This!
If you've not experienced other carrier F - then, sure, go for QF F ex DFW. My wife swears away from QF F, finds the FAs a little too gushy and the hard-product little better than J - unfavorable F comparison with the ME carriers etc. She insists that I book J over F ex-OS (she hasn't sampled F ex-Oz with its sample menus etc).
If QF have substituted the A380 for B787 by then, F won't be an option anyway.
Regards,
BD
I would tend to agree with the idea that the QF F (and I suspect even with the minor makeover which seems more cosmetic than substantial from all I've seen) hard product is little better than (current standard) J. Compared to the J product on the QF 380 (pre refurb) it's fantastic, but now with the J Suite on the 787, there's not a lot of difference with the exception of the more private cabin and higher FA
ax ratio but for a 13ish hour flight like LAX-SYD, it's a great J product and compares pretty well to most others out there in J.
I doubt QF will remove the 380 from much more USA flying, certainly not LAX, as they simply need the capacity down back for all those bound to Disney, LA and onwards. The 787 is great for the thinner routes like MEL-SFO, BNE-LAX, but MEL/SYD-LAX I think will stay 380 for the time being (of course we all recall periods where some 380 services have been subbed for the 787 in lighter seasons, eg: Feb-Mar this year IIRC) and it may well be some 380's will rotate out of the schedules for their refurbs, which clearly will take some time to totally redo the J cabins, plus the makeovers elsewhere. Still, those will be scheduled in advance so you'd know, and at least the J product is of a higher standard.
I also note for the routes we're discussing, the competition on direct, or near-direct (eg: NZ via AKL or even FJ via NAN) is not a whole lot better. AA's 2 class 787's, UA's 2 class 787's(with 6 across in J are a joke and make the skybeds look decent, not to mention the soft product). NZ has, I feel, better service levels and soft (food,) product in J, but again you have an extra stop in there and some feel the seats are too narrow (my feet go off the end !)
Finally a comment on QF F FA's. I've flown my share of sectors in QF F, but by no means would I consider myself a frequent passenger but I generally have found the FA's to be quite relaxed and friendly without being "gushy" or in any way overbearing or forced. Of course some crews and crew members will obviously interact differently with pax, and it may well be that some experiences are not to lkiking for one reason or other (I'e had one or two on QF make me feel like simple requests were a hassle for them). In general I've always found them very good, responsive and personable. Even moreso on repeat journeys (eg: at least one FA working a LAX-MEL remembered me from a similar sector months earlier, and was genuinely wonderful - even though she wasn't working my side of F, she made a special effort to say hi and even remembered which bubbles I liked etc and it was very natural and not forced (to me, anyway).
Just recently I flew MH and TG F sectors and found the TG crew to be far less relaxed in nature and it was an altogether different service experiene (much of that was likely cultural as much as anything).
Personally I prefer the more laid back, yet appropriate, service usually experienced on QF and NZ (and probably VA though I don't fly them) over the US majors and some others... but obviously every interaction and flight experience is going to be different and even then for different passengers with varing needs and expectatiions.
Each to their own though.
