It appears that the Qantas 767-200ERs probably have a MTOW of 350,000 lb.,
judging by
a Boeing 767-200/200ER runway length takeoff chart* which shows a/c with
the
JT9D-7R4D/7R4E or CF6-80A/A2 engines for that weight, and I agree that at
that MTOW
takeoff distances should rarely be a problem, even in hot conditions.

Their max t/o weight at the moment is 146,000 kgs. It used to be 155,000,
but was reduced when no longer needed for long haul ops. Registration fees
are based on this weight, so their is no point having more than you need.

Takeoff Runway length Charts for 200ERs with MTOWs of 380,000 (CF6-80C2-B2
or PW
4052) and 387,000 lb. (CF6-80C2-B4 or PW4056) on hot days (ISA +17C) show
that runway
length is definitely becoming a factor. So, if they stick with lower
gross weight
200ERs, no problem, but if they want to maximise payload and fuel offload
in hot/high
conditions, the lower gross weight JT9D-powered a/c aren't going to cut
it. While
the JT9D 767s shouldn't be anywhere near as limited in TOW as the USAF
KC-135Es were
when based in the Gulf (or the really pitiful KC-135As), that still could
be a
significant operational limitation. It will be interesting to see what
the RAAF
decides to do (or rather, what the Government's willing to pay for), given
that used
767 airframes seem to be relatively cheap and available these days. Guess
it depends
what the market for freighter conversions is as well.

It all rather depends what you want to do with them. If you are buying
tankers, then with max fuel loads you will end up with t/o weights around
the 150 tonne mark. No performance problem at all. I you want to carry 30
tonnes of freight, and play tankers simultaneously, then you're looking at
the wrong aircraft. You will need something substantially bigger, and more
expensive.

As for 767s lying around the countryside...be interesting to see what
condition most of them are in. Remember, you can't look at 300s, as they'll
drag the refuelling boom on the ground when they lift off.

JB