• 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

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

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

  • Environment
    • PRB monitoring
    • En route performance
      • Flight efficiency
    • Terminal performance
      • AXOT, AXIT & ASMA
      • CDO/CCO
    • CIV-MIL

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

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

Capacity - Portugal

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • Portugal registered 0.28 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2025, which remained 0.28 after the post-ops adjustment process, thus achieving the local target value of 0.30. Delays in Portugal decreased by -0.11 minutes per flight year-on-year.

  • Delays were highest in January to April, mostly driven by ATC capacity, and in November and December due to non-ATC causes.

  • The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in Portugal decreased by -5 percentage points compared to 2024.

  • The number of ATCOs in OPS was 174 being below the 2025 plan in Lisbon ACC by -6 FTE.

  • The yearly total of sector opening hours in Lisbon ACC was 70,152, showing a 2% increase compared to 2024.

  • Lisbon ACC registered 10.06 IFR movements per sector opening hour in 2025 4% above the 2024 level.

  • Portugal registered an average airport arrival ATFM delay of 1.88 minutes per flight in 2025, thus achieving the local target of 2.19 minutes. Compared to 2024, average arrival ATFM delays in Portugal were -0.82 minutes per flight lower higher in 2025.

  • The main drivers of delays were weather, accounting for 1.33 of the total delays, and other non-ATC causes, responsible for 0.47.

En route performance

En route ATFM delay (KPI#1)

NoteFocus on en route ATFM delay

En route ATFM delay

  • Portugal (Continental) had 762k flights in 2025, up from 723k flights in 2024.

  • Nav Portugal applied en route ATFM regulations resulting in 209k minutes of delay, a reduction from the 283k minutes in 2024.

  • As part of the strategic traffic re-orientation programme (S25/NTDM), and the use of RN scenarios during Capacity & Weather Based Operations, both operated by the Network Manager, <1k minutes of delay originating in Portugal were re-attributed to other ANSPs.

  • When the above post-operations re-attribution is factored in, the total en route delay for Nav Portugal in 2025 was 209k minutes in 2025 down from 282k minutes in 2024.

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: “The achieved level of performance for the en-route ATFM delay per flight KPI demonstrates a sustained alignment between capacity provision and traffic demand, with the actual delay remaining below the applicable reference value. This outcome reflects the effectiveness of the capacity planning and ATFCM measures implemented, ensuring that delays were overall contained despite continued traffic growth above the STATFOR forecast.

The main contributors to delays were structural ATC capacity constraints during peak demand periods, which represent the predominant driver of en-route ATFM delay. Additional contributions arose from special events and, to a lesser extent, staffing and weather-related factors. Furthermore, a share of the delay was attributable to exceptional external circumstances, namely a large-scale power outage affecting the Iberian Peninsula, This event had a direct impact on operational continuity and contributed to the overall delay figures. Without this extraordinary occurrence, performance would have been further improved.

Significant operational and structural improvements were implemented in Lisboa ACC to address capacity needs and mitigate delays. These included the progressive optimisation of sector configurations, enabling the availability of additional sectors and increased sector capacity, supported by continuous ATCO recruitment and flexible rostering. In parallel, airspace design enhancements—such as the evolution of the Point Merge System—and the implementation of enhanced ATFCM measures (including STAM and participation in the Network Manager occupancy regulation trial) contributed to improving traffic flow management and overall network performance.

As a result, capacity provided during critical periods, particularly in IATA summer , was generally sufficient to meet actual traffic demand. This confirms that the combination of structural capacity measures and dynamic ATFCM measures has been effective in mitigating delay generation and supporting the achievement of the en-route delay performance target in line with PRB expectations.”

Regarding the description of the adjustments to the capacity plan included in adopted performance plan, the NSA reports: “The adjustments to the capacity plan included in the adopted performance plan were primarily driven by the need to accommodate sustained traffic growth and mitigate the risk of delay generation during peak demand periods. These adjustments focused on reinforcing the alignment between declared capacity and evolving traffic patterns, while ensuring consistency with network-level objectives and coordination with the Network Manager.

A key element of the adjustments was the optimisation of sector configurations within Lisboa ACC, enabling the progressive opening of additional sectors and increasing the capacity of existing ones. This was supported by continued ATCO recruitment and qualification, as well as the application of flexible rostering practices to maximise the availability of operational resources during high-demand periods. These measures allowed for a more dynamic and scalable capacity provision in response to traffic variability.

In parallel, the capacity plan was strengthened through targeted airspace and operational improvements. These included enhancements to airspace design—such as the further development of the Point Merge System—and the implementation of advanced ATFCM measures aimed at improving traffic flow efficiency. In particular, participation in the Network Manager occupancy regulation trial and the systematic use of STAM measures contributed to a more balanced distribution of traffic demand and a reduction of congestion hotspots.”

Regarding follow up of the remedial measures indicated in the previous monitoring report(s), the NSA reports: “The remedial measures agreed with the ANSP in 2024 are being prepared as most of them are supposed to be implemented along RP4. Concerning ATCO recruitment NAV has maintained full training classes each year, with very good approval rates, allowing for the ATCO gap to start to narrow.

As for the split of West and Central sectors, the implementation in Central sector is already in place, and in the West sector it is about to start, missing only radio frequency availability, which is expeced in October.

Finally. the restructuring of airspace is continuing, in a joint effort of NAV and Eurocontrol.”

En route capacity incentive scheme

The Portuguese NSA reports neither a financial penalty, nor financial bonus, for Nav Portugal because of the 2025 performance. The local incentive target for en route ATFM delays, due to CRSTMP causes only, was set at 0.29 mins/flight, with a deadband range between 0.25 – 0.33 mins/flight.

The NSA reports an achieved CRSTMP performance of 0.26 mins/flight, within the deadband range, but does not report how the actual value was verified. [NB The attribution of original delay causes on the ansperformance.eu dashboard is unverified]

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

No comment provided.

Annual weighted average of the daily peak throughput

No comment provided.

Other en route information

NoteFocus on other en route information

ATCOs in operations

As additional comments to ATCOs in the scope of the performance scheme, the NSA reports: “NAV Portugal's efforts in recruiting and training new air traffic controllers have yielded positive results this year, as the initial gap between the actual and planned number of FTEs has been narrowed. It should be noted that the difference in the number of ATCOs in OPS, results mainly from the performance in 2024, when NAV ended the year 5 ATCOs short of expected. In 2025, NAV was only 1 ATCO short of initial estimates.”

“Very similar numbers of air traffic controller movements throughout the year.”

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: “In this section, the total values ​​for NAV Portugal were considered.

While the first two lines refer to ab-initio training, the third line – Number of air traffic controller trainees at the end of the year – reports the on-job-trainees, of which 5 come from the ATC-FI 029 training course and 11 from the ATC-FI 030 training course.”

Terminal performance

Arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)

NoteFocus on arrival ATFM delay

Arrival ATFM delay

Average ATFM arrival delay in Portugal was 1.88 min/arr in 2025, the first year of RP4. The performance has improved compared to 2024, last year of RP3, when there were 2.70 min/arr. This represents a 30% reduction in average.

Both of the main airports in RP4 contributed to this reduction:

  • Lisbon, from 4.20 min/arr to 2.83 min/arr in 2025 thanks to reductions in Aerodrome and ATC Capacity regulations, reached its target of 3.78 min/arr.

  • Porto, from 3.02 min/arr to 2.45 min/arr mostly due to reductions in Weather regulations, although still not meeting its target of 1.57 min/arr.

Except Madeira (0.31 min/arr), other airports had zero or almost zero ATFM arrival delay, including Cascais which improved from 0.92 min/arr to zero.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATFM Arrival delay across Member States in 2025 was 0.97 min/arr.

Regarding the reasons and circumstances resulting in the achieved level of actual performance of the arrival ATFM delay per flight KPI, the NSA reports: “The achieved level of performance for the arrival ATFM delay KPI reflects a combination of effective local and network measures, together with specific operational constraints affecting airport and airspace capacity. Overall, the actual ATFM arrival delay remained below the national reference value (-0,31min/flight) demonstrating a generally effective alignment between traffic demand and available capacity.

The main contributors to arrival ATFM delay were predominantly linked to ATFM regulations associated with weather (W) and aerodrome capacity (G), which together account for the vast majority of delay generation in the terminal environment. The post‑operations analysis clearly indicates that these two causes represent more than 93% of the total arrival ATFM delay, confirming that delay performance is primarily driven by causes outside the control of the ANSP .

Weather-related factors (W) play a particularly significant role in the generation of arrival delays, especially at the main airports. The impact of adverse meteorological conditions—affecting runway configurations, arrival sequencing and spacing—has been a recurring driver of delay, with a particularly strong effect observed in Lisboa, Porto and Madeira.

In parallel, aerodrome capacity constraints (G) constitute the other dominant contributor to arrival ATFM delays. These are associated with structural airport limitations, including runway throughput, stand availability and operational constraints affecting arrival flow management. The data shows that these constraints generate a significant share of the regulated delay, particularly at high‑demand airports such as Lisboa and Porto, where demand peaks frequently require the application of ATFM arrival regulations to maintain safe and orderly operations.

Notwithstanding these constraints, the performance achieved at Lisboa demonstrates a strong level of operational efficiency. Arrival delay per flight remained consistently below the applicable KPI values, reflecting the positive impact of capacity and efficiency improvements, notably the implementation and progressive enhancement of the Point Merge System (PMS), combined with other operational measures to optimise arrival sequencing and traffic handling.”

Regarding follow up of the remedial measures indicated in the previous monitoring report(s), the NSA reports: “Building on measures from previous years, particularly the strengthened collaboration with LPPT, it was possible to identify a source of delays related to airport slot allocation. A more detailed analysis revealed specific traffic peaks, indicating that mitigation actions may include the introduction of a sub-parameter defining a maximum number of slots within a rolling hour. This potential solution is currently under evaluation. This ongoing cooperation continues to support the identification and implementation of targeted improvements in operational performance.”

Terminal capacity incentive scheme

In the first year of RP4, with an ATFM arrival delay of 1.88 min/arr, Portugal achieved the national target of 2.19 min/arr. However, the pivot value for incentives indicated by the Member State, 0.39 min/arr*, is limited to CRSTMP delay causes. As CRSTMP delay of 0.102 min/arr falls beyond the end of the bonus sliding range for the incentive scheme, meaning that the maximum bonus of 1.0% applies. As such, the NSA computes a bonus of EUR 519.77.

*Note that the Performance Plan of the State indicates a higher pivot value of 0.55 min/arr. Nevertheless, given the performance is beyond the end of the bonus sliding range even with a pivot value of 0.39 min/arr, there is no financial impact due to this variation.

Other terminal performance indicators (PI#1-3)

Airport level
Airport name
Avg arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)
Slot adherence (PI#1)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Cascais 0.00 NA NA NA NA 98.0% NA NA NA NA
Faro 0.02 NA NA NA NA 97.0% NA NA NA NA
Horta 0.00 NA NA NA NA 95.2% NA NA NA NA
Lisbon 2.83 NA NA NA NA 97.5% NA NA NA NA
Madeira 0.31 NA NA NA NA 96.9% NA NA NA NA
Ponta Delgada 0.00 NA NA NA NA 90.7% NA NA NA NA
Porto 2.45 NA NA NA NA 96.7% NA NA NA NA
Porto Santo 0.00 NA NA NA NA 96.6% NA NA NA NA
Santa Maria 0.00 NA NA NA NA 88.5% NA NA NA NA
Airport name
ATC pre departure delay (PI#2)
All causes pre departure delay (PI#3)
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Lisbon 5.54 NA NA NA NA 25.52 NA NA NA NA
Porto 0.61 NA NA NA NA 17.86 NA NA NA NA
NoteFocus on other terminal performance indicators

ATFM slot adherence

ATFM slot adherence in 2025 was equal to 97.0%, very close to 2024 value – last year of RP3 – of 97.1%. The three largest airports (Lisbon, Porto, Faro) all had adherence above 96.5%. Santa Maria was the airport with the lowest adherence, 88.5%, still well above the standard target of 80%.

With regard to the 3.0% of flights that did not adhere across the country, 2.4% were early and 0.6% were late.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATFM slot adherence across Member States in 2025 was 96.3%.

As background information on actual performance, the NSA reports: “Overall there was no significative variation.”

ATC pre-departure delay

Lisbon and Porto are the only Portuguese airports subject to the monitoring of this indicator.

In Lisbon, delay in 2025 increased to 5.54 min/dep, 21% higher than 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 4.59 min/dep. This is the highest across all airports monitored in RP4.

In Porto, delay in 2025 decreased to 0.69 min/dep, almost equal to 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 0.61 min/dep.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of ATC pre-departure delay across Member States and for which enough data is available in 2025 was 0.74 min/dep.

All causes pre-departure delay

Lisbon and Porto are the only Portuguese airports subject to the monitoring of this indicator.

In Lisbon, delay in 2025 increased to 25.52 min/dep, 9% higher than 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 23.35 min/dep. This is the highest across all airports monitored in RP4.

In Porto, delay in 2025 decreased to 17.86 min/dep, 11% lower than 2024 value– last year of RP3 – of 20.13 min/dep.

The average for RP4 airports subject to monitoring of all causes pre-departure delay across Member States in 2025 was 16.47 min/dep.

 
  • © European Union, 2026