I remember you had to have a medical certificate from a airline appointed doctor when travelling to the U.S. in the 1960´s. The vaccination pass was required almost everywhere outside Europe.

If this is a stupid question, then please forgive me.
I understand the usual lateral separation of pilots in the cockpit would be about 1m.
I understand MOL has previously referred to the co-pilots as "redundant"
I note FR appear to be flying loops in order to maint the fleet ready for an immediate return to revenue service.

I note the reason why he's doing this, but I am also wondering how this would be defined as essential in comparison with repatriation flights or carrying urgent equipment.
But I also accept FR's model is quire different to even other locos - they regularly rotate a/c between different bases so they can't just define a small portion as "the hub fleet" or even the core fleet.
I don't see any **major** environmental issues with a small number of very short loops, if that in turn prevents the need for future maintenance, which itself often needs 2 dead head sectors (not one), especially as all the other airlines are going to present a massive back log on the facilities that do this. In any normal business situation, airlines will still operate empty sectors as part of pilot training. These machines are usually going to operate 3-5 return sectors per day with high 70s LF, but of coure they are getting lambasted for it.

I'm just wondering if there are any circumstances in which a commercial aircraft can ever be permitted to take off with only one operator at the controls.

I know that's a stupid question to pilots, but I'm not a pilot, just someone who used to have a more regular interest in the industry.

The whole travel industry might be forced to move away from the prepayment model where advance purchase of all kinds of travel, hotels, and package holidays is what funds day-to-day operations. From the customer's point of view an escrow model would be fairer, where the payment secures the promised service but the cash is held by a trusted (!) third party and not released to the service provider until the service has been performed. In the UK I know of one company that already operates like this - "On The Beach" (London: OTB) but it's a stand-out rarity. I know the credit card companies perform the escrow function to a limited extent in some cases, and can bring a service provider down if they judge it's unsafe to release the funds, but most firms in the travel industry rely on the prepayment money for ready cash. That seems to have been what motivated Carnival to continue despatching cruises instead of allowing customers to withdraw and get a refund.

I can't see the industry agreeing to this because it could easily double (or more) their working capital requirements but you couldn't rule out some states demanding that this is what happens.

If the prepayment model is revoked I foresee a much smaller airline industry for quite a long time, and much higher fares. Actually, I think that's the immediate future anyway.

Realistically, the emphasis for most peeps is the "at home" - with very little of the "work" bit getting done. Yes, some can fully work from home, but not by any means a majority.

Probably not a majority no, but a very significant proportion of the working population will have proved that working from home is highly cost effective and extremely easy. Almost all office based "white collar" jobs can be carried out from home, just as they are doing right now. Technology is going to accelerate that process as developers see the way ahead especially with virtual and augmented reality.

Not everyone wants to work from home, so there will be some balance and push back, but the genie is completely out the bottle. For many workers, working from home will be completely standard clause, especially as "knowledge specialist occupations" always have to relentlessly compete for talent.

Bit of credibilty behind that...I work for a technology company that went full working from home, before the Government instruction, with zero loss of either capability or productivity. I'm dealing daily with solicitors, accoutants and all sorts of finance people, all of whom are working from home and I authored our companies' business continuity plan, so I have a little specialist knowledge in this field.

UK Daily Telegraph today.

Quote.

”Air fares could double when lockdown is lifted, making foreign holidays temporarily unaffordable for many British families.

The Telegraph understands ticket prices are set to surge because once non-essential foreign travel is once again allowed, aircraft carriers are likely to be barred from fully filling planes.

This is in order to ensure passengers keep a safe distance from each other while onboard. Last night an industry source said it is expected that aircraft carriers will be given social distancing guidance, which they will be asked to enforce for passengers”.

Unquote.

Posted this elsewhere - I apologise Mods if this is not allowed. And to everyone else.

So this will happen on subways, trains and bars too yes? I’d love to see the effects on the London tube.

Not so difficult to make it happen I think..(Where I live trains already sell tickets for half the seats), for the bars there are the doormen to limit no. of people inside and in a subway there is also possibility for limiting access into the stations and into the wagons. There will be many changes in the world we know...

There are no circumstances under which an aircraft certified with a minimum flight crew of two can legally be flown by one.

I'd better start by warning you that I got told off for mentioning the London "Tube" and social distancing by one of our more cosmopolitan posters a while back......

...but I'll stand by what I said in that post and the point you are making..there's a danger of aviation being told to enforce "social distancing theatre"..

It's seems pretty darned pointless to hit the airlines with strict social distancing regulation, perhaps on a less than one hour flight, when prior to that flight a passenger can have been on the tube/bus to the airport for more than an hour, then had a meal in a restaurant land side, then been lined up, mauled and had their possessions dragged through trays in security, then nipped into newsagents and perhaps the "pub" before boarding...and then and only then be forced into rigid social distancing.

For the more cosmopolitan - other cities/means of public transport/ airport terminals can be substituted for the London case.

Well we are in the midst of the most devastating pandemic for a 100 years and the Mayor of London who runs the tube system seems unable to ensure that social distancing can occur even when usage has fallen through the floor due to the shutting down of most of the economy.

So on a normal day?