Cost Index 737 in your Company.

[abenk1984]

Hei,
would you share..
-cost index in your company=...
-company=... (optional)

[brasmelzuit]

depends on the weather and load, we use between 28 to 33 for 733/4/5.

[fivegreenlight]

We generally use 9 :{:{

[ab33t]

Around the 15 mark

[Deaf Tortoise]

Whatever the flight planning software tells us to use for the sector.

Generally 6 or 7.

[BOAC]

abenk - as far as I know, CI is company specific so knowing what the number is will not tlel you much - one man's 28 may be another man's 12.

[vinayak]

we use 7 cost index

[framer]

...........................25.................

[HHI OPS]

We have 22

[olivermbs]

afaik BA(-400/500) harden cost index 0 speeds on the PERF climb page, then set CI 28 for a smooth CLB->CRZ thrust transition.

[arba]

CI 35

733, low cost carrier
middle east

[belowMDA]

733 We used to run CI 35, and 20 for long range ETOPS flights. Unfortunately because we now have to accommodate the lowest common denominator with competitors, we now fly 28 to give a 280kt descent speed on indicated. I much preferred 35 as it gave 293kts and seemed a bit more stable in speed.

[PK-KAR]

CI30 now CI20... "Best LCC in the world" (at least has one of the best paychecks in the country)

[tulswa]

Previously 28 in Classics and 36 in NGs (280 descent). Now CI 20 for both (266/261).

[737ngpilot]

our cost index depends on airplane and mission, in other words our index is variable never fixed

[hawk37]

BOAC wrote:

"one man's 28 may be another man's 12."

Does this mean these 2 aircraft would be flying the same speed profile?

Hawk

[BOAC]

I assume so - it may have changed, but CI used to be based on company assessed costs and I believe the FMC 'reacted' to the CI in a chosen way - it is after all just a number and depending on what factors the FMC has to run the index, speeds for a given number could vary. It may well be that nowadays the Boeing FMC has just one fixed scale - I don't know, but the other factor which renders the information abenk requests of little value is that any particular company will have different reasons for choosing a particular speed profile - eg maintenance v fuel weighting/wages etc, so unless abenks company has the same 'running costs' it is of little interest for Company A what Company B does. I guess all airlines now operate to a lower CI than they did.

As 737ng said, in a well-run airline CI should reflect the sectors involved and be provided to crews for that sector, but some companies just have a fixed CI which is a fairly blunt instrument.

[Nightrider]

Hawk, this is theoretically possible. There are companies which never change the basic parameters in the FMC, others do this on a monthly basis with the latest analyses from the fleet.

There are plenty of factors which all feed in to the system and calculate the individual parameters, using an optimization tool will provide a cost index which is not (!) reflecting the present optimum, but the one based on the last calculation data.

Worked for a company which was very particular about the CI, however, as per directive of the DO, during climb and descend we used a fixed speed setting.....makes the whole game a farce.

Presently using 34 for all classic flights and in during all stages.

[abenk1984]

ok, I see some of your company CI, but does higher cost index has relation with aircraft performance for on time arrival?

[BOAC]

abenk - I do not understand the question! Higher CI = fly faster = get there quicker. If the scheduled time is less than the 'normal' actual time required you will be 'normally' be late. Company choice then to increase CI for that sector or just accept late arrival.

When you have a tailwind or the resulting arrival is too early for airfield slot for whatever reason, then you can reduce CI. Is that what you ask?

[inducedrag]

In our airline we use 30

[Haroon]

Same here 30 for 737-300

[arba]

When you have a tailwind or the resulting arrival is too early for airfield slot for whatever reason, then you can reduce CI. Is that what you ask?

the RTA page is more likely to be used in this case , no?

[DouglasFlyer]

Here's what Boeing says:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_2_07/AERO_Q207_article5.pdf

[BOAC]

the RTA page is more likely to be used in this case , no? - if you wish. Personal choice as always. I was merely trying to work out what the poster wanted in terms of CI.

Personally I have always just flown the a/c like wot we done before FMCs and not messed with RTA much, nor CI.

Good find, Douglas - on a quick look there is in fact a suggestion that the CI scale for an a/c type is fixed and it would appear that a given CI on a given type would produce the same speeds. However, as I stated earlier and abenk will see, the actual CI used its totally AIRLINE dependent and of little use to another operator (except in knowing who is going to delay you.:))

[DouglasFlyer]

the actual CI used its totally AIRLINE dependent and of little use to another operator

That's exactly what Boeing says:

CI is defined as time cost (~ $/hr) divided by Fuel cost (~ cents/lb)

Both are not fixed values but variable costs which means that they must be individual to different airlines as the CI must/should be...