Here's what we know about the Qantas Boeing 787 Dreamliner

they will need to additional 787s beyond the 8 to start any new routes

I honestly wonder if the 787-9 can actually do that route. The distance between MEL and DFW is around 14500km. 

The 787-9 has a 14100km range at 290 passengers. The Dreamliner capacity will be "around 250" although that internally sighted plan indicates 235, but let's presume 250. This will surely extend the range, perhaps enough to reach DFW, but let us also remember the A380 is meant to have around 15200km range and on the DFW - SYD route it has its passenger capacity restricted by 100 seats (also, let's remember QF's A380s aren't that high capacity relative to other airlines' A380s).

Sure, the 787-9 is much smaller and probably a lot less susceptible to wind resistance on the flight back, but if a jet built to fly a 15200km range can only carry 384 passengers on a return trip of 13800km (the DFW-SYD distance), surely there's reason to be skeptical about a shorter-range jet's capabilities on an even longer route.

I could see the flight working, however, if the jet flew to Brisbane first (13370km) and then on to Melbourne. This would also give QF the ability to offer three different Australian capital cities as destinations from DFW with direct or "you can stay aboard the same plane" service, as well as various connection opportunities via BNE domestic too.

That said, MEL - DFW seems more like a 777-8 route to me, and it would certainly have some demand for First Class given the route length. So if QF decide to go with 777X's and give them First cabins, I'd believe they would put 777-8s Dallas routes (both ex-SYD and ex-MEL given they'd be able to comfortably reach DFW without any payload restrictions). 787-9s seem more suited to BNE- DFW.

I am also sceptical about the range capabilty of the 787-9 and the routes that are being discussed.  MEL-DFW is significantly shorter than SYD-ORD.  LHR-PER is similar (to MEL-DFW), but on that I agree with some other comments that it is PR exercise.

I don't think the lower wind resistance is significant unless you plan to glide into MEL.  Head winds just reduce the ground speed,  increasing the effective route distance similarly for all aircraft.

Also note that United is currently flying the longest 797-9 route SFO-SIN at 13,650 km euipped with 250 seats.  I have seen comment that they are also running at reduced load.

My guess is BNE-DFW with BNE-LAX changing from 747 to 787. 

The Perth London flight is also a way of pressuring the Perth airport to bring forward the build of the Qantas domestic peir at the international terminal. They may do an interim arrangement of a few gates for those flights connecting from Canberra and Adelaide,  but QF want to be in the same space sooner rather than later. 

If you assume PER -> LHR is in the vicinity of 18 - 19 hours, I struggle to see a market for it beyond Perth and Adelaide residents. QR are learing the hard way that there may not be enough of a market to sustain Its hard to imagine east coast flyers, beyond novelty value, opting for a 4hr+ flight to Perth, stopover then 19 hour flight - it's not shorter than the current options and involves a killer segment. There's plus points to transiting within AU but they're almost cancelled out by the current lounge in PER versus the Middle East or Asia.

*to sustain service.

Interesting perspective. I live in SYD and would absolutely consider a transit through PER which went direct on to Europe (LHR or otherwise). I like the idea of a domestic transfer as opposed to international and once you're on a long flight you may as well stay on it!

Assuming the timings worked out, the terminals and lounges were good (current QF PER domestic to intl sucks) and the aircraft were good, I'd consider.

It's a lot of assumptions, but none the less...

ajstub note there are quite few EK flights from Perth that transit Dubai not to mention Adelaide and Canberra (whose only other one stop choice is now SQ). Note a lot of us are adverse to too many stops and transfers. I am sure with those three markets there will be enough for 250 seat per day. Note the success of DFW (which I prefer) says semething about long sectors. I prefer a long and short sector rather than two long ones anyday.

This would also have the additional benefit of providing an option that appeals to fliers dissatisfied with Dubai as a stopover - without requiring a large number of flights for Qantas to put onto a whole new network of flights (to a stopover and then onto the final destination). The domestic feeder network to Perth is already set up, so in terms of the number of aircraft needed to provide a new one stop flight to London from a bunch of Australian destinations its hard to beat!

8 B787s will replace 5 b747s plus some extra frequencies on selected routes. More 787s will need to be ordered to start any new routes. 

Angus the replacement of the five 747s has been deferred. I think only two have been definately slated to go in the near future. The economics of a D check may now add up, with low fuel prices.

Christopher I think the new routes will come first as flagship routes (Chicago and Dallas, maybe even London)) then the 747s will be replaced later in the order period. I expect there wll be four 787s per year for a few years with the first eight (to possibly 12) with a long range layout.

Low fuel prices are slated end from late next year though. 

Hey if you look at the general concesus oil price from late 2017. This is fact, not one I just made up. So why do some feel they want to have a negative reaction against my comment when it is simply the facts. It is bound to rise to its long term average at some point and the sooner Qantas retire the older 5 747s the better. Qantas has done a marvellous job compared to other airlines when it comes to capitalising on the benefits of the lower fuel price. 

Where have you heard only to 2 will be retired?

Qantas will need to buy more than the 8 dreamliners it has already ordered. 

18-20 787-9s would allow for a decent amount of growth and convert some to B777Xs and B787-10s. 

US only requires 2 aircraft if the route isn't daily.

That is true, they could do this, but a flight which runs every two days isn't very convenient for travellers. But I suppose if it was a 'monopoly route' like Sydney to Chicago or Melbourne to Dallas without any daily competition form another airline that could work for Qantas. I just think Qantas will want to really get the most from the 787s and so will put them onto high frequency daily routes.

Daily flights to North/South America and Africa require 2 aircraft per route. Daily flights to Europe generally require 3 depending on ground time at the out station and if aircraft rotate onto another route (eg, current LHR timetable requires 5 aircraft for both SYD and MEL flights).

All the QF flights into Asia, other then HND use 1 aircraft for daily. The only reason HND uses 2 is due to the aircraft sitting in Tokyo all day.

The 6 744ERs arrived from late 2002. They are likely to stay around until at least 2022.

OEB and OJM arrived in 1991 and 1993. These are not refitted. These will be replaced as the 787s arrive.

OJS, OJT and OJU arrived in late 1999/early 2000. These are refitted. These *might* be replaced, but in all likelyhood would still be flying for another 3-5 years.

That would probably require fifth freedom rights on YVR-LHR.  The Canadian government doesn't like helping out foreign carriers at the best of times, and I'm sure BA and AC would fight it pretty strongly.

Correct - AC has such a stronghold on the Canadian government so very unlikely it would happen.

I doubt Hong Kong will be considered for 787-9s, at least right now. QF is slot-restricted at HKIA, so the only way they can expand capacity is to use larger jets. The 787-9s, at least the early ones (I am guessing they'll use a regional configuration for Asia) will have lower capacities than even their A330-200s.

This problem may be alleviated in time when HKIA builds a new runway (several years away), but until then I can imagine QF will use A330s on that route, with the 747s and A380 as upgauges-where-necessary. Only when the A330s start being replaced with Dreamliners (which appears to be the long-term plan) will we start seeing regular Dreamliner service to HK.

Ahh I hadn't considered slot-allocation! Fair point. SIN may well be a possibility in the future - most Bus. travellers I know have QF or SQ as their top preference, depending on alliance loyalty so as a potential point of difference and method of competition if SQ keep the A380 and A350 coming to SYD and MEL, QF might opt for the 787 on some flights. They can't use it for JNB. Jumbos are used to Tokyo Haneda on some flights so could be possibilities there where the F market need is less than to China and the Middle East.

I'm hoping it'll be the GEnx.

Qantas B787-9s will use GEnx engines that power superior performance and low maintenance costs.
https://www.qantas.com/travel/airlines/aircraft-boeing-787/global/en