Would it make any sense once for Qantas to stop the A380s in Dubai and then have seperate 787 flight to europe/london to carry on from dubai starting from Melbourne, Sydney Brisban

Would it make any sense once for Qantas to stop the A380s in Dubai and then have seperate 787 flight to europe/london to carry on from dubai starting from Melbourne, Sydney Brisbane that way Qantas could be more adaptable in capacity using the 787s to London (and other flights to Europe as well) as not everyone who travels on QF9/1 will travel on to London. Could this be viable or make any sense?

Anything is possible.

But one of the benefits of the 789s is their range (Joyce was again talking about MEL-DFW and SYD-ORD recently), and 6-7 hr missions from DXB to Europe arent really hitting the 789's sweet-spot.

To do that you'd end up having to base both flight and cabin crews in either Dubai or somewhere in Europe - which will be hideously expensive. 

And then there is the question of line maintenance - do you outsource? How many ME airlines operate the 787?

Realistically I think they'll end up doing AU-US work...

I'm a tad lost in your wording, what I think you are trying to say is that just have 787's operating DXB- Europe, and have the 380's going from mainland Aus to DXB. This could be a good idea but also would possibly be hard to fill all the seats as EK offer more services/flexibility. QF could either complement the EK services or extend, as I know EK have been wanting to enter other German destinations for a while but can't get approval from the Government, this might be a good route for QF.

The 787s will start from Australia not Dubai and carry through Dubai to London/Europe. A380s stop in Dubai. Then they can be more flexible with flights going to London

But where would the capacity on the 787s on the Dubai to Europe leg of the Aus to Europe trip come from -  they have to take all the A380 passengers joining in Dubai? Unless the 787s fly from Australia half empty which obviously is not a goer.

I can see QF wanting a 787-9 from BNE to DXB but I'm not sure about the onward flight to Europe. Perhaps as a stopgap measure, sure, but the range of the aircraft simply doesn't suit such a sector.

But the 787-10? Frankly, I am willing to bet QF will take the -10 as a replacement for the A330s. They've got the options and it would be excellent from a fleet commonality and consistency point of view (the -10 is a simple stretch of the -9). A 787-10 could do a Perth-Dubai run quite comfortably, and then the onward flight to somewhere in Continental Europe (Rome or Frankfurt are probably the most likely ones).

Do you think both the 787-10s will replace the A332 and A333?

Personally? I think the 787-10 will eventually replace both the A332 and A333. The A333 can do all of the Asian routes QF requires (Melbourne-Beijing is within the craft's range, although I admit its getting a little close)... the A332s seem to mostly be used on Domestic Transcon services (even though the A332s have more range than the A333s).

So I don't think QF needs the range of the A330-200 in the first place. The 787-10, which has a bit more range than the A330-300, can do every Asian and Pacific route, and also Perth-Dubai.

The -10 does have a drawback though, relative to the A330-200... it is a slightly larger plane, capacity-wise, so it may be harder to fill. This may result in reduced widebody frequencies on the Transcon route... but on the other hand, the A330s won't be phased out of the fleet for another 5 years or so, and within that time we can probably expect Transcon traffic to go up.

But yeah... overall it seems to me a no-brainer for QF to use the 787-10 as an A330 replacement. Fleet commonality/consistency, less training expenses, they already have options at a good price, and the generational improvement in efficiency.

why do they use the A333 predomonately international over the A332. Is it just down to capacity?

I think so. The A333 has enough range to do all of QF's Asia-Pacific destinations so they don't need the A332's extra range. I think its just a matter of capacity.

787-8 to small for domestic?

787-8 has far more range than Qantas needs for domestic or Asian operations; the craft can do trans-Pacific flights from Sydney to LAX. In addition, considering that QF can always adjust the mix of widebody and narrowbody frequencies to "right-size" the route, it seems to me like QF don't need to introduce another variant into the fleet.

I'm pretty close to certain we won't be seeing a 787-8 in QF livery. The -8s were for Jetstar.

So 787-10 for domestic/Asia/Oceania

787-9 for US and possible Perth-London

That's my basic thought, yes. The shorter and thicker Asia-Pacific and Transcon routes will be the 787-10 territory for the most part.

787-9 will do trans-Pacific services to secondary ports in the US (SFO and DFW), perhaps a Brisbane-Dubai route also, and the hypothetical Perth-London (although honestly, Perth-London and Melbourne-Dallas really do seem to be pushing the 787-9's capabilities even with only 250 passengers aboard...). The 787-9 also seems fit for the flights to South Africa and also Santiago.

I guess I could theoretically see QF use the 787-9 to Asia too, if there are markets that can fill the premium demand required to make a flight viable yet don't have nearly enough Economy demand to fill a -10... but I don't know of many markets which would be like this.