Annual Monitoring Report 2025 - Poland
Contextual information
National performance plan adopted following Commission Decision (EU) 2025/1051 of 19 May 2025
List of ACCs 1
Warsaw ACC
No of airports in the scope of the performance plan
≥80’K 1
<80’K 14
Exchange rate (1 EUR=)
2022: 4.67989 PLN
2025: 4.23444 PLN
Share of Union-wide traffic (TSUs) 2025 2.8%
Share of Union-wide en route costs 2025 3.2%
Share en route / terminal costs 2025 79% / 21%
En route charging zone(s)
Poland
Terminal charging zone(s)
Poland Zone 1
Poland Zone 2
Main ANSP
• PANSA
Other ANSPs
• Warmia i Mazury sp. z o.o.
• Port Lotniczy Bydgoszcz S.A.
MET Providers
• IMWM
• Airport Meteo Sp. z o.o.
• Warmia i Mazury sp. z o.o.
• Port Lotniczy Bydgoszcz S.A.
Traffic (En route traffic zone)
Poland recorded 800K actual IFR movements in 2025, +5.5% compared to 2024 (758K).
Actual 2025 IFR movements were +2.2% above the plan (783K).
Actual 2025 IFR movements were -12.4% below the actual 2019 level (912K).
Poland recorded 3,953K actual service units in 2025, +3.4% compared to 2024 (3,824K).
Actual 2025 service units were -2.7% below the plan (4,065K).
Actual 2025 service units are -20.5% below the actual 2019 level (4,972K).
Safety (Main ANSP)
In 2025, PANSA achieved the planned maturity levels set out in its performance plan for all five components of the EoSM.
In 2025, Port Lotniczy Bydgoszcz S.A. met the planned maturity levels set out in its performance plan for all five components of the EoSM.
In 2025, Warmia i Mazury Sp. z o.o. met the planned maturity levels set out in its performance plan for all five components of the EoSM. In Safety Promotion, the organisation exceeded their planned level.
The rate of runway incursions (RI) was 1.70 and equal to the RIs with ANS contribution, with the former indicator below the Union-wide average while the latter above. The rate of RIs has decreased compared to 2024 at both levels.
The rate of separation minima infringements (SMIs) at State level was 2.09, and equal to the rate of SMIs at ANSP level. Both indicators were below the Union-wide average and both indicators have decreased significantly compared to 2024.
Environment (Member State)
Poland registered a KEA performance of 4.71% compared to its target of 4.51% and contributed negatively towards achieving the Union-wide target. The NSA states that the main reason for not meeting the target is due to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, an increase in drone and balloon incursions in Polish airspace, weather and airspace users' decisions.
KEP deteriorated and KES deteriorated marginally in comparison with 2024, and the levels are still significantly worse compared to previous years.
VFE of the actual trajectory was at 74.75%, which was worse than the average Union-wide performance.
The average time in level flight during descent deteriorated and during climb improved compared to 2024.
Additional taxi-out time was 3.15 min/flight which deteriorated marginally compared to 3.0 min/flight in 2024, and additional taxi-in time was 1.36 min/flight which also deteriorated marginally compared to 1.30 min/flight in 2024.
Additional time in the arrival sequencing and metering area deteriorated marginally to 2.98 min/flight.
Capacity (Member State)
Poland registered 0.17 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2025, which remained 0.17 after the post-ops adjustment process, thus achieving the local target value of 0.24. Delays in Poland decreased by -0.06 minutes per flight year-on-year.
Delays were highest in July, driven by a combination of weather and other non-ATC causes as well as ATC capacity and staffing.
The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in Poland decreased by -3 percentage points compared to 2024.
The number of ATCOs in OPS was 179 being below the 2025 plan in Warsaw ACC by -5 FTE.
The yearly total of sector opening hours in Warsaw ACC was 28,447, showing a -20% decrease compared to 2024.
Warsaw ACC registered 23.47 IFR movements per sector opening hour in 2025. This is +29% above the ratio recorded in 2024.
Poland registered an average airport arrival ATFM delay of 0.48 minutes per flight in 2025, thus not achieving the local target of 0.06 minutes. Compared to 2024, average arrival ATFM delays in Poland were -0.01 minutes per flight lower in 2025.
The main drivers of delays were other non-ATC causes, accounting for 0.23 of the total delays, and weather, responsible for 0.22.
Cost-efficiency (En route/Terminal charging zone(s))
The en route 2025 actual unit cost of Poland was 57.41€2022, +5.0% higher than the determined unit cost (54.69€2022). The terminal zone 1 2025 actual unit cost was 117.35€2022, -9.6% lower than the determined unit cost (129.78€2022), while the terminal zone 2 2025 actual unit cost was 226.69€2022, -6.9% lower than the determined unit cost (243.57€2022).
The en route 2025 actual service units (4.0M) were -2.7% lower than the determined service units (4.1M).
The en route 2025 actual total costs were +4.6M€2022 (+2.1%) higher than determined. This is mainly due to higher staff costs for PANSA (+8.2M€2022, or +6.5%), partially compensated by lower other operating costs than planned (-3.7M€2022, or -11.5%). The NSA explained that the increase in staff costs is mainly caused by higher provisions than forecasted, while the decrease in other operating costs is mainly due to lower energy and repair services costs.
PANSA spent 49.6M€2022 in 2025 related to costs of investments for both en route and terminal charging zones, +0.8% more than determined (49.2M€2022). The NSA explained that this difference reflects the actual evolution of the useful life and value of assets.
The en route actual unit cost incurred by users in 2025 was 67.51€ (-4.2% below the 2025 DUC). The terminal actual unit cost incurred by users was 153.02€ (-10.1% below the 2025 DUC) for the terminal zone 1, and 296.95€ (-6.4% below the 2025 DUC) for the terminal zone 2. The difference between the AUCU and the DUC for the en route charging zone is mainly driven by other revenues. The difference between the AUCU and the DUC for the terminal charging zone 1 is mainly driven by the adjustment for traffic risk sharing and by the adjustment for inflation for the terminal charging zone 2.