A friend of mine who is a 67 pilot told me that the rule of thumb is 5500kgs per engine per hour (11,000KG/hr)

With all due respect, I think there must be some miscommunication between you and your friend about the fuel consumption of a 767. �As was pointed out, at that rate the 767 would have an endurance of about 7 hours. �Perhaps it was pounds, not kilograms? �Anyway, what I am getting is closer to the Captain Sim documentation, wherever they get their numbers from.

In all honesty, it would be nice for them to pop into these discussions once in awhile. �Not everything is a ticket item and they have more information than I do.

At any rate, 133,000 lbs is what the fuel planner recommended with a 50 kt tailwind. �Is landing with 20,000 lbs good? �258,000 lbs is well below the maximum landing weight.

My last flight I loaded 111,000 lbs of fuel. �I arrived with about 3000 lbs. �That is figuring FSX estimate + 30% + 5000. �Basically, that cut it closer. �35% would be better, maybe more.

Since Captain Sim refers users to the FSX fuel planner, I am trying to come up with a formula that uses that, rather than an external program. �FSX estimate as is is a suicide mission, not a flight. �I am trying to keep it as simple as possible for people who just get the airplane and want a reasonable fuel figure for trip planning. �So I am working it out by trial and error. ��I'll probably come a lot closer to the Fuel Planner numbers by the time I'm done.

I did think the picture was funny, considering a 5000+ nm trip came down to a matter of feet clearing the runway. �Not funny in real life, obviously.

Yeah, I agree that that is the realistic way to do it. �But the problem is, we have no way under the Captain Sim scheme to arrive at trip fuel, since we are told to use FSX in lieu of a fuel planner with ACE. �So I am trying to work within these limits. �Without an accurate trip fuel calculation, figuring how many pounds you're going to burn with 20 minutes on the APU or something seems like a waste of time to me. �I would rather have a safe, reasonable estimate. �I think I can probably do that off the FSX value.

My mistake - for generalized planning you can bank on 5500KG/hr total fuel burn.  Side note - I was in an actual 767 simulator today, and I must say the CS767 is almost spot on to the real machine with the exception of some very minor variances.  I do look forward to speed tape on the next release (if it indeed comes)!

Yes, you don't want to waste money hauling around a bunch of extra weight with fuel costs high.

On the other hand, you don't want to have to make that "minimum fuel" call, or worse, not arrive at your destination!  In 1989 there was a tragic incident where an Avianca 707 had to hold for over an hour, missed the first approach at KJFK and crashed after losing power to all four engines due to fuel exhaustion while trying to return to the airport.

I don't know how many of us fly in an environment where we experience holds, unpredicted headwinds, etc. so we can often afford to be casual about our fuel planning, especially since we're not paying for it.  But I enjoy trying to make things fairly realistic, while yet keeping them as simple as possible.

Ideally, I suppose you would want to land with your legal minimum.  But if you don't have to hold, or there is a better tailwind than expected, you will be well over that if you have planned properly.

I have been using a cost index of 50 since there are good tailwinds going east across the Atlantic and I can get away with something low.  The 767-300 goes up to 9999.  I have not yet determined what practical effect changing the cost index makes.  It will be nice when the "insufficient fuel" message bug is straightened out.

I am uncertain to what extent real world CIs translate to FSX for this airplane due to vagaries of FSX weather, etc.  I don't think you could go wrong with 100.  This is a good area for frequent 767 drivers to put our findings together and come up with these answers.