Mission Index Flying

[Guest Lips]

OK, I admit it, I work in the AMC Fuel Efficiency Office (FEO) and I was responsible for the whole Mission Index Flying (MIF) project. For a little background, I am a reservist flying for a major airline and took the job in FEO to get away from the airline for a bit in January of 2009. Originally I signed on for 9 months, but it lasted 2 yrs and 9 months...it's the military. As a commercial airline pilot I was appalled that the MAF did not use cost index algorithms in our flight planning system or in the aircraft. I was more appalled (and disappointed) when I learned that it would cost about $40-$50 Million dollars to put it into EACH fleet. No way we had the money for that, so I searched industry and found this little company that offered the same technology on a laptop...enter the mission computer. The rest is history...except I went out to the wings and saw that the MIF training that was put into the CBT was horrible and guys weren't getting too excited about the software because the training led them to believe that it was a pain to program and use...sort of like telling a guy he needs to learn (and use) every functionality in Powerpoint to produce a three line slide.

We are starting roadshows to try and fix that, and I wanted to start a topic here to answer questions and dispel any myths that might be working their way through the system (that never happens, right?). Bottom line for now: ignore the MFP tab until you are bored on a long leg and want to play with it. Put in ZFW, FOB, winds and temp dev, get your climb profile, write that down, and put it away until top of climb. Real bottom line: it's new, so I know you are skeptical (and already busy), but it has been used in the airline industry for over 15 years and it really does save fuel (and looking at the next few budget cycles, we really need to save fuel). Try it, then come back here and comment. If you already tried it and don't like it, try it again the simple way, then share your thoughts. Thanks for reading...Lips

[Domo]

Haven't had the chance to use it on a mission (locals are too busy and dynamic to pull out the laptop) but think it will be useful. I was at the roadshow in CHS and your approach was definitely more user friendly than the CBTs. Took the apprehension about the new software out of the picture.

Is this a revival of the FSAS(?) from the 80/90s? I was just talking with my old man today about this, and they called it the 'heads down' display in the C-5.

[Big Bear]

If we want to save fuel, we need to stop flying empty or mostly empty so damned often. I'm sure the software will help safe fuel, but when I burn 60K to fly 2 pallets of ######ing bubblewrap, my motivation to penny pinch goes up in smoke.

[sixpack]

Look, like BigBear said, I'm not going to buy into saving an extra 69# of gas per mission when we are flying empty I would guess at least 25% of the time. I've seen countless times flying from the states to some place in SWA with 18 pallets and 69,000 pounds of stuff, then going back with absolutely nothing when i know there is something within an hour or two that need to get back to the states. And don't get me started with the types of crap that we haul to these locations... last trip I was on we flew at least 12 light carts to this undisclosed location when I can almost guarantee they have more than enough of them there already, but since the ones there aren't for the unit that is deploying then we have to haul them out.

From what i've seen from the MIF software so far is the same that we've been doing before in the C-17. Fly 2-4k below max altitude and M .74... slower if you have a tailwind and faster if you have a headwind.... got it... we had a checklist that told us the exact same thing in the past. We already have enough to do from alert to takeoff that this is just another hinderance.

Instead of this program, we should have hired fedex to teach us to run like their shipping model. I guarantee we would save more fuel that way than this program. Just my .02.

[itsokimapilot]

Look, like BigBear said, I'm not going to buy into saving an extra 69# of gas per mission when we are flying empty I would guess at least 25% of the time. I've seen countless times flying from the states to some place in SWA with 18 pallets and 69,000 pounds of stuff, then going back with absolutely nothing when i know there is something within an hour or two that need to get back to the states. And don't get me started with the types of crap that we haul to these locations... last trip I was on we flew at least 12 light carts to this undisclosed location when I can almost guarantee they have more than enough of them there already, but since the ones there aren't for the unit that is deploying then we have to haul them out.

From what i've seen from the MIF software so far is the same that we've been doing before in the C-17. Fly 2-4k below max altitude and M .74... slower if you have a tailwind and faster if you have a headwind.... got it... we had a checklist that told us the exact same thing in the past. We already have enough to do from alert to takeoff that this is just another hinderance.

Instead of this program, we should have hired fedex to teach us to run like their shipping model. I guarantee we would save more fuel that way than this program. Just my .02.

Shack. Just what I need, another laptop to slap a bandaid on a broken process. Let's see, I now have a CT2, Tactics, JPADS, MIF laptop to keep up with and use inflight. We need logistics to more effectively use our aircraft. I've flown empty from the AOR more times than I care to count. I know that there is a backlog of sh1t that needs to get out of theater. Why are we not hauling that? Aircrews aren't wasting resources. Our logistics folks are.

[Majestik Møøse]

A huge portion of the shit we carry across the Pacific is people's household goods. We might as well be a moving truck. It's pretty ridiculous that sorties are generated to carry couches around. My solution to this and many other problems in the AF: stop PCSing officers every 2-3 years!

[GearMonkey]

I agree with sixpack. . . it's a $10 million computerized version of our previous checklist insert which, in turn, was a graphical version of the 2,000-4,000' below max altitude rule of thumb for peak efficiency (in the C-17 anyway).

The problem is that the more advanced features require a lot of data we don't have access to without becoming pests on the radio (i.e. hey guys, whats the wind and temperature down there?). With better flight management and weather service (Ha!) it could be a helpful tool but for now it is another hassle for my already busy crew.

[ColoradoAviator]

Shack. Just what I need, another laptop to slap a bandaid on a broken process. Let's see, I now have a CT2, Tactics, JPADS, MIF laptop to keep up with and use inflight. We need logistics to more effectively use our aircraft. I've flown empty from the AOR more times than I care to count. I know that there is a backlog of sh1t that needs to get out of theater. Why are we not hauling that? Aircrews aren't wasting resources. Our logistics folks are.

Couldn't have said it better. On my last two trips I was the only crew member trained on PPAS/MIF. We already have a computer in the C-17 that is our primary fuel planning resource - it's called the mission computer (our name for the FMS for those unfamiliar). We can fly all the "Mission Index" we want to save 200# on a leg but when we fly from ETAD direct to the west coast with a cargo of seven Space-As to the tune of 230,000# of gas all motivation to save goes out the window.

This MIF stuff comes on the heals of an update to our 2MDSV3 directing us to save fuel through cutting our preflight APU usage. Every time we try to save 100# we end up screwing ourselves with overheating avionics resulting in late takeoffs.

If you want to save some gas let's fly fewer legs with more cargo!

While we're at it, why can't the FEO get the data currently provided via the AMC Fuel Tracking directly from AOC/ACARS for the C17? The damn thing beams that information directly to mom & dad every time we takeoff and land anyway.

Edited September 8, 2011 by ColoradoAviator

[sky_king]

Instead of this program, we should have hired fedex to teach us to run like their shipping model. I guarantee we would save more fuel that way than this program. Just my .02.

I'll throw a couple more pennies on that for you.

[Guest Lips]

OK, I hear you loud and clear on the fact that our enterprise has some serious issues to deal with. In the three years that FEO has existed, I will tell you that we have identified the same things that irritate all of you, from flying too many empty legs to carrying stuff that ought to be floating on a boat. While you can't see it, we have in fact lowered the number of empty legs we are flying. Not nearly enough, but every bit does make a difference. We are in essence a one way cargo operation - nothing we hope or wish for will change that. More stuff has to go east than will ever have to go west, period. We are, however, trying to educate ourselves on how to make the most out of every sortie we fly. I hope you will be patient while we try - remember that until 3 years ago nobody cared about how much fuel we used and we are a very big organization that will take some time to change (turning the Queen Mary...).

Back to MIF. It is one of over 70 initiatives we are working on in the office, and I know it would be perfect if it were part of the mission computer, but the reality is we can't afford that, so we will have it on the laptop for now. We have our eye on the EFB that hopefully will come out soon and want to place MIF on that, which will make it smaller (ipad) and more accessible. When MIF first started in the airline world it was on three separate booklets, so at least we aren't doing that!

Specifically, I know you used to have a kneeboard card that gave approximations for headwinds/tailwinds - it was created with the help of the MFOQA folks using cruise data. It was a WAG (OK, SWAG), but still not the right solution for true optimization. MIF is a much better solution, and honestly not too much of an intrusion if you use the basic operating features and leave the advanced stuff to the guys who like to play with new toys. I will admit that it becomes fun to look into its capabilities and see what it has to offer. One example is building a route from a point in space (like a holding pattern you are in) to your alternate and knowing exactly how much fuel you have before you have to leave. It opens up options that we never had the tools for before, but will take some effort and exploring to understand.

Keep up the feedback on what sucks in the enterprise, we will keep trying to fix it (one bite at a time of a HUGE apple). Thanks for reading.

Respectfully

Lips

[PirateAF]

Lips,

I applaud your efforts. I will give the MIF software a try on my next mission.

We've all got to do whatever we can do to save fuel (within reason).

The real question is how did you get Johnny Canada to narrate the CBT!?

[Champ Kind]

One example is building a route from a point in space (like a holding pattern you are in) to your alternate and knowing exactly how much fuel you have before you have to leave. It opens up options that we never had the tools for before

And here all this time I thought that fuel planning was part of doing that pilot shit! (although some would argue it's a "Nav thing" in the C-130E/H)

[BQZip01]

I know that there is a backlog of sh1t that needs to get out of theater. Why are we not hauling that? Aircrews aren't wasting resources. Our logistics folks are.

Shacked!

[Chuck Sargent]

Believe me, Lips knows the situation. MIF is not the swing that will connect to produce the walk off HR - it is an RBI along the way, or maybe just a base hit. There is only so much we can do here and now, but it is one of those things that can be changed.

Bottom line - for the cargo dudes, flying empty is our biggest threat. Flying less than full is the next.

For the tankers, launching for no receiver is our biggest threat. Not passing what is scheduled to carry is the next.

Even at a full sprint effort at all levels, it will be years before we will be where we should be (like FedEx, Continental, or NetJets). Those guys know that. You know that. Sigh... That being said, whatever you all can do to help the FEO would be most appreciated.

Final remark - As always, A code has the final say. Take care of your crew and Fly Safe!

Very respectfully,

Chuck

[Karl Hungus]

Bottom line - for the cargo dudes, flying empty is our biggest threat. Flying less than full is the next.

For the tankers, launching for no receiver is our biggest threat. Not passing what is scheduled to carry is the next.

Is this in regards to TACC ops or the AOR? As you know, the biggest problems (and potential savings) are in the AOR. Until we see major changes over there, it's going to be tough to get people on board with the minor stuff.

[addict]

I need the tropopause level in the weather info.

I also detest programming the flight plan into a computer at the flight deck. Why not MIF that by computer beforehand at Scott AFB and just throw it into the IFM package? Or at least put it onto a disk for aircrew to program? To come up with a profile from weather TACC provides on a flight plan TACC provides? What does the pilot do again?

I get it, MIF will help in flight to change a profile with the environment, but we've already been doing that - clogging up the radios and searching for better winds... but I can't even get a controller to read another jet's spot winds without causing some disgusting 10-transmission long conversation. It will get interrupted and pretty soon everyone is just saying "BLOCKED" like it's family game night.

[farva]

That software we just paid quintuple for probably just negated every dollar of fuel savings. And while were at it (Oh god, I wish I could find that article) when we brought Fedex in to consult and improve our ops, they said we would have to COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN AMC for at least 6 months to un###### ourselves.

Tropopause level? Gimme a break.

Edited September 18, 2011 by farva

[Jaded]

And while were at it (Oh god, I wish I could find that article) when we brought Fedex in to consult and improve our ops, they said we would have to COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN AMC for at least 6 months to un###### ourselves.

I've heard this several times and don't understand it. How would shutting down ops improve the situation?

[JarheadBoom]

I've heard this several times and don't understand it. How would shutting down ops improve the situation?

Ask Finance. Or the Med Group.

[/sarcasm], in case you're slow...

Edited September 19, 2011 by JarheadBoom

[Big Bear]

Ask Finance. Or the Med Group.

[/sarcasm], in case you're slow...

HA!

[Riddller]

I think making it an app is the way to go. What do ya'll think?

[Chuck Sargent]

Is this in regards to TACC ops or the AOR? As you know, the biggest problems (and potential savings) are in the AOR. Until we see major changes over there, it's going to be tough to get people on board with the minor stuff.

Both, and I completely agree with you!

My final brief to AMC/CV was how the AOR was the "Las Vegas of fuel savings - what goes on there, stays there" and how when we put on tan flight suits, all the fuel savings goes out the door. He said he would pass that on to AMC/CC who was going to the desert shortly after, but I was a dot by the time that happened. I have to believe they addressed it, but who knows where it went from there.

Keep asking the tough questions! That is how things will get fixed.

[BigFreddie]

My last mission the FM had us put on tankering fuel for an AOR location. Seems the temp was higher than expegged and we were 12k over our max takeoff. We coordinated to defuel and the process was started. In the meantime the TACC DO told AMCC to direct us to go to the end if the runway and burn off the excess which would have taken as long as defueling. Smoke that in your fuel savings pipe. But, as you said, you can get away with murder in he AOR for fuel but preventing a dude from getting blown up hauling us fuel warrants carrying extra.

[addict]

sounds like a MOG issue

[baileynme]

Just got the brief on this yesterday, looks like the 135 will be getting it soon. My understanding is that in the airlines the program is catered to each airplane whereas ours is not (all of our standard configurations aren't even covered). This combined with the problems we've been having with flight managers lately (see recent ASAP reports) and inaccuracy of our weather packages makes it seem like an "optimized" fuel load will be highly inaccurate. That's assuming its a dead head with no A/R which would bring a whole new set of problems (any -10 guys used this with any success)? Besides that, I agree with everyone else, the AOR is a black hole of gas, especially in winter when ice fog reeks havock on any good intentions.