People who have a successful academic career without a PhD usually have highly pertinent external experience, are in particular subfields where 'equivalent experience' really means something (often highly technical roles/fields such as programming), and are often from an earlier generation.They are very rare, and trying to find a generalisable formula for their success in order to emulate their path is unlikely to be a fruitful pursuit.

If you really want an academic career (and many more people do than are successful) then you should optimise your chances. This means doing a PhD at some stage. Fewer than 10% of people with PhDs manage to stay in academia long term, so be realistic about the odds of success without one - it is not simply a case of 'hard work conquers all' as most PhDs are earned by just that, and it is still not enough. Stick around on this forum and you will see multiple cases where effort still hits a brick wall.

There is more than one way to do a PhD. Yes, most people struggle by on a studentship, but there are ways of doing it while employed full time as staff or 'by publication' for long established research staff who have earned their stripes via their work. Look into the available options at a few universities.

If you frame the PhD hurdle as simply a financial one, you overlook the skills/experience acquired during the process which would be necessary for an academic job. It is unclear how you propose to develop those skills outside of academia. If I were you I would apply for a research assistant job, get a proper feel for the nature of academic life (Masters degrees give you little exposure to the full reality; your perception of some aspects seems a little rose-tinted) and explore alternative routes to a PhD from within academia. If it's the career you really want, then starting working in it is probably your best bet.

Firstly, I am very sorry to hear of your troubles. Secondly, though it is good to have passion for your PhD, don't let it be a reason to neglect taking proper time to recover. I appreciate that in depression it can be difficult to find anything that sparks enjoyment, so I don't want to dissuade you from the pleasure you find in it, but please don't let it come between you and whatever you need to do to get yourself in a better place to fulfill the potential you clearly have.

In the UK, referees are not normally contacted for references unless an offer is made.

In my recent experiences of being given an interview I've only been given 4 days to a week's notice. So I wouldn't worry yet, unless you have complex/costly travel to book.

I would wait a few more days and then contact the department administrator in the first instance. It can be a bit awkward if you directly contact a PI and they're in the middle of sifting, particularly if you're in a 'maybe' pile. So the administrator/PA is likely to be more neutral. If you are being invited for interview they will be in touch when they are ready.

Sorry to hear of the many difficulties you've faced recently. That's a lot to deal with in a short space of time.

Most science/engineering PhD students will be allocated a desk within an office/lab. There is often some level of expectation of daily attendance Mon-Fri. Actual contact with one's supervisor during that time will be infrequent (once a week/month/term/year!)

My attitude is once people stop funding you they have no right to object to you seeking other sources of income. Obviously, submitting has to be a priority, but that shouldn't preclude you from being able to provide for yourself.

I got a full time job at an external organisation during the last four months of writing up my thesis. It made it very difficult, but I survived. I cannot imagine sitting around twiddling my thumbs between submission and viva, but nor can I imagine being very inclined to do paper writing up during that time. I appreciate others may have more enthusiasm for that though.

Obviously working will reduce the amount of time available for viva prep and writing articles. As far as the former goes there is only so much prep one can do. For the latter, bear in mind that feedback received during your viva might improve your work, so don't necessarily rush to submit papers pre-viva (though prepping drafts is another matter).

It's not fun but it's doable. I wrote the last 30K words of my thesis while working full time in a non uni job (i.e. just weekends and evenings to work on it). It was not at all enjoyable but I got it done. Just pre-warn friends/family that you will be basically be unavailable for most things during that period. And do make sure you factor in enough time/energy for self-care so you don't end up irretrievably frazzled.

Good luck.

Have you done any networking in that time e.g. attended conferences/external events/participated in online interactions with different people/organisations in your field? Some academic societies have formal mentoring schemes but there our other informal routes to finding one - it does require some searching on one's own part though.

I'm sure it's frustrating but I'm not sure that your proposed solution is the right one. Ideally such a journal would be peer reviewed. If you stick to a narrow field you might struggle to find adequate numbers of submissions to sustain the journal. If you accept submissions from any field, do you have a sufficiently wide academic network to publicise the journal and attract peer reviewers? Some work that is controversial and challenging is important, game-changing stuff. But some is bordering on nonsense. Would you accept both categories? If not, how do you sort the wheat from the chaff?

It's worth noting that, however intellectually sound, most theses are rarely perfect to be published as they stand: almost all will need some kind of editing or reworking to translate into other types of document such as books or papers. So your reluctance to modify any of it at all may be putting up an additional barrier to publication. It may well be that the key arguments can be retained and accepted, but perhaps need presenting in a different way.

Unless you actually want a career in academic publishing, I would be reluctant to start a journal from scratch as to make it actually work would probably take more time than would permit you to continue with actually doing some research. So I think maybe you need to think about the long game. What do you want to do with your career?

Presumably your supervisor is supportive of the main approach of your work. Has s/he offered any advice as to target journals?

Firstly, you're definitely not too old at all.

Secondly, I'd always caution anyone against doing a *full time* unfunded PhD as it is rarely a good 'investment'. However you have the good sense to want to do it part time so that's not a problem.

Thirdly, I'd also warn that the jobs prospects in many fields of academia are truly dire, so if your only reason for doing one is career enhancement, proceed with caution, particularly if self-funded. But if you want to do it for the stimulation/interest as well then that's a different concern. Having a decade of professional experience under your belt also puts you in a stronger general career position than, say, a new graduate with no job history who is looking to self fund and comes out the other end to find themselves struggling to find work.

It sounds from what you've said like an itch you need to scratch. If that's the case, then go for it. And maybe have a look at this guide to see if there are funds you can apply to which would supplement your income:

Yes, many typos are correctly spelled words, albeit the wrong one.

I know of one person who was in the middle of printing before they noticed a place were "public health" had an unfortunately absent first 'l'.

Also, it's easy to turn a blind eye to the red squiggly line when it is picking up every technical word.

I had multiple typos, plus a sentence that trailed off to nothing (I'm still not sure whether I failed to finish writing it or it was victim to a copy-paste-editing shuffle) plus a weird page numbering/printing glitch that to this day I cannot find a logical explanation for.

Examiners picked up on some of the typos and asked for correction (but not the missing text!), and I corrected the rest myself.

It's not a major issue by itself, but if the thesis has other substantial issues then it might tip the balance of opinion to the unfavourable end of the spectrum. But only a very picky examiner would make a big deal of a thesis where typos were the only main issue.