Qantas recently considered Airbus A350, staying with Boeing 787

Yep the A350 is Good for the passenger... but QF have those 787's at a very good price. 

I am not sure it substantially a longer range. They seem to be much the same. It sort of depends on the variant.

A359 range with max payload - around 14350km
B789 range with max payload - around 15200km

Tthe 787-9 has a 15, 400km max range.

It really is the best jet on the market for QF, I think. And given how cheap QF got them for it would be suicide to not take them.

QF could also use Thompson's Cozy-Suite economy seat to make the "hell-ride" in the back the world's least hellish hell-ride. They could easily fit in 215 CozySuite seats (the LOPAs from Thompson and several other airlines seem to demonstrate that there's enough room), 32 Premium Economy seats and 28 Business Suites onto the jet. Which, coincidentally, just happens to meet their capacity target of 275.

If QF did that... you'd have an epic leap for their hard product with a substantial improvement in their cost-base and operational efficiency.

Those cozy suites would make it extremely awkward for the wind pax to get in and out of their seat without knocking against the staggered seats.  Those seats would make me avoid the aircraft completely.  Having said that, I avoid 787s and 3-4-3 777s at all costs, which is made easy by only using SQ to Europe.

"Those cozy suites would make it extremely awkward for the wind pax to get in and out of their seat without knocking against the staggered seats."

Well the seat bottoms retract slightly, and apparently this makes it a lot easier to get into the aisle. Sure, you have to think "diagonal, not straight across" but I don't think the general pax are incapable of understanding that. And frankly, QF will either go 9-across Sardineliner or 9-across CozySuite... I'd take the latter over the former and from a "competitive product" point of view the latter is the better option. It reaches an almost-identical density whilst preventing shoulder-rubbing or crusher-seats.

lol "wind pax".  I agree its better than regular 787 seats, but for now i'll go without having to deal with either.  I've flown on 3-4-3 777 with EK and airNZ for 13hrs so I know how that feels.

Will the 787-9 have sufficient range to do DFW to MEL?  If so, I wonder if QF will offer it anyway.  Presently, they treat Melbourne passengers so badly that we have to get a domestic flight to domestic terminal connection to/from Sydney to get onto the A380 service to DFW.  Qantas don't even give us a 737 designated as QF7/QF8 to operate a MEL-SYD leg to the international terminal. They are SO Sydney centric. Makes me angry.

"Will the 787-9 have sufficient range to do DFW to MEL?"

In theory it can, BUT the 787-9 recently had its maximum range estimate "revised down" by Boeing (so the 15, 400km figure I used above was... well... marketing BS). The 787-9 can JUST do SYD-DFW, however that's departing from Australia. On the way BACK, however, the prevailing winds would make the 787-9 have to either go via Brisbane or Los Angeles.

The A380, which has quite a bit more range, still cannot do DFW-SYD at a full load of passengers.

Perhaps if QF want to offer more DFW services, it will do a MEL-BNE-DFW route, but that wouldn't offer First Class.  

MEL-BNE-DFW would be fine by me.  My criteria is getting off and on an "international" flight in MEL (avoiding domestic Oz connections).  I sometimes go on Air NZ via Auckland, and will soon try their new 777-200 direct service AKL to IAH (Houston).  They don't fly it every day however, and often the connections from AKL to MEL are a slow 2.5 hours.

Also, a funny thing at Auckland Airport, if connecting from a trans-pacific NZ flight onto a NZ trans-Tasman flight, they make you stand in a line forever to go thru a full security check all over again!  How stupid.  Passengers have never left a secure environment.

i've seen that at other airports...also the 777s will have the 3-4-3 shitness

DFW-MEL distance is about 13900km so it would be enough to fly non-stop using a B789. But opting a B778 would be fairly ideal where it would compete against the B77L and would eventually be enough to fly between these two destinations without having to refuel.

i bet you have an iphone

yes

Qantas have had that Attitude about all Boeings for years.i think it was the inheritance of the TAA/Australian A300's for a while till they were phased out in 1998 and later the arrival of the A330 AND NOW THE A380 that has switched their thinking.

The widest PE on a Dreamliner is Virgin Atlantic's 21", so I think its fair to say that's as big as Qantas PE will get. And 21" at 7-across is perfectly respectable. Its wider than most PE products, and could also be fitted onto the A380 at the same specs.

Their A330 Suites are 23" across (between the armrests), and I think they'll stick with that measurement for the 787-9. More consistent experience, and the DL's extra width will allow them to widen the footwells (which would be a good comfort boost). Plus, frankly, 23" is the same width as Emirates First Class (and its wider in seat mode than Qantas' current First). They'll stick with 23" width.

As for the CozySuite, I think 20" is a bit of an exaggeration... its probably something like 19.8" and Thompson round up. I think if QF go CozySuite they'll take 19" width. Widest Economy in the sky (this could also be fit at the same width on a 737, and QF has a lot of those) with no chance of cannibalizing PE demand...

So that way, each class up you go, you gain an extra two inches seat width AND (assuming they stick with 38" for Premium Economy) an extra seven inches seat pitch (31" to 38" to 45"). So its a nice steady linear progression. 

Is 32" pitch fit for the Cozysuite economy over 31". I know it's only a fraction of a difference but it's just that I noticed other 3-3-3 airlines giving 32" pitch in economy 787

What's the chance Qantas/AJ will read anything what we've said about the configuration (Cozysuite) we would like and choose it

Ehhh, Qantas already use a 31" pitch, and I think they'll be unlikely to give any more. And width is more important to passenger comfort than pitch, so if the CozySuite at 19" gives you >1.5" extra width (plus separate armrests, upper body space and a sleeping surface), there isn't really much of a reason to add extra pitch... especially when the fixed back shell would preserve a passenger's impression of "my space" due to the lack of people reclining into it.

And I have no idea whether Qantas or AJ lurk and read these forums. If they do, they probably select the most stupid comments, put them in a hat, then get wasted at the QF Xmas Party while reading them out aloud.

Time's been a changin now. The market back then is totally different to what it is now. What may have been an economic-8 seater back then isn't the case in today's market (hence the majority of airlines bar JAL opting for 3-3-3 seating).