I have PSS 767 and 767 PIC and dreamfleet 737.... the FMS asks you to enter the cost index. What would you say is average? I want to be realistic here. I have been entering 45 but I dont know if that is far off or not. I know it varies but what would you say is a good estimate?

Hi,I saw a similar post on the PSS forum this morning. The UPS VA part is missing in this one. My guess is that each airline has its own way of suggesting Cost Indexes. As mentioned earlier you seem to be flying UPS so you want to adhere to their settings. I am sure that if you post this request for a third time in the flight plan forum there will be a UPS pilot giving you the correct settings. Or alternatively search for all posts relating to UPS and/or cost index.Michael

I think you mean PSS 777 or 747 - no 767 in the PSS camp as far as I'm aware. Anyway, the default cost index for 767 PIC is 80. Any variation is user company policy.

We use 90

Yes, I did post it earlier... and the reply wouldn't show up so I had to post it hear. Now I see the reply to my previous post on the other forum, must have been something with the server because I had a friend check it and same thing happened to him. I'm sorry you seem so upset that I posted on more than one forum... the topic replies to both my 767 PIC and PSS 747 so I figured try both forums to get best results. Thanks for the replies.

Bill,Who is we?

I was not upset, I merely tried to guide you to the flight plan forum where UPS flight plans have been published. Their author may have interesting clues for the cost index of UPS.Michael

We is I. Slip of the thought as we/I learnt 90 from Murf. He informed me that this was what an airline used so we use is.

There was a substantial thread on this topic.We use 150000000 here - go 76 go!DS CVA3339 / UKD149http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg

Well I don't know if you wanted real world settings or not?Here's a glossary:CI is the acronym for cost index... it may look like CL (but a lowercase L since the site uses a sans serif font).ECON is for minimum cost operationsSL1 is somewhere around two-thirds of the ECON for even better fuel economy when tailwinds or time-ahead-of-schedule allowsOT1 is used for headwinds or when behind scheduleMNF and MRG values are usually 0 for min fuel or max rangeSo...Delta uses a cost index value of 113 on their -300ER'sOr here is the entire scale for their 767 range:Aircraft..........ECON...SL1..OT1 B-767-200.........81......54.....243B-767-300.........94......63.....377B-767-300ER....113.....75.....377B-767-400ER....107.....71.....---BA uses a 40 for all of their flights! Low but what the hell...Qantas uses a Cost Index 125 for domestic flights anda Cost Index 20-80 for most International plansAnd for 737's:Southwest:300/500 is set at 28 and the 700 at 36And BA B744's use up to 90...Hope that wasn't too messy, but that is REAL WORLD info...!Boaz...

On my last pond hop in a B763, (ACA869, Jan 2, 2003)...the CI was 70 yet we departed behind schedule. Our cruise speed was 'selected' at Mach .82 to make up for lost time. The FO informed me that instead of using Cost Index calcualtion / % to increase the cruise speed, they left it at 70 and used the FMC/VNAV/CRZ page and punched in Mach .82. This allows the FMC to figure out the descent portion of the flight at CI 70 yet have a VNAV-CRZ of Mach .82. Alternatively, SPD intervention on the MCP could have been used, but I suppose the rule of thumb is...if the FMC-VNAV is controlling, then any alterations should be made in the FMC (VNAV-CRZ page in this case), not on the MCP. To get back to ECON (CI calc'd) speed, a simple deletion of the manually enetered Mach 'SEL SPD' on the VNAV-CRZ page would do it.Useless info FYI.Rob.Have you hugged your PIC767 today?

Well, AC843 today B767-200 CGDSS used cost index of 300 to acieve speed of M0.82 due being behind sched.To get M0.82 in PIC you need to enter about 1700.DS uses the highest CI ever. This is because of excessive fuel burn in the PIC merged Voyager that he commands.

I hear the Voyager can use a CI as high as 10 million....but Daryl's goes up to 11.Interesting they would use CI 300 rather than just over ride the CRZ SPD in flight...I guess the difference in this case is that the flight planning was done when the flight was already behind schedule...whereas in my example, the flight plan was already done, we were delayed at the gate after the doors closed.Anywho, grrreat stuff this CI buisness.

AC usually put the CI in the remarks section of the flighplan on the first page. By planning the whole route at M0.82 they also take into account any extra fuel that they would need for this in the flightplan.

>AC usually put the CI in the remarks section of the flighplan>on the first page. By planning the whole route at M0.82 they>also take into account any extra fuel that they would need for>this in the flightplan.This is done primarily for Total Mission Management (TMM) and key connector flights. They also may compute a cost index of 200 but increase or decrease accordingly due to schedule or better arrival.