Search

Notices
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines

FDX Flight Plans

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-25-2007 | 04:57 PM
  #11  
MD11Fr8Dog's Avatar
...Whatever It Is!
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Gooch121
And since the GOC Specialist (oh if we go Flag, do we get to call them dispatchers) ain't going for the ride either...
He may not being going for the ride, but if they actually become dispatchers, don't their tickets now become at risk?
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 05:25 PM
  #12  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by CaptainMark
Get ready..it's coming...GOC has new software which will be putting our aircraft as high as possible...MEM-OKC at FL400...my intel says we have a few pilots who think they can save the company money by uncapping the altitudes in the current system...(same guys who thought up the 290 descent)also we will be a Flag Carrier very soon...no alternates...fuel costs are now a top priority...expect less gas and higher altitudes as early as next month...the email from air-ops eludes to this as well...
The "Optimum Altitude" displayed (INIT or PERF page) when using Cost Index Zero is the most fuel efficient Max Range Cruise altitude. The FMC has the same performance tables built into it that the flight planning computer has, but the FMC also has current (real time) AND forecast winds and temps (assuming you enter them). Therefore, the FMC will be more accurate for optimum altitudes than the flight plan; that was probably calculated at least two hours before the flight. If FedEx really wants to save money, they need to let the FMC have the final "say" in calculating optimum altitudes.... not the flight planning system. That being said, I rarely see an "optimum altitude" that is FL 400 or higher (you would have to be really light). Because of this, I doubt that even the flight planning system will come up with cruise altitudes that high. In any case, you always have the "Max Flight Level" (INIT or PERF page) to reference. Depending on your airline's selection, the MAXFL will either be 1.2g or 1.3g buffet margin (UPS selected 1.2g, which IMHO was not really a good decision). Stay comfortably below the MAXFL, and you will be OK.
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 06:25 PM
  #13  
CaptainMark's Avatar
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
From: FDX A300 CPT
Default

that is understood...just relaying some info...cost indexes will also be changing...there will be a learning curve..
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 06:36 PM
  #14  
Fr8 Pup's Avatar
On Reserve
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Nugget
Default

As a flag carrier, an alternate is only needed if 1 hr before ETA or 1 hr after ETA wx is < 2000/3. The 1.2.3 rule.
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 06:44 PM
  #15  
Check 6's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
From: 777
Default

Ok.

I can handle the age 60 thing. I can even handle getting srewed by the S/O back to Capt thing.....

But nobody is going to touch my damn Scooby Snacks....

My kids need to eat..
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 07:37 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,717
Likes: 0
From: Retired
Default

Originally Posted by CaptainMark
that is understood...just relaying some info...cost indexes will also be changing...there will be a learning curve..
So I guess that good old Bill McKelvy was right all along. He changed the cost index so many times, the company finally published that FCIF telling us to leave the damn thing alone. The understanding was always it was a balance between time vs. fuel. With the cost of fuel these days, maybe the company is planning on shorter hub turns or earlier departures and arrivals, in order to both save fuel and at the same time, make delivery. Should be an interesting balancing act, but I just can't envision flight plans much above FL 370, as the high and low speed margins get real close together, way up there.
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 09:21 PM
  #17  
ABK MAN's Avatar
time and initals
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
From: dispatcher
Default

but those guys have dispatch licenses, right??? why are they not dispatchers? If one has to divert because of low fuel, won't that cost more money than havin a little extra go juice and the freight making it?
Reply
Old 05-25-2007 | 09:58 PM
  #18  
HazCan's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 954
Likes: 0
From: headbanging
Default

Originally Posted by ABK MAN
but those guys have dispatch licenses, right??? why are they not dispatchers? If one has to divert because of low fuel, won't that cost more money than havin a little extra go juice and the freight making it?
I contend that if someone would just sack up and divert to NQA, this problem would be solved!

Last edited by HazCan; 05-25-2007 at 09:58 PM. Reason: too many beers, trouble typing
Reply
Old 05-26-2007 | 01:12 AM
  #19  
FLMD11CAPT's Avatar
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
From: MD-11, F/O
Default

Originally Posted by Jetjok
So I guess that good old Bill McKelvy was right all along. He changed the cost index so many times, the company finally published that FCIF telling us to leave the damn thing alone. The understanding was always it was a balance between time vs. fuel. With the cost of fuel these days, maybe the company is planning on shorter hub turns or earlier departures and arrivals, in order to both save fuel and at the same time, make delivery. Should be an interesting balancing act, but I just can't envision flight plans much above FL 370, as the high and low speed margins get real close together, way up there.

Yeah.......the same Mckelvy who thought he could whip out his leatherman tool and do maintenace on the A/C, by himself, no documentation, no license.
Reply
Old 05-26-2007 | 04:40 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,253
Likes: 0
Default

There is a little project going to upload current winds via datalink directly into the FMS.....
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
maximilian2
Foreign
26
06-12-2015 04:31 AM
Longbow64
Part 135
117
07-23-2009 08:46 AM
JetJock16
Regional
92
04-04-2007 06:59 AM
angry tanker
Cargo
91
03-08-2007 08:56 AM
GotheriK
Hangar Talk
31
11-27-2006 12:37 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices