Toronto Vancouver
Honolulu Aukland Christchurch Wellington
Noumea Nadi
Hobart Melbourne Sydney Brisbane Townsville Cairns Darwin Alice Springs Perth
Adelaide Canberra
Bali Jakarta
Singapore
KL?
Port Moresby
Taiwan
Hong Kong
Manila
Ho Chi Minh?
Its been everywhere, man.

Lots of charters to numerous cities in Japan late 80's early 90's. Hiroshima is one I remember.

Narita
Kansai

Sapporo
Fukuoka
Bombay
Tahiti
Seoul
Penang (tsunami relief)
Launceston (a few freighters at least, don't know if there was any LST RPT)

tdracer :ok: yes it's interesting when you throw the figures around, the 767 really has a market area Boeing can't replace (for those who can't afford a new 787).
The attempts at expanding and re-engining the 737NG to replace the aging 757's are falling short, though they're trying to jam more seats in and are brewing over Lion Air's request for an expandable centre take blader, to give a 10+ hour endurance... but this model can grow no further towards 767 territory.
You've mentioned upgrading the 767 bunsen-burners and weight being the issue, so really the next step of efficiency is putting winglets on, if not already fitted. ANZ first quoted fuel savings of 6-8% on longer sectors but in the end turned out to be 13-15%. A great outcome but a huge outlay (if you paid for it).
So it becomes a tough market for those who can't afford the B787.

There isn't a replacement other than the too-wide 787. The A321 has been suggested, but single aisle high capacity seems to be unsuitable.

At today's interest rates if you cannot afford the 787 you are not for real, hence the large order book.

There may yet be a robust market for re-built 767s if the dire predictions of 787 failure are to be believed.:8

In a way it is sad to see the list of all the places the 767 went to, it just highlights where Qantas does not go to anymore.

Beijing
Shanghai
Honiara
Doha
and KL via Jakarta or Singapore Austral.
Oh, and Victorville.

Has everyone forgotten about Papeete and Nagoya?

Al Udeid
Dubai
Tindal
Woomera
Christmas Island

Wow, reading this brings home how small the QF network has become.

Crying shame......

tdracer, not sure what you mean about the 767 weight. According to the Boeing airport planning documents the 787-8 is a lot heaver than a 767-300ER, an extra two thousand pounds on the wings would be insignificant. (260,000 lb vs 195,000 lb) ?

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com...ps/767sec2.pdf
http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com.../acaps/787.pdf

Care to clarify ?

If one includes charters, you could certainly add Wuhan and Chongqing in the PRC. I think too you could include Yangon and maybe another place in Myanmar (Mandalay ??) that escapes me. I think you could also include Delhi and Hanoi.

Don't understand what the 787 has to do with it, but for the tanker mission, the underwing weight of the GEnx-2B (compared to the CF6) is up well over a ton (actually closer to two tons). That would have pushed the empty weight of the 767 tanker up by close to 4 tons. Unless there was a corresponding increase in the max takeoff weights (which is its own can of worms), that would mean less fuel upload. For the 'standard' tanker mission, the reduced fuel burn of the new engine wasn't enough to offset the reduced upload, resulting in a net reduction in the tanker offload capability (based on the USAF provided mission profiles). Lots of expense for no extra capability :(

Remember, the 767 MTOW at EIS was 320,000 lbs. - over 40 tons less than today's airplane, and the engine options were in the 48k-50k thrust range. If there was a suitable new 50k engine available it might make a viable 757 replacement.

I still miss the F27, F28, and the 727. Not to mention that the MD80 was simply the nicest aeroplane that I ever had the pleasure to PAX on.

The 767 like each of these has sadly had it's day.

As a PAX I could tell from the "old aeroplane smell" as soon as I walked through that heavily greased antiquated door that I was on an old QF 767.

With the dumbing down of engineering skill I feel safer on newer aircraft, even if it is a 737 I pretty much don't mind as long as it's relatively new.

Until one day they put the engines back down the back where they should be, I guess I just have to get used to what is left :(

There is still one type left with "the engines down the back where they should be" :O

Add Larnaca, Tel Aviv, Nairobi, Seychelles, Broome & possibly Mauritius

AO 767's
 

The 5 767's that flew in AO colours had one of the highest daily utilisation totals about at the time. It was not uncommon for the aircraft to log 16 or 17 hours per 24 hour day. The aircraft were quite "mothered" in that they were (except for one) back in CNS every day and the deferred snag list was very small as the same engineers attended to the same aircraft every day.
The 767 was a good aircraft for its day and this type of operation. Sad to see them (and AO) go.
AO aircraft went to:
Cairns
Darwin
Gold Coast
Melbourne
Perth
Sydney
Hong Kong
Denpasar, Bali
Fukuoka
Nagoya
Osaka
Sapporo
Kota Kinabalu
Singapore

Plus a number of Captains choice charters into Asia and China.
:{:{

That's quite amazing? Who designed and did their scheduling? Qantas or AO?

The 767 Japanese charter destinations in the early 90's included Aomori, Niigata, Okayama, Tokushima, Fukushima, Sendai, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Sapporo and possibly a couple of others that escape my memory. (Excuse the errant spelling if necessary)

Included in that was a sector from Okayama to Jakarta that included a dog-strike to the nose-wheel on landing. Nice!