SWA mostly uses 28 I think. Unlike others, theirs does seem to change. Anything over 99 is worthless when it comes to any savings (as told by a real NG pilot). Anywhere from 25-35 seems to be the norm on the ones I have looked into. [h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | WD SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 |

Thanks for the link John.. are you a member?Cheers,Ryan

Can the team at least give us a CI range?I seem to remember someone (Randy?) posting a CI of 350 as an average figure yet posts here are talking of 25!I think the only time I have used a CI was in the old PSS 747/777 and I think on the 767PIC, where it was mentioned that the top 'value' was 100 so you could easily equate it to percentages.If the range is given in the manual then I apologise for not RTFM (read the FULL manual :-) )

In all my VA flights, I have kept records of fuel burn, distance and the CI. The fuel consumption is affected quite a lot by the CI, suffice to say that on short haul, a higher factor seems better and on long haul a lower figure improves the consumption.I have the A320Pro video, the cost index of 23% for the featured flight is described as "typical" for that arline.Basically, 25 will cruise the a/c at around 280kias and 50 will shove it up to 300.

Yes I am Ryan :)

350??? I would like to have seen that post.[h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | WD SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 |

A320Pro video, the cost index of 23% for the featured flight is described as "typical"that may be true, but we do not know the full range that they have available, do we? Some go 100, 500, 700 up to a 1000. So, with the understanding that the PMDG NG is 1-500 (even though the manual is mistated) - where does that leave us?Can a real NG driver step up here on this issue? I will try my contacts at Alaska airlines.

Morning Guys,Sorry but can I just confirm that 1 = most economy and a slow ish flight 100 = less economy and fast ish flight?

Hi Kimberly,A cost index of 0 provides the best fuel economy (it results in max range cruise speed). Higher cost index values result in higher speeds and higher fuel burns. Whether that means "less economy" depends on the relationship between the time-related costs and the fuel-related costs. If all you're worried about are the fuel-related costs, then yes, higher cost index values result in less economy.Don S.

>> 350??? I would like to have seen that post.>>>[h4]Best Wishes,>Randy J. Smith>http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpg>>AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA>@535/1000 | WD SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 |The reaason for the question mark Randy was because I wasn't sure if it was you who posted that figure.I have just checked and it is in fact in the FMC manual, page 8-12."...the aircraft reaches its Min Cost Curve at a different figure, generally about 350 cost index points greater" (The reference was a CI of 00).So I guess we can work on a CI of 350 in genral for the PMDG 737.I also see I had not RTFM :-) as it states the CI range, 0-1000 as someone else has pointed out.RgdsDave

British Airways uses a CI of around 45 on the 777-200ER, & a CI of around 52 on the 737-400. they don't operate the 737NG, but a value below 60 seems to be common for all airlines operating the 737NG.the important thing to note is that CI varies, according to the price of the tickets, number of passengers, cargo loads & cost of shipping, baggage load, TO/landing slot times required to meet & therefore weather etc...CI is calculated for the pilot between time of checkin of passengers & departure (& when passengers are late, airlines have to guess baggage loads etc, so thats one reason why they like you to be early!).its all fed into a big computer & the data sheets with CI & everything else are given to the pilot by the ground crew in time for his pre-flight checks.Each airline uses slight different calculations & hence uses slightly different values to achieve their requirements (which are of course different) & these may well change from flight to flight, but will be within a given range of values, based on the airlines' calculation system.having studied the 737NG systems for my Commercial pilots licence (haven't quite got it yet though...), i have a few pages (about 50 lol!) explaining cost index & some of the very basic calculations (a computer is required to do the calculations, otherwise it would take hours).i mainly fly the 737-700 combi version (C-40A for the Navy, http://www.vusn.org) & my calculations come up with 400 for the Navy, but then they are a non-profit organisation & just want to get the good delivered asap. means i can fly my PMDG around faster than you other guys! :(

At Continental we use:B737-300, -500 : 48B737-700, -800, -900 : 68

PMDG staff:I replied to this thread about cost index modelling.Why is that message no longer in this thread ?Tero

bump.Tero

I think easyJet use a CI of 55 on all 73G flights.