The 787-10 is an excellent airplane because it provides great payload capacity on a relatively light frame with very good fuel burn with a range that covers (my estimate) 85 to 90% of widebody routes..
Jayunited posted some details of one of the United 787-10 flights leaving TLV back to the states on another thread. The empty weight of the United 787-10 he posted was slightly higher than the empty weight of a CX A359. The 787-10 has a higher empty weight compared to a 787-9.
Airbus does not currently offer a direct competitor to the 787-10. It will do so only when it stretches the 359. This was hinted at by Zeke in another thread, referring to an interview with CX's CEO following an Airbus presentation.
The 787-9/10 compete fairly well with the A330-900 and A350-900 depending on if you are looking at lower or higher range.
The Bloomberg article was talking about a stretched A350-1000 to compete with the 777-9. Nothing to do with the A350-900 and 787-10.
This is also not correct about the 787-10. See the slide in the link above. United clearly states that the 787-10 is more than adequate to replace 777-200ER's for markets below 7,200 sm.
Well they are saying the combination of 787-10 and A350-900 works.
“ The A350-900 & 787-10 provide a solid tag-team 777-200ER replacement solution:
In terms of seat capacity, the A350-900 and 787-10 emerged as contenders
787-10 will sufficiently cover markets below 7,200sm while A350-900 will cover longer-range markets
Existing order for 35x A350-1000’s was used to fulfill this replacement need”
Look at the recent UA SFO-AKL flights, the 787-10 is flying the route on light cargo days, and they put the 777-300ER on the heavy cargo days.
The flight is around 5600 nm (6500 sm), one of the insiders on another thread said they got some staff on the flight however had to leave many behind as they ran out of payload.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News