. The area is planned for 2026.

PYXIS resulted in shorter routes for some city pairs, but longer routes for other city pairs. Hence, the impact on HFE performance is difficult to determine and depends on the traffic demand.”

Regarding progress on the implementation of the measures committed to in the ERNIP, the NSA reports: “[LVNL, MUAC to confirm ERNIP status]”

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: “LVNL: simultaneously with PYXIS a route in the western part of LVNL airspace was made more direct. This direct was already often given in the actual operation, but was formalised so that it can be planned.

Additionally, in RP4 LVNL plans to implement the use of LARA for advanced FUA, making temporary reserved areas available for civil traffic more efficiently, allowing airspace users to make use of more efficient routes.”

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: “LVNL: simultaneously with PYXIS a route in the western part of LVNL airspace was made more direct. This direct was already often given in the actual operation, but was formalised so that it can be planned.

Additionally, in RP4 LVNL plans to implement the use of LARA for advanced FUA, making temporary reserved areas available for civil traffic more efficiently, allowing airspace users to make use of more efficient routes.”

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: “LVNL has hardly any contribution to this PI, as most flights in the cruising phase are above FL245, so outside LVNL's area of responsibility. No specific measures are planned.”

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
Amsterdam 3.25 NA NA NA NA 2.59 NA NA NA NA 1.87 NA NA NA NA

AXOT

Amsterdam Schiphol is the only Dutch airport subject to the monitoring of this indicator.

The additional time in 2025 decreased to 3.25 min/dep, 5% below 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 3.41 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: “No specific measures have been implemented or are planned. Performance very much depends on the runways in use, which depends on the weather conditions. E.g. the higher the share of flights departing from runway 36L, the higher the taxi-out additional time. This is because the absolute taxi-out time for this runway is high, which means that the additional time is relatively large in an absolute sense as well. Moreover, taxi times to this runway may be negatively influenced by the taxi route, as with some runway combinations departures 36L have to taxi around runway 18C/36C to avoid crossing an active runway. The reference time is determined by traffic that can cross the (inactive) runway.”

AXIT

Amsterdam Schiphol is the only Dutch airport subject to the monitoring of this indicator.

The additional time in 2025 was equal to 1.87 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: “No specific measures have been implemented or are planned. Performance very much depends on the runways in use, which depends on the weather conditions. E.g. the higher the share of flights landing on runway 18R, the higher the taxi-in additional time. This is because the absolute taxi-in time for this runway is high, which means that the additional time is relatively large in an absolute sense as well. Moreover, taxi times from this runway may be negatively influenced by the taxi route, as with some runway combinations landings on 18R have to taxi around runway 18C/36C to avoid crossing an active runway. The reference time is determined by traffic that can cross the (inactive) runway.”

ASMA

Amsterdam Schiphol is the only Dutch airport subject to the monitoring of this indicator.

The additional time in 2025 was equal to 2.59 min/arr, very close to 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 2.67 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 specific measures are planned. Performance is significantly driven by usage of parallel runways, for which traffic is lined up further from the runway than for non-parallel approaches, to ensure vertical separation when turning to base leg. The performance during non-parallel approaches determines the reference time. The runway combination itself depends largely on weather conditions and using noise preferent runways as much as possible, as is as such difficult to steer by LVNL.”

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), average times flown level during descent are on average 4.8 seconds per flight lower in the Netherlands. The highest average time flown level during descent happens at Eelde (EHGG) (419.4 seconds per flight), while the lowest happens at Amsterdam (EHAM) (138 seconds per flight).

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: “Detailed monthly monitoring of performance has started for EHAM; the same is in development for the other airports. Based on detailed analyses, measures to improve performance will be developed. These will focus on reducing the time in level flight, not specifically the share of CDOs.”

Vertical flight efficiency of the climb

Compared to the overall RP4 average value (34.8 seconds per flight), average times flown level during climb are on average 5.6 seconds per flight lower in the Netherlands. The highest average time flown level during climb happens at Eelde (EHGG) (110.9 seconds per flight), while the lowest happens at Amsterdam (EHAM) (26 seconds per flight).

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: “Detailed monthly monitoring of performance has started for EHAM; the same is planned to be implemented for the other airports in 2025. Based on detailed analyses, measures to improve performance will be developed, but possibilities are limited, given the already good performance.”

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
Amsterdam 26.0 NA NA NA NA 138.0 NA NA NA NA
Beek 60.0 NA NA NA NA 305.7 NA NA NA NA
Eelde 110.9 NA NA NA NA 419.4 NA NA NA NA
Rotterdam 69.6 NA NA NA NA 170.9 NA NA NA NA

Civil-Military dimension

Effective use of reserved or segregated local airspace

NETHERLANDS reports a ratio of 94.82%

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 FABEC the data was retrieved from: https://www.sesperformance.eu/dataportal/data/. The guidane material states that the data for PI #9, #10, and #11 should be provided by the Network Manager. However, the data is not complete, only the ratios are provided by NM and on a state level (not on the ACC level). Therefore, the data is only provided at a state level (ratios only).”

Rate of planning via available airspace structures

NETHERLANDS reports that: - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 20.24% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of planning via available airspace structures is 37.90% (via available conditional routes – CDR)

Rate of using available airspace structures

NETHERLANDS reports that: - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 27,43% (via available restricted and segregated airspaces) - The ratio of the use of the available airspace structures is 62.70% (via available conditional routes – CDR)