Flight is BAL809A in a 767-300ER. Has anyone got a flightplan for this flight? EGCC-TBPB?Many thanks in advance :)

Here is one:N0487F320 WAL UB3 PENIL UL70 BAGSO UV14 SHA UN525 DINIM/M082F340 DCT 48N020W 43N030W 35N040W/M082F350 25N050W DCT BGI DCTNot sure about the final altitude and MACH speed. Maybe Tocartcan correct it if it is not valid.Have a nice flight...Ciao,FlyerNL

IS this for a 767-300ER. It's just that it says M082 and I have to have either a cost index of 900 or SEL SPD, which burns way too much fuel! lol. Just confirm this is for 767-300ER? Many many thanks otherwise for the flight plan :)

Hi,Yes, it could be M082. Depend on what the airline want... But if you prefer M080 it is no problem, just takes longer to get there.:-)Ciao,FlyerNL

Ahh I see. Is the one you have obtained from Britannia for 767? Or could it be another airline operating at a slightly less efficient fuel burn rate?

Like most British charter airlines, BAL use 0.80 with their 763s in the cruise to save fuel. Lots of scheduled carriers in Europe use 0.82 though, including Atlantic Crossings. BA uses 0.80 as well though I understand.

>>>>>BA uses 0.80 as well though I understand.BA use 0.78, occasionally 0.79 :-)

Thats what I thought EGCC. On all NAT coroutes that I have for Britannia, they use M080. I don't know of any airline that operate there 767's at M082. Anyone know?

Air Canada for One.Under a scheme known as TMM - Total Mission Management, time critical flights can have the oceanic portion of the flight flown at M0.82.Will explain more later.Mark

THE TMM Concept.To make up time on commercially important flights.Eg, the headwinds over the westbound NAT tracks are expected to be particularly strong, resulting in an increased flight time.By flying the oceanic sector at M0.82, the max. cruise speed of the 767, the company can hope to cut down on some of this lost time.Also, as you now have a higher ground speed, and the flight time is less you should burn LESS or the same as the M0.80 based fuel load.Sounds strange, but it can result in shaving 30mins to 45mins off the flight time.I have yet to see a TMM flightplan for EGPF/CYYZ that took more than the average 39T-41T of fuel that the 767-200 usually takes on the route, the 767-300 has a lesser fuel burn, despite being larger and heavier. OLD P&W JT9's compared with newer GE engines.It also saves the company money - it costs a lot to reroute passengers and freight etc that have busted connections, not to mention the knock on delays caused by the aircraft being late.Hope this helps with some of the reasoning for sometimes flying at M0.82.Mark

LOT fly their 767s @ 0.82 on the NAT crossings, as do (or did?) CityBird (Belgian charter outfit).

Hi, for a MYT A332 N0474F340 WAL UB3 PENIL UL70 BAGSO UV14 DUB/N0477F360 UV14 SHA UN517 GIPER UN516 SOMAX/M081F380 DCT 47N020W 38N030W 28N040W/M081F390 21N050W 18N056W DCTCheers