HI, Sorry If I am ruining your sunday but I'll keep this short , I worked in production support for 2 years before switching to service based company where I was again put in a permanent night shift by force because I had experience, it was so horrible that I had to quit my job else I would have ended myself, I'll not go into details.
I decided to take up front-end web development and I learned React,Next, JS,TS, Vite and Sass was able to make projects made in tutorial. I am creating a resume and I'll be putting that 1 year experience front end because I did had access to web application and know how it works . I was supporting it and we migrated to flash based to HTML5 during my tenure.
My question is I didn't do that much in migration they just asked me to monitor application and debug it create some HTML templates and styling, now if the interviewer asks me to explain my project what would I say ?
Should I not put this at all and approach as a fresher ? I was on good pay in the last support job will I get less than that ?
The caveat is I do not have time to practice and build projects because I wanted to take break but a huge emergency came up and I immediately need a job , asap if preferred.
Please advise oh wise people.

TW: domestic violence and abuse
Hey there. I've been a regular here with another account but I wanted a new one to share this. I'm not sure why I'm posting here exactly. Maybe because this community is mostly supportive and less mean than others, I don't know. This isn't an OAD issue, so I apologize.
I am leaving my husband. The reasons are many. He's always been verbally abusive, borderline physically abusive too (pushing me, throwing stuff at me, he's done some very ugly things but he hasn't hit me yet, just threatens to do so almost daily to "keep me in line"). He doesn't treat our son well either but mostly he ignores his existence.
He has never been an equal partner in terms of childcare or household chores, despite both of us working from home and me working much longer hours. In fact, that's probably the main reason I'm OAD. I've even told him that I won't be having any more kids with him because he firmly believes that childcare and household are the "woman's job" (at the same time he despises SAHMs and thinks they're "worthless gold diggers"). Even this morning, he was already awake and he currently doesn't even work (refuses to, wants me to support him), yet I was the one who had to wake up to take care of our toddler and it's always been this way, including the first 2 years after we had him, my husband stopped working then as well and just took on small odd jobs, barely enough to pay the bills, leaving everything else to me. There was a month or so last year when I imposed the rule that whoever is already up will be the one taking care of the kid (taking him to the potty and giving him breakfast, nothing extreme) instead of waking the sleeping parent up and it worked for a couple of weeks, then my husband started going out to have his coffee outside any time he'd wake up before me. When he was still a baby, usually I'd be working until 1-2am, his father would sleep all day, literally, and be at his computer at 3am, the baby starts crying, he doesn't even check on him, instead comes and wakes me up telling me the baby is crying, go take care of him. He never takes over anything for me when I'm sick, not even when I was almost passing out from pneumonia, I was still the one doing all of the childcare, waking up at night, taking him to doctors appointments because he was also sick. All my husband has ever contributed was driving because I don't drive. But he won't even get out of the car, just drive, wait for us, then drive us back. A taxi service basically.
He has a mental illness but he quit his meds a few months ago (his psychiatrist approved but he hadn't seen him in 7 years and the doctor didn't even remember him or what his issues were). Instead of feeling better, however, my husband has been gradually entering an episode since then. He's become paranoid and violent. He still hasn't hit me, but every single conversation on any random irrelevant topic leads to him losing his shit and threatening to hit me. And he doesn't just say it, most times he raises his hand, shaking with rage, barely stops himself from hitting me, and doesn't care if our toddler is around or not. I've been walking on eggshells for months and as a result, I don't even talk to him any more and avoid him as much as I can because I know that he's just waiting for a reason to release his anger. And that's a 280lbs man so it's scary enough to keep me quiet. Not that our communication was particularly good before, he'd always refuse to talk about our issues, leave in the middle of the conversation, and regularly give me the silent treatment for days without even telling me what's wrong. But now it's non-existent.
He doesn't realize there's anything wrong with him and his mother and I have been trying to get him to see a psychiatrist for months now but he not only refuses, he becomes aggressive with both of us.
He actually hit his mother a few days ago, in front of our toddler. I think that was what cemented my decision to leave. In fact, I probably should have done it much sooner, maybe the first time he threatened to hit me, while pregnant, 5 years ago. I should have left then, but honestly, I was afraid of being a single mother. I'm still afraid but now I feel that I don't have a choice. He refuses to get help, his mother refuses to start the procedure for involuntary treatment. I don't see any other way, honestly.
I feel guilty and his mother is making me feel guilty for leaving him while he's ill. When I told her that I won't let my son live in a house with DV, she actually said "Do you know there are women who get beat up every day and you call this domestic violence?". Yes, in fact I do, but I get it. She's his mother, she was hoping I'd stay and help, and I wanted to, I have been trying. I know it's his mental illness that took things to this extreme but life before it wasn't that much better. He isn't a bad person, but he is so mean and cruel when he gets angry, he'd call me all sorts of names, humiliate me, disrespect me in every possible way. I just kept compromising with myself and waiting and hoping that things will get better. Well, now they got so much worse and I have no hope left.
I know life will be very hard as a single parent. I don't have any family to help out, but I hope my mother in law will continue to help as she has so far, I don't know.
We'll be renting for a while, and I will have to work even longer hours to keep us afloat, so I guess it's a good thing I've been living on 4-5 hours of interrupted sleep for the past 4 years. But I think ultimately, we will be better off. I won't be watching my sweet boy's heart break every single day when he tries to get attention from dad just to be chased away, yelled at or threatened. They spend less than 5min a day together, not even every day. I don't push them to spend time together any more because his father is too unpredictable, but even in the past it would have been the same if I didn't try to guide them toward each other. Now that I've stopped, they barely see each other, despite living in the same apartment.
There's nothing left for us here. But I'm terrified of being a single mother. I'm also afraid of my husband's reaction and possible retaliation because he isn't thinking straight. I know that having one child will be much easier than multiples in this situation so I'm thankful for the choice I made, maybe the one smart thing I've done in the past 6 years. But I would appreciate some reassurance from other single parents. Lie to me, please, tell me it will be okay.

Google Drive is super popular, Microsoft OneDrive is super popular, Apple iCloud is super popular (if you have an Apple Device). All of these services have some kind of web installer you can download to your personal computer so you can just drag, drop, save, and load your files seamlessly as if your cloud drive was a local directory. You don't even have to mess with Adobe Cloud or whatever they call it.
What I like about Google Drive is you can color-code the folders and use dashes in the file names, and what I like about OneDrive is their Photo app works nicer with their editable tags. And OneDrive comes with a password protected encrypted folder for your most sensitive files. With Gdrive you have to pay for a Business account to have editable tags, and encrypted folders I believe.
I believe they all give you 15-20gb of free storage before their next plan is a couple bucks a month for 100gb ish. I don't know about Apple but Gdrive has excellent Google Docs integration and Microsoft has Office 365 so both of those cloud services also have document support, spreadsheet support, powerpoint support etc. Google Drive has a lot of plugins and maybe has better video playback, idk.
This never happened to me technically but don't be that person that has their computer crash on them and you lose everything because you didn't plan for the contingency of data loss. And this is more convenient than having physical backups.

since I never followed meal plans because of crappy home life and my hesitancy to recover so I decided to eat whatever and not put a restriction on myself and recover, like eating foot in highish amounts to recover like doesn’t matter how unhealthy it is just eat basically and I restored weight a year ago but I started learning about my traumas from family after high school graduation and stayed isolated for a year and I recovered right before I isolated but being here makes it hard to eat healthy so I ate fast food to recover the rest and just ate that for a year mostly because it was convenient and I am used to eating like garbage
So now I don’t feel like I want to restrict and feel more normal but I’ve never returned to a more normal pattern of eating and idk how to approach that after you restore, do you just do it on your own or with a dietician when your not anorexic anymore, since my recovery has been lonely and without support

Need them to hunt shiny Kyurem! My empty head already transfered my shiny Zekrom into Home so now I need both of them. I dont care if they are legit or not, its purely for Kyurem.
Only stuff I can offer in S/M are Wormhole UM Ultra Beast
I have some various shinies in Home and Gen 9 if interested, can also offer various Gen 9 services like Tera Changes, level 100 ups via candy and specific shiny hunts of your choice

Mistake again.

On 29th May 2023, I work this Adhoc job at the condo. When I eat the bread, I take out the plate, the plastic break. After eating, when I go and throw the rubbish. Maybe the wind too big, maybe the wind blow the plate on the floor but I never realize that. The next day when I reach home, I go and find my plate, I cannot find. I made a big mistake of losing my plastic plate. This type of mistake shouldn't have happened. On 1st June 2023, I work this Adhoc job at another condo. My phone put on the vehicle sheet. Then I was outside the condo, checking the vehicle. So when they come, I ask what number they are going to. Then I accidentally dropped my phone on the floor. So not only I lost my plastic plate, I also dropped my phone on the floor. On 3rd June 2023, in the morning after I finish my night shift work, again I make mistake. So I went to the bus stop to wait for the bus. So I wait and wait and wait, I buay tahan already. So I think, maybe I walk straight turn left got other bus numbers. As I walk away, less than 2 mins, the bus already come. I made a big mistake of not continue to wait few more minutes. As a result, I need to wait for more than 10 more mins for the next bus. So this is a mistake that shouldn't have happened.

Can share with your fans why you have not informed your wife about your BDSM activities since you say its not cheating, why you never tell your wife ?

While this is not cheating, this is actually a sia suay thing. Even though this is not cheating, my wife will feel very very sia suay if she finds out that her husband becomes a dog for a 22 years old (last year). Now is 23 years old beautiful chiobu girl. Because my wife say we are human being. We are not dogs. Because its a sia suay thing. That is why didn't tell her. Because she will be angry.

The way you eat and drink is very harmful to your health. Since you are at polyclinic now, can you go and request for a complete blood test ? Check for cholesterol and sugar level. Please consider a blood test please. Its not normal to drink 6 cans of soft drinks in a single meal.

BDBYZD Its not normal for a normal human being to drink 6 cans of soft drinks but however, I am not a normal human being. I am a human God. 50% human 50% God. For a human God like me, there's no need for me to do what blood test. So I am a human God. Don't worry man. Don't worry.

What if BDSM mistresses see you, they no wet ?

BDBYZD The BDSM mistresses. The purpose of attending the BDSM session is not to make them wet. Because you are not going to have sex with them. So why they need to feel wet ? The purpose is for them to feel shiok, not to feel wet. When the BDSM mistresses punish/humiliate/torture the slaves, they will feel shiok. They no need to feel wet. All they need to feel is feel shiok. They will feel happy. They will feel shiok to punish/humiliate and torture you. Most of the BDSM mistresses when they know its me. Confirm they will feel excited. Because I am Singapore famous YouTube sensation, Facebook sensation, Instagram sensation, TikTok sensation. They confirm will feel high. Will feel excited.

Who are the top 3 BDSM mistresses in Singapore ? Is Princess Yura number 2 ?

Its not fair for me to tell you who are the top 3 BDSM mistresses when I have not engage all the BDSM mistresses. So this question is a bit unfair to answer. Because I never try all the other BDSM mistresses services yet. So how can I tell you who is number 1 ? Based on what I have engage before. Like I say I have engage 3 BDSM mistresses before. Currently out of these 3, Mistress Luna currently is number 1. Why I say No 1 ? When I engage Goddess Mistress Luna, she just started her BDSM career. That time she have no experience at all. That time when I want to look for BDSM mistresses, Mistress Luna has not started her career yet. When she just started her career, I was one of the first few slaves who engaged her. I can say that I engaged her in the very very first month of her BDSM mistress job. In her very very first month. Even though Mistress Luna just started BDSM business and I just engaged her, she looks professional. The way she punish/humiliate/torture me, I couldn't tell that she is a new beginner. Its like she's a professional. Its so well done. Let me explain to you why. The first BDSM mistress I engage. She say she got few years of BDSM experience. Let me point out what are her problem. The first BDSM mistress I engage, she need to read the script. After she punish me, she need to read the script. Next one is what what what. She cannot remember the script. She need to see her phone what is the next one I want. But Goddess Mistress Luna, she doesn't need to do that. She's very very pro. Very professional. Before the session, I tell her what I want. She can remember all on her mind, on her brain, what is next she want to do to me, what is next she want to punish me. The first BDSM mistress, when she slap my face. She scared I feel painful. When she slap my face. She say "can or not. can or not" This spoil my mood. Imagine you watch the wrestling match, you punch the wrestler then you ask the wrestler "my punch can or not. you feel pain or not. the punch can or not" This spoil the whole script. You don't watch wrestling. People punch then say can or not. Or you watch the porn, you slap the slave then you ask the slave can or not. Because you see before the session, I already tell the BDSM mistress "just slap my face as hard as you can" In the end, she scared scared scared. But Mistress Luna is different. I like the way she torture me because she knows what I want. She can give me what I want. She don't show mercy to me which is what I want. For example that time Mistress Luna cane my buttocks. She cane and cane and cane. I feel super super painful. But she never show mercy to me which is why I like it. Don't because I screaming in pain then the BDSm mistress starts to show mercy to me. Maybe cane more soft or stop canning. No. Don't care. Just continue to cane me as hard as she can. The hardest she can. Don't show mercy. So I super loved it when Mistress Luna doesn't show mercy to me. The more I scream, the more hard she cane me. The more strokes she cane me. I super loved it. And I can tell you man, the first time I engage her, that was during Mistress Luna's first month. If you see her Twitter, she starts her career on May 2022 but I engage her even before she started her Twitter. I engage her on April 2022. I was one of the very few slaves who engage her. And after that I want to engage her again and again because I felt that her services good. I like it. Like I say, I never engage all the other BDSM mistresses in Singapore before so its not fair to rate how good they are. Like Princess Yura all these I dunno cos I never engage them before. So its very hard to give you their ranking. Out of 3 mistresses I engage, Mistress Luna is number 1.

Will you start your slave business. Be a slave to others ?

Luna say I don't look like Master ? Since when did Mistress Luna say that ? People say that if I become a slave, confirm got many people pay me to whack me. Let me answer you this question. I mention before. I am not gay. I am not interested in guys. I am not going to earn few hundred dollars just for a guy to punish me because my haters 99.99%, they are guys. They are men. So I am not interested. Even that time on my Telegram, got someone say "what if a man offer me $3000" You see it doesn't matter if a man offer me $2000 or $3000 or $4000 or $5000, I will not accept it because I don't like to be punished and humiliated by a men because I am not gay. I don't feel high. I don't feel shiok. I don't like to be a slave to a man. Only a woman. And the woman must be a chiobu. Cannot be too fat. Cannot be too old. Cannot be too ugly. So if open the slaves business and i only want ladies, its impossible to earn. Because usually those ladies who like to punish slaves, the male slaves are the ones to pay money to the BDSM mistresses to get the services. Its impossible for the lady to pay money to punish a slave. You have to pay the money to the girls for them for them to punish you. The idea of open slave business will not work. Because like I say, I am not interested to be a slave for guys, for men. I see the men. My kukujiao cannot stand. I only interested in beautiful chiobu. Btw, ladies are called Mistress not Master. So don't say I got Master. I don't have Master. I only got Mistresses.

[to be continued]

Hey! Has anyone ever heard of Far800 and know how to contact them? I’m from canada and I paid express shipping for a cosplay from Uwowo. The tracking site is in full Chinese so i’ve been forced to google translate everything and apparently it was out for delivery on the 2nd but the delivery failed? I live in an apartment and i was awake and home all day, i never heard anything but now my tracking says they left a message for me to contact them? There was no email, no text, no phone call and no note anywhere near my suite or in the lobby of the building. If anyone knows how i can contact the courier company i’d really appreciate it, I’ve emailed Uwowo customer support but i won’t be hearing back until monday. I have a Con coming up very soon so i gotta get my hands on the cosplay ASAP

For people who have some sight left lol. I can’t qualify for legal blindness because I can see just enough when I’m in a dark exam room. But in actuality, my vision is various levels of bad during the day. I have major light sensitivity and extremely severe dry eye (little to no tear production). This means that when it’s windy or when there’s air blowing on my eyes, my vision becomes more fuzzy to only perception of general shapes. I also have varying severity of nystagmus. So my functional vision is extremely limited, but I’m not legally blind so can’t qualify for any services or support. Anyone else stuck in a similar spot, or have been in the past?

I'm trying to do this on a Fedora 37 KDE virtual machine to be able to boot into FreeDOS and update the BIOS. This distro has SELinux implemented, though I'm not sure if it's the cause. PC is Dell XPS 8500 from 2012, and this is the update I'm trying to do.
I have been following this and this video (both doing the same exact thing pretty much) to use UNetbootin to create a bootable USB to boot into FreeDOS and update the BIOS of my decade old XPS 8500 PC. For PCs this old, you have to do this. Dell and the videos show people formatting the USB to FAT32, so I did that too, and then used UNetbootin exactly like they did.
However, there's something that happens in all these videos that isn't happening for me, and it's causing the booting to fail. At 5:12 of this video and 4:00 of this video, after they use UNetbootin to create the bootable USB, the USB has a couple of files such as libcom32.c32, libutil.c32, menu.c32, syslinux.cfg, ubninit, and ubnkern. However, my USB only has ubnkern after using UNetbootin, and nothing else.
Also in the videos, when they click OK and let UNetbootin do the operation, they see a progress bar load, and then click exit on an installation complete popup. For me, I see the progress bar at 0% for a split second, and then the popup just disappears and the app closes.
I'm wondering if it's a permissions issue. It's pointed out in the first of those 2 videos at this timestamp that UNetbootin doesn't launch properly all the time, so he forces it to launch properly using sudo QT_X11_NO_MITSHM=1 unetbootin.
I had to use that command, because opening UNetbootin the normal way gives this popup titled "Run as root - KDE su"
```The action you requested needs root privileges.Please enter root's password below or click Ignore to continue with your current privileges"
Command: 'bash -c '\"QT_X11_NO_MITSHM=1 /usbin/unetbootin "rootcheck=no'''\'''
Password: [Password Textbox]``
If I type the password, it gives me this error:
```Permission denied. Possibly incorrect password, please try again. On some systems, you need to be in a special group (often: wheel) to use this program
Command: 'bash -c '\"QT_X11_NO_MITSHM=1 /usbin/unetbootin "rootcheck=no'''\''' ```
If I click the ignore button, it gives this error popup titled "Error -KDE su"
```Cannot execute command 'bash -c '\"QT_X11_NO_MITSHM=1 /usbin/unetbootin "rootcheck=no'''\'''
(Not sure if I got the apostrophes/quote symbols right. It doesn't let me copy the messages on any of these popups)
I can't try rufus instead because that's only available on Windows, and I'm on Linux. Any ideas on why this isn't working?

Chef Gordon Ramsay was in a great mood to see his remaining 12 Chefs following the strong last service from both teams and said they all had brought back the spirit he had seen from them in their seasons. Santos said he was having to focus today after feeling like his team let him down by nominating him last night and Giovanni said he needed to prove his age wasn’t catching up with him going into the 2nd half of the competition. Chef Ramsay said he hoped everyone had their creative juices flowing as it was time to work exotic meats to see how they could work with meats they didn’t regularly cook. Van was psyched to do this challenge again having killed it in Season 17 and Tara also remembered doing this challenge, saying she wanted to finally excel in a challenge. Each dish would be scored out of 5 by Ramsay and 2 guest judges and first up was boar with Kanae and Van facing off. Kanae’s boar was messily presented and scored 7 out of a possible 15 and Van had a superb effort scoring 13 out of 15 and Van said he needed to get out of Hells Kitchen today having still not got out since the first challenge. Next up was the battle of elk and neither Sabrina who scored an awful 4 and Kashia who scored 7 did much to prove their worth but the battle of the venison was much stronger with Ed scoring 12 and Dannie scoring 11 with Dannie saying this was her bounce back after last night’s service. With the red team in the lead 31:23, Antonio scored 10 with his alligator dish and Elizabeth scored 9 to not let the blue team get much closer in points but Tara scored a great 13 with her asian inspired goat and Nikki only scored 7 with Tara saying this was her best challenge yet and she hoped that Giovanni could bring the victory home for the blue team. Giovanni’s ostrich was undercooked sadly and only scored 5 and despite Santos having an average effort, his score of 7 was enough to win the challenge for the red team! Van said WOOOOO at getting out of Hells Kitchen and said he hoped Ed enjoyed his punishment today and Giovanni said he needed to get out of this slump to avoid going home early again.
The red team went off to party and Dannie said she hoped she had proven herself to still be a strong Chef in the red team and Nikki said everyone just had to look forward to the next service. Giovanni was frustrated during the punishment and Sabrina annoyed the rest of the team by being lazy during the punishment, leading to an argument between her and Kanae. Kanae said as much as she wanted the blue team to win she wouldn’t mind losing to get rid of Sabrina who had followed her to the blue team and Antonio said he’d have rather kept the teams as they were. Chef Ramsay welcomed back the red team to hells kitchen and said he had an important announcement for both teams as it was time for an assessment on who the weakest Chefs were in each team. However, Ramsay said he was not wanting everyone’s decision but wanted to hear from the 2 best performers from yesterdays challenge which were Van and Tara. Ramsay wanted to know who the 3 weakest Chefs from each team were and that those 6 Chefs would take each other on in a challenge with the weakest Chef leaving Hells Kitchen. Kanae was concerned with Tara being in charge of who was up for elimination as she considered her one of the weaker Chefs and Santos said Van better not put him on the chopping block after being put up for elimination last service. Van decided that Kashia and Dannie were both going up but after deliberation he put forward Santos as the next nominee and Santos was fuming feeling Elizabeth should be going up instead of him. Tara put up Sabrina first then Giovanni and Antonio which annoyed Antonio as he felt his improvement meant nothing and that Kanae should be going up instead of him.
Sabrina was fuming about being put up first by Tara and said she was still bitter about the poached eggs fiasco but that she had to prove herself as a great Chef and Santos said it was extremely stressful to have to cook for his life but was confident he was better than the 5 Chefs he was cooking against. Ramsay announced that the challenge would be to for the Chefs to prove their skills in cooking duck and Dannie said she confident about cooking duck while Giovanni said he was going to haunted if he went out on cook for your life again and hoped he could not buckle under the pressure this time. First up was Santos who’s duck dish was mainly given good reviews from Ramsay except he felt there was one too many vegetables on the plate. Next up was Antonio who said he was sad to be having to cook for his life but Ramsay said his dish was extremely strong and said it was better than Santos so told Antonio to return back to the dorms and Antonio was delighted to bounce back BABY! Ed was happy to see Antonio back and congratulated him on his improvement in the competition. The next chef to bring her dish up was Kashia who did cook her duck perfectly but had watery vegetables as well as a slightly bland sauce and this meant Santos was allowed to return to the dorms and Santos said he should never have been there in the first place but was happy to prove that he was at least better than Kashia.
With Santos and Antonio chilling, Sabrina was up next and said her heart was ready to fall out of her butt and despite Ramsay saying she had way too many potatoes on the plate, he declared her dish better than Kashias and Sabrina headed back to the dorm much to the chagrin of Tara but Kanae said she felt Sabrina deserved to be back in Hells Kitchen. Next up was Giovanni who said he could not get eliminated at this stage again but he had nothing to worry about as his dish was praised by Ramsay who told Giovanni to go back to the dorms and Van congratulated his buddy Giovanni at making it back and said he was happy for him. Last up was Dannie with a flustrated Kashia worried she was going out and despite Dannie’s confidence, her duck was overcooked and Ramsay declared that Kashia had the better dish so DANNIE was sent home from Hells Kitchen for failing at cooking duck. Kashia said no one was getting rid of her yet and Elizabeth said she was happy Dannie had gone as the red team now would be stronger going forward.
https://strawpoll.com/polls/e2narLm0pgB
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yZAEyarJoN7y7eVxefqMECZJaQT4frCccvuZ5TdMGvM/edit#gid=0

Off Payroll Working (Anti-Avoidance) Bill

An Act to make provision for further anti-avoidance measures in relation to Off Payroll Working and the establishment of employee rights where income is deemed employment income.
BE IT ENACTED by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
Section 1: Definitions
(1) “Off Payroll Working legislation” refers to successive previous laws and regulations related to the determination on whether a worker should be treated as an employee or self-employed for tax purposes when paid through an intermediary.
(2) “IR35 legislation” refers to the successive previous laws and regulations on off payroll working above, directed at small privately owned businesses.
(3) “Client” refers to any corporate entity which pays for services provided by an intermediary.
(4) “Intermediary” refers to any corporate entity established to provide the services of individuals to a client.
(5) “Individual” refers to the person providing services to a client while remunerated through an intermediary
(6) “Deemed employment income” is any income liable for income tax and national insurance under the terms set out in Section 5.
Section 2: Combination of Off Payroll Working and IR35 rules
(1) From the enactment of this Bill, interpretation of all IR35 legislation will be considered the same as Off Payroll Working legislation, and the treatment between small private businesses and other businesses will be the same.
(2) In all cases, the client will now be responsible for determining the employment status of the worker.
Section 3: Application of Off Payroll Working Rules
(1) Off Payroll Working Rules will be considered when:

a. An individual has more than 5% ownership of an intermediary entity, and/or;
b. Services given to a client by an intermediary equate to more than 5% of the individual’s total taxable earnings.

Section 4: Assessment of Employee or Self-employed for tax purposes
(1) In each financial year, the client must make an assessment on whether an individual should be taxed as an employee or self-employed.
(2) If at least 5 of the following conditions apply, the individual shall be classified as an employee for tax purposes and “deemed employment income” should be calculated and taxed for Income Tax and National Insurance by both the client (in the first instance) and by the individual (true up/down in their annual self assessment):

a. Degree of control - in the course of the services, is the client mostly responsible for establishing the hours of the service or the time of day or date that the work should be delivered?
b. Mutuality of obligations - is the client obliged under the terms of the contract to give regular work and pay for it, and is the individual responsible for delivering that work?
c. Correction of work - is the client responsible, ahead of the intermediary or individual, either contractually or implicitly, for the quality of the services delivered by the individual?
d. Financial risk - are the financial risks related to the contract primarily with the client instead of the intermediary/individual?
e. Provision of own equipment - is the majority of the equipment used (buildings, plant and machinery, technology, sundries etc.) in the service provided by the client?
f. Disciplinary - is the individual contractually obliged to the same or greater behaviour and disciplinary terms as an employee of the client, or where not applicable, an employee of an equivalent business?
g. Exclusivity - does the contract result in substantial terms of exclusivity for a period greater than 3 months?
h. Inclusion in business - is the individual practically included in the client business in the context of internal meetings and communications?
i. Alternative worker - can an alternative individual replace the individual without substantial disruption or public statement?
j. Public opinion test - would a reasonable member of the public expect that the individual is an employee of the client?

(3) HMRC will challenge the judgements made for each consideration above if they appear to be unreasonable in a tax tribunal.
Section 5: Provision of employment benefits for deemed employment income earners
(1) Where an assessment is made that an individuals’ earnings are deemed employment income, the individual retains the right to statutory employment benefits and statutory pension terms as other employees.
Section 6: Repeals
(1) The Off Payroll Working (IR35 clarification) Act 2018 is hereby repealed.
Section 7: Commencement, Short Title and Extent
(1) This Act will come into force on the 6 April 2024
(2) This Act will extend to the entirety of the United Kingdom.
(3) This Act shall be cited as the Off Payroll Working (Anti-avoidance) Act 2023
This Bill was submitted by His Grace Sir Rea-wakey KCT KT KD KCMG KBE MVO FRS, Duke of Dorset, Secretary of State for the Home Department, on behalf of His Majesty’s 33rd Government.
Opening Speech:
Deputy Speaker,
I now present the final piece of anti-avoidance legislation to the House. Many years ago, alongside my good friend bnzss, I co-wrote a piece of legislation designed to tackle the known tax avoidance loophole through off-payroll working. While the legislation has been somewhat useful at tackling the loophole, recent cases such as those of Gary Lineker and Lorraine Kelly have proven that the legislation simply does not go far enough. Therefore I decided to rip it up and start again.
This legislation goes much further than the previous Bill - firstly combining both the IR35 rules for small businesses and the off-payroll working rules that currently apply to larger businesses, ensuring consistency between both sets of rules. Secondly, the Bill establishes a clearer set of criteria and a passable threshold in which earnings made through a company registered under the Companies Act 2006 or it’s predecessor or successor acts or a limited partnership should be recognised as employment income, thereby incurring income tax and National Insurance. Finally, this Bill provides further clarity as to the status of an individual when their income is deemed to be employment income, and extends the rights of employees to these workers including but not limited to the provision of statutory employment benefits and rights under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and statutory pension regulations.
The Government will relentlessly pursue those who wish to use technicalities in our regulations to avoid paying higher rates of tax and companies that wish to avoid conferring statutory benefits to those who are, for all intents and purposes, employees.
In combination with the other two pieces of anti-avoidance legislation I will be/have submitted to the House, these measures are collectively expected to raise £3.4 billion. This proposed revenue generation and these Bills were raised at Her Majesty’s Budget Committee and unopposed. My thanks go to my friend the Right Honourable Phonexia2 for their assistance in costing.
I urge the House to rally behind this Bill.
(M: These costings are calculated as 40% of the tax gap
for “Evasion” and “Non-payment”, given the difficulty of calculating the actual revenue generated from these measures).
This division will end at 10pm on Wednesday 7th June 2023.

The Airbus A300 is a wide-body airliner developed and manufactured by Airbus. In September 1967, aircraft manufacturers in the United Kingdom, France, and West Germany signed a memorandum of understanding to develop a large airliner. West Germany and France reached an agreement on 29 May 1969 after the British withdrew from the project on 10 April 1969. European collaborative aerospace manufacturer Airbus Industrie was formally created on 18 December 1970 to develop and produce it. The prototype first flew on 28 October 1972.
The first twin-engine widebody airliner, the A300 typically seats 247 passengers in two classes over a range of 5,375 to 7,500 km (2,900 to 4,050 nmi). Initial variants are powered by General Electric CF6-50 or Pratt & Whitney JT9D turbofans and have a three-crew flight deck. The improved A300-600 has a two-crew cockpit and updated CF6-80C2 or PW4000 engines; it made its first flight on 8 July 1983 and entered service later that year. The A300 is the basis of the smaller A310 (first flown in 1982) and was adapted in a freighter version. Its cross section was retained for the larger four-engined A340 (1991) and the larger twin-engined A330 (1992). It is also the basis for the oversize Beluga transport (1994).
Launch customer Air France introduced the type on 23 May 1974. After limited demand initially, sales took off as the type was proven in early service, beginning three decades of steady orders. It has a similar capacity to the Boeing 767-300, introduced in 1986, but lacked the 767-300ER range. During the 1990s, the A300 became popular with cargo aircraft operators, as both passenger airliner conversions and as original builds. Production ceased in July 2007 after 561 deliveries. As of March 2023, there were 228 A300 family aircraft in commercial service.
Origins:
During the 1960s, European aircraft manufacturers such as Hawker Siddeley and the British Aircraft Corporation, based in the UK, and Sud Aviation of France, had ambitions to build a new 200-seat airliner for the growing civil aviation market. While studies were performed and considered, such as a stretched twin-engine variant of the Hawker Siddeley Trident and an expanded development of the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) One-Eleven, designated the BAC Two-Eleven, it was recognized that if each of the European manufacturers were to launch similar aircraft into the market at the same time, neither would achieve sales volume needed to make them viable.[2] In 1965, a British government study, known as the Plowden Report, had found British aircraft production costs to be between 10% and 20% higher than American counterparts due to shorter production runs, which was in part due to the fractured European market. To overcome this factor, the report recommended the pursuit of multinational collaborative projects between the region's leading aircraft manufacturers.[3]: 49 [4][5]: 2–13
European manufacturers were keen to explore prospective programs; the proposed 260-seat wide-body HBN 100 between Hawker Siddeley, Nord Aviation, and Breguet Aviation being one such example.[2][6]: 37–38 National governments were also keen to support such efforts amid a belief that American manufacturers could dominate the European Economic Community;[7] in particular, Germany had ambitions for a multinational airliner project to invigorate its aircraft industry, which had declined considerably following the Second World War.[3]: 49–50 During the mid-1960s, both Air France and American Airlines had expressed interest in a short-haul twin-engine wide-body aircraft, indicating a market demand for such an aircraft to be produced.[3][8] In July 1967, during a high-profile meeting between French, German, and British ministers, an agreement was made for greater cooperation between European nations in the field of aviation technology, and "for the joint development and production of an airbus".[2][9]: 34 The word airbus at this point was a generic aviation term for a larger commercial aircraft, and was considered acceptable in multiple languages, including French.[9]: 34
Shortly after the July 1967 meeting, French engineer Roger Béteille was appointed as the technical director of what would become the A300 program, while Henri Ziegler, chief operating office of Sud Aviation, was appointed as the general manager of the organization and German politician Franz Josef Strauss became the chairman of the supervisory board.[2] Béteille drew up an initial work share plan for the project, under which French firms would produce the aircraft's cockpit, the control systems, and lower-center portion of the fuselage, Hawker Siddeley would manufacture the wings, while German companies would produce the forward, rear and upper part of the center fuselage sections. Addition work included moving elements of the wings being produced in the Netherlands, and Spain producing the horizontal tail plane.[2][6]: 38
An early design goal for the A300 that Béteille had stressed the importance of was the incorporation of a high level of technology, which would serve as a decisive advantage over prospective competitors. As such, the A300 would feature the first use of composite materials of any passenger aircraft, the leading and trailing edges of the tail fin being composed of glass fibre reinforced plastic.[5]: 2–16 [10] Béteille opted for English as the working language for the developing aircraft, as well against using Metric instrumentation and measurements, as most airlines already had US-built aircraft.[10] These decisions were partially influenced by feedback from various airlines, such as Air France and Lufthansa, as an emphasis had been placed on determining the specifics of what kind of aircraft that potential operators were seeking. According to Airbus, this cultural approach to market research had been crucial to the company's long-term success.[10]
Workshare and redefinition:
On 26 September 1967, the British, French, and West German governments signed a Memorandum of Understanding to start development of the 300-seat Airbus A300.[6]: 38 [11]: 43 [12]: 57 At this point, the A300 was only the second major joint aircraft programme in Europe, the first being the Anglo-French Concorde.[9] Under the terms of the memorandum, Britain and France were each to receive a 37.5 per cent work share on the project, while Germany received a 25 per cent share. Sud Aviation was recognized as the lead company for A300, with Hawker Siddeley being selected as the British partner company.[2] At the time, the news of the announcement had been clouded by the British Government's support for the Airbus, which coincided with its refusal to back BAC's proposed competitor, the BAC 2–11, despite a preference for the latter expressed by British European Airways (BEA).[9]: 34 Another parameter was the requirement for a new engine to be developed by Rolls-Royce to power the proposed airliner; a derivative of the in-development Rolls-Royce RB211, the triple-spool RB207, capable of producing of 47,500 lbf (211 kN).[13] The program cost was US$4.6 billion (in 1993 Dollars).[14]
​
In December 1968, the French and British partner companies (Sud Aviation and Hawker Siddeley) proposed a revised configuration, the 250-seat Airbus A250. It had been feared that the original 300-seat proposal was too large for the market, thus it had been scaled down to produce the A250.[5]: 2–14 [8][15] The dimensional changes involved in the shrink reduced the length of the fuselage by 5.62 metres (18.4 ft) and the diameter by 0.8 metres (31 in), reducing the overall weight by 25 tonnes (55,000 lb).[10][16]: 16 For increased flexibility, the cabin floor was raised so that standard LD3 freight containers could be accommodated side-by-side, allowing more cargo to be carried. Refinements made by Hawker Siddeley to the wing's design provided for greater lift and overall performance; this gave the aircraft the ability to climb faster and attain a level cruising altitude sooner than any other passenger aircraft.[10] It was later renamed the A300B.[9]: 34 [15]
Perhaps the most significant change of the A300B was that it would not require new engines to be developed, being of a suitable size to be powered by Rolls-Royce's RB211, or alternatively the American Pratt & Whitney JT9D and General Electric CF6 powerplants; this switch was recognized as considerably reducing the project's development costs.[11]: 45 [15][16]: 16–17 To attract potential customers in the US market, it was decided that General Electric CF6-50 engines would power the A300 in place of the British RB207; these engines would be produced in co-operation with French firm Snecma.[8][10] By this time, Rolls-Royce had been concentrating their efforts upon developing their RB211 turbofan engine instead and progress on the RB207's development had been slow for some time, the firm having suffered due to funding limitations, both of which had been factors in the engine switch decision.[5]: 2–13 [15][16]: 17–18
On 10 April 1969, a few months after the decision to drop the RB207 had been announced, the British government announced that they would withdraw from the Airbus venture.[6]: 38–39 [15] In response, West Germany proposed to France that they would be willing to contribute up to 50% of the project's costs if France was prepared to do the same.[15] Additionally, the managing director of Hawker Siddeley, Sir Arnold Alexander Hall, decided that his company would remain in the project as a favoured sub-contractor, developing and manufacturing the wings for the A300, which would later become pivotal in later versions' impressive performance from short domestic to long intercontinental flights.[5]: 2–13 [9]: 34 [16]: 18 Hawker Siddeley spent £35 million of its own funds, along with a further £35 million loan from the West German government, on the machine tooling to design and produce the wings.[6]: 39 [15]
Programme launch:
On 29 May 1969, during the Paris Air Show, French transport minister Jean Chamant and German economics minister Karl Schiller signed an agreement officially launching the Airbus A300, the world's first twin-engine widebody airliner.[2] The intention of the project was to produce an aircraft that was smaller, lighter, and more economical than its three-engine American rivals, the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar.[10] In order to meet Air France's demands for an aircraft larger than 250-seat A300B, it was decided to stretch the fuselage to create a new variant, designated as the A300B2, which would be offered alongside the original 250-seat A300B, henceforth referred to as the A300B1. On 3 September 1970, Air France signed a letter of intent for six A300s, marking the first order to be won for the new airliner.[6]: 39 [10][16]: 21
In the aftermath of the Paris Air Show agreement, it was decided that, in order to provide effective management of responsibilities, a Groupement d'intérêt économique would be established, allowing the various partners to work together on the project while remaining separate business entities.[2] On 18 December 1970, Airbus Industrie was formally established following an agreement between Aérospatiale (the newly merged Sud Aviation and Nord Aviation) of France and the antecedents to Deutsche Aerospace of Germany, each receiving a 50 per cent stake in the newly formed company.[3]: 50 [6]: 39 [10] In 1971, the consortium was joined by a third full partner, the Spanish firm CASA, who received a 4.2 per cent stake, the other two members reducing their stakes to 47.9 per cent each.[10][16]: 20 In 1979, Britain joined the Airbus consortium via British Aerospace, which Hawker Siddeley had merged into, which acquired a 20 per cent stake in Airbus Industrie with France and Germany each reducing their stakes to 37.9 per cent.[3]: 53 [5]: 2–14 [6]: 39
Prototype and flight testing:
Airbus Industrie was initially headquartered in Paris, which is where design, development, flight testing, sales, marketing, and customer support activities were centered; the headquarters was relocated to Toulouse in January 1974.[8][10] The final assembly line for the A300 was located adjacent to Toulouse Blagnac International Airport. The manufacturing process necessitated transporting each aircraft section being produced by the partner companies scattered across Europe to this one location. The combined use of ferries and roads were used for the assembly of the first A300, however this was time-consuming and not viewed as ideal by Felix Kracht, Airbus Industrie's production director.[10] Kracht's solution was to have the various A300 sections brought to Toulouse by a fleet of Boeing 377-derived Aero Spacelines Super Guppy aircraft, by which means none of the manufacturing sites were more than two hours away. Having the sections airlifted in this manner made the A300 the first airliner to use just-in-time manufacturing techniques, and allowed each company to manufacture its sections as fully equipped, ready-to-fly assemblies.[3]: 53 [10]
In September 1969, construction of the first prototype A300 began.[16]: 20 On 28 September 1972, this first prototype was unveiled to the public, it conducted its maiden flight from Toulouse–Blagnac International Airport on 28 October that year.[6]: 39 [9]: 34 [11]: 51–52 This maiden flight, which was performed a month ahead of schedule, lasted for one hour and 25 minutes; the captain was Max Fischl and the first officer was Bernard Ziegler, son of Henri Ziegler.[10] In 1972, unit cost was US$17.5M.[17] On 5 February 1973, the second prototype performed its maiden flight.[6]: 39 The flight test program, which involved a total of four aircraft, was relatively problem-free, accumulating 1,580 flight hours throughout.[16]: 22 In September 1973, as part of promotional efforts for the A300, the new aircraft was taken on a six-week tour around North America and South America, to demonstrate it to airline executives, pilots, and would-be customers.[10] Amongst the consequences of this expedition, it had allegedly brought the A300 to the attention of Frank Borman of Eastern Airlines, one of the "big four" U.S. airlines.[18]
Entry into service:
On 15 March 1974, type certificates were granted for the A300 from both German and French authorities, clearing the way for its entry into revenue service.[18] On 23 May 1974, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification was received.[16]: 22 The first production model, the A300B2, entered service in 1974, followed by the A300B4 one year later.[8] Initially, the success of the consortium was poor, in part due to the economic consequences of the 1973 oil crisis,[6]: 40 [8][9]: 34 but by 1979 there were 81 A300 passenger liners in service with 14 airlines, alongside 133 firm orders and 88 options.[18] Ten years after the official launch of the A300, the company had achieved a 26 per cent market share in terms of dollar value, enabling Airbus Industries to proceed with the development of its second aircraft, the Airbus A310.[18]
Design:
The Airbus A300 is a wide-body medium-to-long range airliner; it has the distinction of being the first twin-engine wide-body aircraft in the world.[8][9]: 34 [12]: 57, 60 [19] In 1977, the A300 became the first Extended Range Twin Operations (ETOPS)-compliant aircraft, due to its high performance and safety standards.[6]: 40 Another world-first of the A300 is the use of composite materials on a commercial aircraft, which were used on both secondary and later primary airframe structures, decreasing overall weight and improving cost-effectiveness.[19] Other firsts included the pioneering use of center-of-gravity control, achieved by transferring fuel between various locations across the aircraft, and electrically signaled secondary flight controls.[20]
The A300 is powered by a pair of underwing turbofan engines, either General Electric CF6 or Pratt & Whitney JT9D engines; the sole use of underwing engine pods allowed for any suitable turbofan engine to be more readily used.[12]: 57 The lack of a third tail-mounted engine, as per the trijet configuration used by some competing airliners, allowed for the wings to be located further forwards and to reduce the size of the vertical stabilizer and elevator, which had the effect of increasing the aircraft's flight performance and fuel efficiency.[3]: 50 [16]: 21
Airbus partners had employed the latest technology, some of which having been derived from Concorde, on the A300. According to Airbus, new technologies adopted for the airliner were selected principally for increased safety, operational capability, and profitability.[19] Upon entry into service in 1974, the A300 was a very advanced plane, which went on to influence later airliner designs. The technological highlights include advanced wings by de Havilland (later BAE Systems) with supercritical airfoil sections for economical performance and advanced aerodynamically efficient flight control surfaces. The 5.64 m (222 in) diameter circular fuselage section allows an eight-abreast passenger seating and is wide enough for 2 LD3 cargo containers side by side. Structures are made from metal billets, reducing weight. It is the first airliner to be fitted with wind shear protection. Its advanced autopilots are capable of flying the aircraft from climb-out to landing, and it has an electrically controlled braking system.
Later A300s incorporated other advanced features such as the Forward-Facing Crew Cockpit (FFCC), which enabled a two-pilot flight crew to fly the aircraft alone without the need for a flight engineer, the functions of which were automated; this two-man cockpit concept was a world-first for a wide-body aircraft.[8][16]: 23–24 [20] Glass cockpit flight instrumentation, which used cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors to display flight, navigation, and warning information, along with fully digital dual autopilots and digital flight control computers for controlling the spoilers, flaps, and leading-edge slats, were also adopted upon later-built models.[19][21] Additional composites were also made use of, such as carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP), as well as their presence in an increasing proportion of the aircraft's components, including the spoilers, rudder, air brakes, and landing gear doors.[22] Another feature of later aircraft was the addition of wingtip fences, which improved aerodynamic performance and thus reduced cruise fuel consumption by about 1.5% for the A300-600.[23]
In addition to passenger duties, the A300 became widely used by air freight operators; according to Airbus, it is the best selling freight aircraft of all time.[20] Various variants of the A300 were built to meet customer demands, often for diverse roles such as aerial refueling tankers, freighter models (new-build and conversions), combi aircraft, military airlifter, and VIP transport. Perhaps the most visually unique of the variants is the A300-600ST Beluga, an oversize cargo-carrying model operated by Airbus to carry aircraft sections between their manufacturing facilities.[20] The A300 was the basis for, and retained a high level of commonality with, the second airliner produced by Airbus, the smaller Airbus A310.[19]
Operational history:
On 23 May 1974, the first A300 to enter service performed the first commercial flight of the type, flying from Paris to London, for Air France.[6]: 39 [18]
Immediately after the launch, sales of the A300 were weak for some years, with most orders going to airlines that had an obligation to favor the domestically made product – notably Air France and Lufthansa, the first two airlines to place orders for the type.[3]: 50–52 [18] Following the appointment of Bernard Lathière as Henri Ziegler's replacement, an aggressive sales approach was adopted. Indian Airlines was the world's first domestic airline to purchase the A300, ordering three aircraft with three options. However, between December 1975 and May 1977, there were no sales for the type. During this period a number of "whitetail" A300s – completed but unsold aircraft – were completed and stored at Toulouse, and production fell to half an aircraft per month amid calls to pause production completely.[18]
During the flight testing of the A300B2, Airbus held a series of talks with Korean Air on the topic of developing a longer-range version of the A300, which would become the A300B4. In September 1974, Korean Air placed an order for four A300B4s with options for two further aircraft; this sale was viewed as significant as it was the first non-European international airline to order Airbus aircraft. Airbus had viewed South-East Asia as a vital market that was ready to be opened up and believed Korean Air to be the 'key'.[8][16]: 23 [18]
Airlines operating the A300 on short haul routes were forced to reduce frequencies to try and fill the aircraft. As a result, they lost passengers to airlines operating more frequent narrow body flights. Eventually, Airbus had to build its own narrowbody aircraft (the A320) to compete with the Boeing 737 and McDonnell Douglas DC-9/MD-80. The savior of the A300 was the advent of ETOPS, a revised FAA rule which allows twin-engine jets to fly long-distance routes that were previously off-limits to them. This enabled Airbus to develop the aircraft as a medium/long range airliner.
In 1977, US carrier Eastern Air Lines leased four A300s as an in-service trial.[18] CEO Frank Borman was impressed that the A300 consumed 30% less fuel, even less than expected, than his fleet of L-1011s. Borman proceeded to order 23 A300s, becoming the first U.S. customer for the type. This order is often cited as the point at which Airbus came to be seen as a serious competitor to the large American aircraft-manufacturers Boeing and McDonnell Douglas.[6]: 40 [8][18] Aviation author John Bowen alleged that various concessions, such as loan guarantees from European governments and compensation payments, were a factor in the decision as well.[3]: 52 The Eastern Air Lines breakthrough was shortly followed by an order from Pan Am. From then on, the A300 family sold well, eventually reaching a total of 561 delivered aircraft.[1]
In December 1977, Aerocondor Colombia became the first Airbus operator in Latin America, leasing one Airbus A300B4-2C, named Ciudad de Barranquilla.
During the late 1970s, Airbus adopted a so-called 'Silk Road' strategy, targeting airlines in the Far East.[3]: 52 [18] As a result, The aircraft found particular favor with Asian airlines, being bought by Japan Air System, Korean Air, China Eastern Airlines, Thai Airways International, Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines, Philippine Airlines, Garuda Indonesia, China Airlines, Pakistan International Airlines, Indian Airlines, Trans Australia Airlines and many others. As Asia did not have restrictions similar to the FAA 60-minutes rule for twin-engine airliners which existed at the time, Asian airlines used A300s for routes across the Bay of Bengal and South China Sea.
In 1977, the A300B4 became the first ETOPS compliant aircraft,[24] qualifying for Extended Twin Engine Operations over water, providing operators with more versatility in routing. In 1982 Garuda Indonesia became the first airline to fly the A300B4-200FFCC.[25] By 1981, Airbus was growing rapidly, with over 400 aircraft sold to over forty airlines.[26]
In 1989, Chinese operator China Eastern Airlines received its first A300; by 2006, the airline operated around 18 A300s, making it the largest operator of both the A300 and the A310 at that time. On 31 May 2014, China Eastern officially retired the last A300-600 in its fleet, having begun drawing down the type in 2010.[27]
From 1997 to 2014, a single A300, designated A300 Zero-G, was operated by the European Space Agency (ESA), centre national d'études spatiales (CNES) and the German Aerospace Center (DLR) as a reduced-gravity aircraft for conducting research into microgravity; the A300 is the largest aircraft to ever have been used in this capacity. A typical flight would last for two and a half hours, enabling up to 30 parabolas to be performed per flight.[28][29]
By the 1990s, the A300 was being heavily promoted as a cargo freighter.[16]: 24 The largest freight operator of the A300 is FedEx Express, which has 65 A300 aircraft in service as of May 2022.[30] UPS Airlines also operates 52 freighter versions of the A300.[31]
The final version was the A300-600R and is rated for 180-minute ETOPS. The A300 has enjoyed renewed interest in the secondhand market for conversion to freighters; large numbers were being converted during the late 1990s.[16]: 24–25 The freighter versions – either new-build A300-600s or converted ex-passenger A300-600s, A300B2s and B4s – account for most of the world's freighter fleet after the Boeing 747 freighter.[32]
The A300 provided Airbus the experience of manufacturing and selling airliners competitively. The basic fuselage of the A300 was later stretched (A330 and A340), shortened (A310), or modified into derivatives (A300-600ST Beluga Super Transporter). In 2006, unit cost of an −600F was $105 million.[14] In March 2006, Airbus announced the impending closure of the A300/A310 final assembly line,[33] making them the first Airbus aircraft to be discontinued. The final production A300, an A300F freighter, performed its initial flight on 18 April 2007,[34] and was delivered to FedEx Express on 12 July 2007.[35] Airbus has announced a support package to keep A300s flying commercially. Airbus offers the A330-200F freighter as a replacement for the A300 cargo variants.[36]
The life of UPS's fleet of 52 A300s, delivered from 2000 to 2006, will be extended to 2035 by a flight deck upgrade based around Honeywell Primus Epic avionics; new displays and flight management system (FMS), improved weather radar, a central maintenance system, and a new version of the current enhanced ground proximity warning system. With a light usage of only two to three cycles per day, it will not reach the maximum number of cycles by then. The first modification will be made at Airbus Toulouse in 2019 and certified in 2020.[37] As of July 2017, there are 211 A300s in service with 22 operators, with the largest operator being FedEx Express with 68 A300-600F aircraft.[38]
Variants:
A300B1 - The A300B1 was the first variant to take flight. It had a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of 132 t (291,000 lb), was 51 m (167 ft) long and was powered by two General Electric CF6-50A engines.[16]: 21 [39]: 41 Only two prototypes of the variant were built before it was adapted into the A300B2, the first production variant of the airliner.[6]: 39 The second prototype was leased to Trans European Airways in 1974.[39]: 54
A300B2 -
A300B2-100:
Responding to a need for more seats from Air France, Airbus decided that the first production variant should be larger than the original prototype A300B1. The CF6-50A powered A300B2-100 was 2.6 m (8.5 ft) longer than the A300B1 and had an increased MTOW of 137 t (302,000 lb), allowing for 30 additional seats and bringing the typical passenger count up to 281, with capacity for 20 LD3 containers.[40]: 10 [41][39]: 17 Two prototypes were built and the variant made its maiden flight on 28 June 1973, became certified on 15 March 1974 and entered service with Air France on 23 May 1974.[39]: 27, 53 [40]: 10
A300B2-200:
For the A300B2-200, originally designated as the A300B2K, Krueger flaps were introduced at the leading-edge root, the slat angles were reduced from 20 degrees to 16 degrees, and other lift related changes were made in order to introduce a high-lift system. This was done to improve performance when operating at high-altitude airports, where the air is less dense and lift generation is reduced.[42]: 52, 53 [43] The variant had an increased MTOW of 142 t (313,000 lb) and was powered by CF6-50C engines, was certified on 23 June 1976, and entered service with South African Airways in November 1976.[39]: 40 [40]: 12 CF6-50C1 and CF6-50C2 models were also later fitted depending on customer requirements, these became certified on 22 February 1978 and 21 February 1980 respectively.[39]: 41 [40]: 12
A300B2-320:
The A300B2-320 introduced the Pratt & Whitney JT9D powerplant and was powered by JT9D-59A engines. It retained the 142 t (313,000 lb) MTOW of the B2-200, was certified on 4 January 1980, and entered service with Scandinavian Airlines on 18 February 1980, with only four being produced.[39]: 99, 112 [40]: 14
A300B4 -
A300B4-100:
The initial A300B4 variant, later named the A300B4-100, included a centre fuel tank for an increased fuel capacity of 47.5 tonnes (105,000 lb), and had an increased MTOW of 157.5 tonnes (347,000 lb).[44][42]: 38 It also featured Krueger flaps and had a similar high-lift system to what was later fitted to the A300B2-200.[42]: 74 The variant made its maiden flight on 26 December 1974, was certified on 26 March 1975, and entered service with Germanair in May 1975.[39]: 32, 54 [40]: 16
A300B4-200:
The A300B4-200 had an increased MTOW of 165 tonnes (364,000 lb) and featured an additional optional fuel tank in the rear cargo hold, which would reduce the cargo capacity by two LD3 containers.[40]: 19 [42]: 69 The variant was certified on 26 April 1979.[40]: 19
A300-600 - The A300-600, officially designated as the A300B4-600, was slightly longer than the A300B2 and A300B4 variants and had an increased interior space from using a similar rear fuselage to the Airbus A310, this allowed it to have two additional rows of seats.[42]: 79 It was initially powered by Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4H1 engines, but was later fitted with General Electric CF6-80C2 engines, with Pratt & Whitney PW4156 or PW4158 engines being introduced in 1986.[42]: 82 Other changes include an improved wing featuring a recambered trailing edge, the incorporation of simpler single-slotted Fowler flaps, the deletion of slat fences, and the removal of the outboard ailerons after they were deemed unnecessary on the A310.[45] The variant made its first flight on 8 July 1983, was certified on 9 March 1984, and entered service in June 1984 with Saudi Arabian Airlines.[40]: 42 [39]: 58 A total of 313 A300-600s (all versions) have been sold. The A300-600 uses the A310 cockpits, featuring digital technology and electronic displays, eliminating the need for a flight engineer. The FAA issues a single type rating which allows operation of both the A310 and A300-600. A300-600: (Official designation: A300B4-600) The baseline model of the −600 series. A300-620C: (Official designation: A300C4-620) A convertible-freighter version. Four delivered between 1984 and 1985. A300-600F: (Official designation: A300F4-600) The freighter version of the baseline −600. A300-600R: (Official designation: A300B4-600R) The increased-range −600, achieved by an additional trim fuel tank in the tail. First delivery in 1988 to American Airlines; all A300s built since 1989 (freighters included) are −600Rs. Japan Air System (later merged into Japan Airlines) took delivery of the last new-built passenger A300, an A300-622R, in November 2002. A300-600RC: (Official designation: A300C4-600R) The convertible-freighter version of the −600R. Two were delivered in 1999. A300-600RF: (Official designation: A300F4-600R) The freighter version of the −600R. All A300s delivered between November 2002 and 12 July 2007 (last ever A300 delivery) were A300-600RFs.
A310 (A300B10)-
Airbus had demand for an aircraft smaller than the A300. On 7 July 1978, the A310 (initially the A300B10) was launched with orders from Swissair and Lufthansa. On 3 April 1982, the first prototype conducted its maiden flight and it received its type certification on 11 March 1983.
Keeping the same eight-abreast cross-section, the A310 is 6.95 m (22.8 ft) shorter than the initial A300 variants, and has a smaller 219 m2 (2,360 sq ft) wing, down from 260 m2 (2,800 sq ft). The A310 introduced a two-crew glass cockpit, later adopted for the A300-600 with a common type rating. It was powered by the same GE CF6-80 or Pratt & Whitney JT9D then PW4000 turbofans. It can seat 220 passengers in two classes, or 240 in all-economy, and can fly up to 5,150 nmi (9,540 km). It has overwing exits between the two main front and rear door pairs.
In April 1983, the aircraft entered revenue service with Swissair and competed with the Boeing 767–200, introduced six months before. Its longer range and ETOPS regulations allowed it to be operated on transatlantic flights. Until the last delivery in June 1998, 255 aircraft were produced, as it was succeeded by the larger Airbus A330-200. It has cargo aircraft versions, and was derived into the Airbus A310 MRTT military tanketransport.
Airbus A300-ST (Beluga)
Commonly referred to as the Airbus Beluga or "Airbus Super Transporter," these five airframes are used by Airbus to ferry parts between the company's disparate manufacturing facilities, thus enabling workshare distribution. They replaced the four Aero Spacelines Super Guppys previously used by Airbus.
ICAO code: A3ST
Operators:
As of March 2023, there were 228 A300 family aircraft in commercial service. The five largest operators were FedEx Express (70), UPS Airlines (52), European Air Transport Leipzig (23), Iran Air (11), and Mahan Air (11).[46]

When you had positive results - you don’t need to leave the sub completely. We encourage members to stay – but in a supportive role!

WHAT THIS THREAD IS FOR:

• This thread is to create a safe space for positive home pregnancy tests and beta results for active members of infertility, regardless of treatment type or status, to share their results with the community. Negative results can also be shared in the treatment thread; this is the only place to share positive or questionable results.
• This is absolutely the place to share/receive support for beta hell/limbo.
• We ask that you be mindful of people sharing difficult news in this thread and understand that it's not necessary to provide more than one positive updates (a strong positive on an HPT, a beta rise your clinic finds acceptable, etc.), regardless of your nerves. Most clinics will do two betas, and the next step is an ultrasound. Other countries don't do beta’s.
• Ultrasound update with the following caveats: ONE ultrasound only (not past 7 weeks!). The update may be given stating that the “results were positive”. Specific details (what was seen, singleton vs twins, HR, size, etc) may be shared at a pregnancy sub such as /infertilitybabies. If an ultrasound provides questionable results, such as a large yolk sac or low heart rate, those details can be shared here. Those who find themselves in pregnancy limbo after the first ultrasound may continue to post in this thread.
• Any signs about an unconfirmed or potential loss like bleeding, etc. can be discussed in this thread. If a physician has officially deemed a pregnancy a loss, posts can be made anywhere on the sub

WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED – comments that do this will be removed

• No drive-by posts. You may only post here if you have participated in the sub’s daily threads before. If you have not your comment on this thread will be removed without comment.
• No ultrasound details (HR, size, twins, singleton etc.) – questionable results are exempt from this
• Do not make a new comment within the same thread – update your previous comment
• It's to share your results not to "say goodbye" or some kind of victory lap or about giving/wanting ~hope~.
• We know good news after infertility and/or loss is hard to accept, and infertilitybabies is a safe space to discuss your anxieties around early pregnancy. This thread is NOT the right place to work out those feelings - it's for results only or support when in beta hell/potential loss limbo.
• Hunger games results, PGT results, etc.
• Questions about early pregnancy that are not directly related to loss signs.
• Comments about pregnancy symptoms (sore breasts, nausea, etc).
• Links to pictures of HPTs (use /TFABlineporn).
• Responding “Thank You!” to every well wisher. Use your best discretion as some comments do necessitate a response, however responding to every person makes this post far too large.

HELPFUL INFO

Click 'view table' on mobile:

For a comprehensive Beta database, check out http://www.betabase.info/ for more information on beta based on DPO (DPO = days post transfer + 3, or 5 day embryo; DPO = Days post Insemination for IUI).
Further info: Human chorionic gonadotropin as a predictor of outcome in assisted reproductive technology pregnancies00512-9/fulltext)
Radiopaedia on Fetal bradycardia
Normal Ranges of Embryonic Length, Embryonic Heart Rate PDF!

You may be interested in posting at /whatworkedforme.
You are always encouraged to share your non-pregnancy-related infertility experiences with people asking questions on the sub and continue to support other community members here on infertility

Curodoc offers a variety of health care services that can be provided in the comfort of your own home. These services are designed to meet your medical needs while allowing you to receive care in a familiar and convenient environment.

If you are interested in Iman Gadzhi – Copy Paste Agency contact us at +44 759 388 2116 on Telegram/Whatsapp.
I have Iman Gadzhi – Copy Paste Agency.
Iman Gadzhi – Copy Paste agency is the latest course by Iman Gadzhi.
Copy Paste Agency is designed for established agency owners, who can use these lessons to scale their business.
In Iman Gadzhi – Copy Paste Agency, you will learn:

• How to continue to run a multiple-six-figure agency from home with a skeleton staff and minimal expenses
  
• How to command higher retainers… and retain those clients for longer
  
• How to automate, delegate, and optimize every area of your agency from lead generation and sales to service delivery and client communication
  

To get Iman Gadzhi – Copy Paste Agency contact us on:
Whatsapp/Telegram: +44 759 388 2116 (Telegram: multistorecourses)
Reddit DM to u/CourseAccess
Email: silverlakestore[@]yandex.com (remove the brackets)