A major risk to airlines in the future will be minimum mandated space per passenger or, if you will, mandated social distancing. The current recommendation in this neck of the woods is 4 square meters per person, which would yield the following maximum capacity for a select few airliners. Please note this does not take into consideration the space needed for galleys and lavatories.

A220-300: 22 pax
A321: 32 pax
787-9: 75 pax
A350-1000: 81 pax

Even if we lower the requirement to 1 or 2 square meters, this will spell the end of commercial aviation as we know it.

Realistically I can see aircraft being allowed to fly with the middle seat in a row of three being empty, ie 120 seats available in a 180 seat A320. Those in window seats board first, then those in aisle seats. Whilst this would be uneconomical it might be sustainable for a short while. Those travelling would only do so if it was absolutely essential and would need to understand the need for a higher than normal fare.

There are some way out of normal fares and routings showing up on the search engines at the moment with all the groundings and restrictions. Results that were previously right down the bottom of the list and you wondered why they even bothered to show them due to the travel time and cost, are now all that's available.

So when all this is over (fingers crossed) the idea being proposed here is that somebody who for example has travelled for the best part of an hour on a crowded poorly ventilated Piccadilly line tube train from say Kings Cross to Heathrow is suddenly entitled to (in relative terms ) oceans of space when they get on board an aircraft..or is the thinking that the likes of TfL, National Express et. al. are also going to rigidly enforce social distancing when we come out of the far side of this pandemic?

(edit to add for the non Brits: TfL = Transport for London, the Agency that runs London's tube/bus network..
National Excess...;sorry Express... major Private bus/coach company)

It would be fair to say that we have no idea what rules will come into force, but Aviation Authorities and transport Ministers have a habit of imposing restrictions on travellers in order to do something about a threat or to be seen to be doing something, for example the 100ml restriction on fluids carried on board.

I doubt very much that we will go back to business as usual

The Covid-19 global "stay-at-home" lock-downs has amplified the work-from-home concept. More people are embracing the concept of less travel. The new bliss is to live, work and play at a nice place where you don't have to fly away from. Cargo flights will boom, but passenger flights will sharply decline in this global recession.

I can't, not if the restriction is 2 square meters or a minimum distance of 1 meter. Given a seat width of around 18 inches, and aisle of the same, and a pitch of 30 inches on a standard A320/737, maximum seat occupancy may well have to look as the following:

1A occupied / 1B empty / 1C empty __ 1D occupied / 1E empty / 1F empty
2A empty / 2B empty / 2C occupied __ 2D empty / 2E empty / 2F occupied

etc., effectively reducing capacity to 1/6 of normal, equivalent to around 30 pax on an A320 / 737-800.

No. Passengers on the M2 line between Kongens Nytorv and Copenhagen airport will be required to keep the same distance, and it'll be up to the Metro Company to ensure those distances are ensured by restricting the number of passengers allowed on each carriage.

(edit to add for the none Danes: I agree; it's absolutely ridiculous to insert local references to public transport on an international discussion board).

Nah, I don't think so. Work@home is not suited for a majority of folks. I've been in an industry for over 20 years now where all most people need is an internet connection and a decent workstation. I've been mostly working from home for the last 15 years. But still, if I look to other people, most just don't want to work from home. They want to have some structure, get out of the house, be in a social environment and meet coworkers face to face. And don't forget, not everyone - by far - has a decent office space at home, or the possibility to create one. If you live in a tiny apartment, you'll go crazy if you're in there 24/7. And I'ld reckon that that feeling of being closed in between the 4 walls of ones home is what most people will remember from these couple of weeks, not the that working from home is such a great replacement for going to the office.

The same is true for business travel. Yes, a (voice or video) conference is an alternative that is sometimes acceptable, but every once in a while you just need to meetup to maintain a good relationship. People are social animals and technology is just not the same.

The biggest problem I see with business travel getting back to previous levels in the short to medium term is the ability of companies to get insurance that covers Covid19 for their staff when travelling. If available its going to be very expensive unless a 'cure' is found within a year or two.

There was a almost total shutdown after 9/11. After some time business was back to normal. I doubt it will be different this time. With regards to home working I enjoyed saving the fuel costs for not driving to the airport and back. On the downside I realised that there was a danger of losing social contacts. You are ( almost automatically ) out of the game when it comes to new jobs, which often are given through networking. There were people who took advantage of it. Although it made sense, working at home, looking back I would not do it again.

Regardless of the relevance or not of references to local surface transport the underlying objection to the suggested seating scheme remains:

It's somewhat bizarre to suggest that the authorities should enforce social distancing on passenger flights when it already seems pretty much impossible to meaningfully and rigidly enforce such a policy anywhere else on the entire journey from departure to destination...

https://aviationweek.com/air-transpo...5-analysts-say"A 40% drop in global revenue passenger miles followed by a rapid snap-back and leveling out of 5% year-over-year growth starting in 2023 would cut near-term new-aircraft demand about 25% from pre-coronavirus pandemic estimates, Vertical Research Partners analysts conclude.

Vertical plugged a 40% traffic decline into its model for 2020, with rebounds of 19% next year and 10% in 2022, the company said in a Mar. 30 research note. Among the outputs: airlines would need 6,300 new aircraft over the next five years, down from its previous forecast of 8,300.

On a percentage basis, the reduction would hit narrowbodies and widebodies equally, reducing demand for each category by about 25%. Vertical’s revised analysis shows airlines would need 1,540 fewer narrowbodies and 380 fewer widebodies. "

There's more in the article

Alternatively, instead of social distancing, those travelling on international flights - at least - get pre-screened as already immune via a five-minute serum antibody test. That might be a feasible starting point for restarting international passenger travel and even some tourism well before a vaccine shows up.

That said, if our efforts to contain the virus via lockdowns are successful, the numbers will be relatively small because most of us won't have caught it.

That's all very well for any passengers already in Auckland, the big problem is all the others now that that NZ is in lockdown. There are no domestic flights except for 'essential workers', no intercity buses or trains, and long-distance car travel is very much frowned on.
The government is working on a process by which foreign tourists can be safely gathered into embarkation points - Auckland and Christchurch, possibly RNZAF Base Ohakea - for return to their countries of origin. This will need to eliminate or at least drastically reduce the risk of the passenger and all the service staff (cab & bus drivers, hotel staff, customs & immigration officers, baggage handlers & airport counter staff, domestic flight & cabin crew, etc) they'll have to be in contact with being infected. This is a non-trivial exercise and will be expensive to implement.

I got told of someone who tried to book an NZ-UK ticket on Qatar in economy and it came out at $85,000!

There's always the choice of walking.

Apparently they went with American via LA and Dallas I think it was for an awful lot cheaper.

I totally agree at the moment the people in South Island have no options to depart Christchurch for an international flight back home. I know that as soon as it is safe to do so that such flights will come back on but we will all have to be very patient and abide by the stage 4 regulations.

I would like to place on record the extreme kindness and help we have received and continue to do so from the New Zealand people they have been fantastic and we are so grateful.

One point for all you legal experts out there. Have just received a round robin from the chairman of a very well known international airline saying how sorry for cancellations, delays and dropping us all in it etc. It contained the astonishing offer that the unused portions of our tickets will be held as a flight credit on the airline to use by March 21. No mention or offer of a refund instead. My understanding is that in addition to having a duty of care as they cancelled our flights they also MUST offer a full refund for the unused portion of our tickets. Any comments please as I think this is disgraceful.

I heard the same thing but not that much but still amazingly high. Interesting to note that I viewed a news report in the last couple of days that Qatar might need government support to continue operations. With prices like that why bother just keep milking the situation.

I was not told but checked on QR website. The price is less than 10% of what you were told. It is not Economy as no availability and for the first available flight.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....16dfec0527.jpg

It is always better to check facts before spreading news, and not only for the fares....

.

I hear you, but aside from this being a rumour [cough] & news forum of the Professional Pilots Rumour Network I was told this by a someone who is not going to just make stuff up given they were involved in helping someone out. You do realise the complicated revenue management systems airlines use that prices are constantly changing? Also a screenshot of pricing on the 7th of April while cool has no real relevance for something that happened last week. Lastly I don't quite get your math but let's just leave it at that.

It's tough times out there for all of us.