Again, even amongst contributors on here, all emphasis seems to focus first and foremost on measures to reassure the most neurotic of coronaphobes. They will be the last to resume traveling whatever the industry does. A hardcore of those who have succumbed to the daily doses of media-driven coronapanic will never fly again. Period. The industry must stop shaping its policies around appeasing these most squeamish outliers and instead consider what those comprising the reasonable mass market are asking of them. Including cutting red-tape and ditching practically useless virtue-signalling "safety measures". Often yours for a substantial additional fee. So you want to see airliners restricted to 30% loads by government mandate? Well, if you can afford the fares which will arise from that, you go off and hire yourself a private CitationJet. Let the rest of us exercise our common sense. Recent scientific evidence indicates that airliner cabins are not leading vectors for spreading C-19 infection.
There just seems to be a noisy minority who demand that everybody else's lifestyle choices be restricted / banned / priced out of reach so that should they ever muster the courage to move their a*** out of their armchair they can feel "safe". Those people are not reasonable. They will never feel "safe". They aren't the ones who will return to flying. And that's fine. Each to their own. But that has to include not restricting the sensible silent majority with increasingly absurd and expensive "safety measures".
Coronaphobia will not stop me from traveling, though as with everybody else, draconian restrictions will (and continue to do so). I'm not complacent about C-19; I certainly don't want to catch it. But nor do I wish to be run over by a bus - though I'm not planning to avoid bus stations to improve my chances. Nor do I wish to be struck down by lightning - but I'm not going to lock myself away indoors forever to dodge that possibility either. Life comes with risk. Each individual must recognise their own tolerance level and manage their lives around the level of risk which works for them and their personal circumstances.
I see lots of well-intentioned "safety measures" intended to "reassure" me, but too often they leave me either appalled or scratching my head in bemusement. Today I read that UK rail operators will be leaving train windows open through the winter to discourage the spread of C-19. Well, gee thanks, rail bosses! I'm sure the NHS will be super-delighted by the flood of additional cold and pneumonia cases your new policy will harvest for them. But they're fine, cos they're not covid. Airport operators proudly circulate photos of swathes of taped-off seating to "reassure" me. Slight problem: I have an arthritic knee and WILL BE SURE TO AVOID airports which I know to have taped off their seating. Are these airports run by complete halfwits? What morons are promulgating these completely mad ideas to "reassure" frequent travellers like me? Do they believe that C-19 is suddenly the only medical issue which travellers have to consider in the course of their everyday lives? What about those whose conditions mean they need to use the lavatory more often (closed due to covid)? What about passengers who need to use an ATM in arrivals ... deactivated, because of course you will catch covid from typing in your pin number? Getting stuck overnight with no local currency in an airport comes with no medical implications at all, right? You want to buy food? How mad! Don't you know that you could catch covid in a shop or a restaurant ... but of course if you're diabetic and we induce a serious medical crisis by derailing your dietary routine, that is just tough luck. Covid "reassurance" uber alles! You're free to die of anything else. Or merely suffer (trivial if not covid-induced).
Finally - but not least - the resort experience. Spanish and Italian politicians - amongst others - are keen to "reassure" me that it is "safe" to holiday there. By - amongst other things - insisting that every moment spent outside your private space must come with wearing a muzzle on pain of large fines. In a hot climate! Well I don't know about you, but I go on holiday to enjoy myself (tough concept for coronaphobes and "experts" to grasp, I know). Perma-bemuzzlement in tropical heat and enjoyable vacations simply cannot co-exist. I'll obediently wear a muzzle for the greater good in a crowded public space, but not out and about hiking on a deserted hillside? As long as these masters of "reassurance" are mandating "reassuring" measures of this sort, they can shove their "luxury vacations" right where the sun don't shine. Not one cent of mine will go towards a "holiday" like that. Or one where I'm forbidden to meet anybody new ... cos they have to stand too far away from me at all times. I presume that everyone who has ever kissed someone they met for the first time on holiday has already died of covid? Of course, this isn't a problem for me. Way too ugly. No chance of a kiss (unless arrest follows shortly afterwards). But I do spare a thought for those who might like to meet someone special whilst away?
I call upon airline and travel industry execs to wake up to what the mass-market / frequent travellers really want. And lobby the 650 Westminster Mental Patients (MP's) accordingly. Stop pandering to extreme coronaphobes who will still be hiding away a decade from now whatever you do. They are not your customers. They are not the flying public.
As one of your regular customers (on the rare occasions my flights aren't cancelled), my needs are simple. I want my travel insurance policy to be valid. I don't want to be quarantined (barring upon receipt of a positive C-19 test). I want to be able to sit down in an airport departure lounge. I want to be able to buy food and use an ATM. I want to be able to remove my muzzle in wide-open spaces with few people around. I don't want even more red-tape and form-filling queues designed to offer the illusion of "enhanced safety".
I know. I guess I'm just unreasonable! Forget everything I said and just shut down the world again.