See, pretty low numbers.

 

No 999 or 9999.

Oh come on, not this again.

Oh come on, not this again.

 

Exactly my thought...

 

 

 

How many times do we have to say "cost index varies by flight?"  I guess I need to say it more:

 

Cost index is a variable factor, adjusted by the flight operator in order to meet the cost requirements of the flight.  Factors for CI adjustments could be any of the following:

• Flight sensitivity to schedule adjustment
• Subsequent flight sensitivity to schedule adjustment (most likely the reason for the above)
• Ground delays that can be made up in the air
• Higher or lower profit margins for the route, based on aircraft type
• Quantity of loyalty program members on the flight
• Presence of perishable/expedited items onboard (e.g. human organs)

When you see the figures that say "[this] is the CI for [this] operator," chances are, you're seeing a default value that the operator has in their SOPs.  That default value is probably only used when the dispatch paperwork omits the value (intentionally or in error), or it is otherwise not provided.

Oh come on, not this again.

Not sure what your problem is, but I was not aware that this has been discussed already and is now categoriized with nono's like WX radar or 2 displays!

 

The whole idea of CI is to achieve an economic flight, taking all factors in consideration (and even high speed can be economic mind you, if connecting flight are granted then), But since all is for free in FSX anyway, one could argue that CI for FSX is pointless!

 

However some just like to simulate everything and would like to know what number they should punsh in.

I think the CI numbers by JamesDinsale are a great help even if they are not spot on for every flight those airlines make.

It is a guideline and I can confirm for at least one airline it is pretty close for many flights.

Use the provided numbers together with my post where I explained how to experiment with CI (see above, post number 9) and you are definately better of than putting 0 or 9999 or nothing in!

I use 100 for my BAW flights as this is what they use.

Well there you go... I've been using 30, thinking I was naughty to use 50.

I use it the same with my flight level.For an example if my cruise altitude is FL330 I set my CI to 33.It is a very good solution for me. :rolleyes:

Thanks for all the specific CI's and input. It seems that flying the 777 to it's full potential (mach 0.84) isn't always the case then. As a desktop pilot it's easy to assume time is the most important factor. I probably will join a VA or get a livery for a airliner that uses higher CI, and be flying closer to 0.84 mach.

 

- Andrew Wold