Has anyone else noticed that version 1.2 seems to have a lot less range than the 1.0 or 1.1. The differance seems to be in the way the new FMC gauge calculates fuel usage. If you replace the FMC gauge with one of the older versions,it'll allow for a longer flight without the"insufficiant fuel" notice,but you'll lose the built in weather radar. Boeing's website shows a maximum range of 5990 nmi. With version 1.2,you won't even get close to that.

i don't know if the cost index is modeled but u can try a CI of around 50 or so. i believe the less the cost index, the greater the economy and thus the range. ppl will correct me if i'm wrong

I tried doing a 4900nm flight from YMML to PHNL in the Qantas 767 using a CI of 20 and received the "insufficient fuel" warning. I lowered the CI to 0 and was still getting the warning. I chose not to do the flight because I didn't want to run out of fuel after a 10 - 11 hour flight seeing as the FMC was showing that this would occur between CHEEM and CARRP just as I would be getting ready to start the OPACA4.CARRP STAR. That made the range to be about 4700nm.�

I never tried a really long distant flight like that with v1.0 or v1.1.

I'm aware of the winds aloft issue. The 767 version 1.2 seems to have far less range than the 1.1 or the 1.0 versions. When I put in a flight from Frankfurt to Los Angeles with 1.2,the FMC calculated insufficiant fuel well before reaching LA. This is a 5476 nmi flight with no passengers or cargo. When I reinstalled 1.1,the same flight was calculated to have fuel to spare. A 5476 nmi flight that is listed on Boeings website as a typical city pair,isn't possible with version 1.2. At least that's what the FMC is indicating. Have you tried any long flights in the 5000 nmi range or greater? If I swap out the FMC gauge from the 1.1 or the 1.0 into the 1.2,I get better fuel calculations but I lose the weather radar which seems to be coded into the 1.2 FMC gauge.

I am nearing the end of an Atlanta to Moscow flight. �Although the FMC was reporting insufficient fuel at the beginning, now it is saying I will have plenty.

My recommendation is to plan wisely, ignore the FMC and just find out if you run out of gas or not. �It is a sim. �I am using the freeware 767-300 planner originally put out for the other 767 and it works fine.

EDIT: landed with 33,600 lbs of fuel left (16,800 kg), which is too much; I should have stuck to the recommendations of the fuel planning program. �I had wing tanks full, 75% in the center. �I don't think this bird has short legs at all. �That was right at 5000 nm.

Actually the whole flight was flawless, and she was rock steady during cruise and on final. �Very, very well done Captain Sim! �This is a delightful airplane and as good as any as I have ever seen if she keeps giving me flights like this.

Sure, buddy. 

http://www.nofuel.thatssailing.com/flightsimulator/fuelplannerb763/default.asp

I used the first one; I think the second is if you lack some Microsoft program or something.  Works fine.

Yeah Tim.

Thanks for that. It'll help me better plan my flights.

Mark

I had a similar experience to you cantland.

I flew from Melbourne Intl (YMML) - Honolulu Intl (PHNL) a range of 4850nm. As I stated before, I had insufficient fuel. I'm not exactly sure how much fuel was remaining by the time I landed, but it was about 30%. By the time I was at the half way mark, I knew I was going to get there easily.

Autoland worked perfectly for me too. A pleasant flight was had by all.

It also appears to me to be a FMC problem. �

Mark