Unless you are commercializing the research I think this an authorship problem. Acknowledgement on all future papers sounds quite significant. I know authorship/acknowledgements vary depending on field but a never ending commitment is a lot, especially if you are going to compete with them. The project might be your idea but if you are not contributing anything after that.

Generally I think that you should get authorship if you contributed to the specific paper (either data collection or writing) and acknowledgement if you supported the authors for that specific paper. I would suggest authorship on any paper that uses your protocols or the first paper from the study (sort of as an acknowledgement). Authorship is a lot better than an acknowledgement and 1-2 papers sounds reasonable.

Have you tried networking. Like reach out to that famous professor or your old supervisor for a coffee and talk about possible job opportunities. The number of post-docs I know that got recommended for their job is kinda crazy. If you tell some connected people in your research department that you are looking for X or Y, they might be able to recommend you to someone at a conference or collaborator. It is a long shot but you might get lucky

The university wants you to finish the PhD in the least amount of time possible. So I would focus on showing that you can finish (you have good data) and that you have a plan to finish by X date (people love gantt charts). If you show both of them you should get an extension.

Honestly I think it us unlikely you will get funding for a full year. As funding for a 4th year is just incredibly rare even under extreme circumstances. I don't know of anyone who has got full funding for a 4th year and some people have had worse conditions than you.

Choosing your own topic will be a lot harder but there are ways to find funding. Before approaching an academic; choose an area you want to work in, find a gap in literature and have a very rough methodology, ie can it actually be done. Those questions should be answered before you approach an academic. When you contact an academic you can then discuss the project and you should ask whether they would like to supervise you and possible funding sources. That is very rough but should get you started.

Or you could make a general approach to sports science lecturer about PhD opportunities and see what happens.

Your progress sounds typical and I wouldn't worry. You aren't meeting YOUR expectations but we all aim to high when we first start. A PhD is 3 years for a reason and I would consider how your skills have progressed so far. Also you didn't say what your supervisor said and I think you might have imposter syndrome

I think if you enjoy the project itself you will finish. As if you enjoy the work it will compensate for the bits you enjoy less.

What is your link with the company?

I also did my dissertation with a company (they were fully supportive BTW) and they signed an NDA with the university. The university didn't publish my dissertation and restricted access, in return I got to use a lot of sensitive data.

Plenty of students have taken part-time jobs when writing up, so don't worry. Though I have stories of people losing their motivation to write after a long days work. I would just make sure that the job is not too taxing and that you will have some energy to write afterwards.

Good luck with the write up!

I would email again. Two weeks is definitely more than shortly.

Sorry about the delay.

1) Sounds like you have been passed over. Doesn't stop you re-applying for the PhD or calling the university asking for confirmation/feedback.

2) I know at my uni there are 3 intake times a year and you join at the closest time period. There are a lot of PhD spots that advertise year round and the will accept students when they find the right student, not just September.

Do you think a change of scenery would help? Like could you start writing up in a cafe or a library or change the format of your study? As i have had the same problem with revision during undergrad, I started disliking the space because of the association with the activity. Becoming comfortable in your surroundings makes things easier.

Have you at least worked out how much you can keep. There might be a massive amount of work but look at how much you don't have to rewrite. Maybe if you start restructuring it you might think it is less than you initially thought. Anxiety can wreck you when you keep delaying an action until the point you have over-estimated the difficulty.

I used to hate writing a lot and I still dislike it. However I have come to realise that I was more scared of being wrong than anything. The first few drafts I had to write were horrible and it made me hate my research. Though the more you do it the easier it becomes and confidence builds. No work is perfect and something written is better than nothing. Because we all hate doing things and avoiding them is not a solution long term. You mention your career will not require writing skills but you will need communication skills. If you have good research and cant communicate it via the written word that is a big problem in any career.

So quit if you want but I wouldn't hide behind hating writing.

What sort of job asked specifically for your supervisors name?

Is their a head of grad students in your department, head of your research group or any academic you have worked for? A would try to get some form of written reference and offer that. You could also contact HR and they might get you a terse bare bones reference,

Honestly I think corrections are the easiest part of the academic process. You do the corrections and it is good enough. No self doubt, no thinking if it is right or general imposter syndrome. They basically you are good enough for a PhD but you need to fix some things. The corrections don't need to be perfect but just do what they say. I think you should stop doubting yourself, give up on a perfect thesis and do the corrections.

Ouch that sounds like a bad situation. Though I don't think it is all your supervisors fault but more the circumstances. Very few PhD projects stays the same as their original with several redrafts/change of focus/panic change, being normal. Again licenses are pain to get but I thought you generally need a research plan/scope to get one which you can't do until the student starts. So expecting it ready is a big stretch. What I am saying is that those complaints are typical and I wouldn't blame your supervisor.

Though if he has to cut 21 million, £3,000 seems trivial to me. If you really need the equipment do the trial with the current stuff and show him the results. If they are bad you might get it but if it is good, you have good data. You would be surprised what old equipment can do if you learn how to use it properly.

Have you also checked about alternative funding sources? There are usually travel grants available that can help with conferences, and your supervisor could help with them (he is head of department).

The project may have changed away from what you like but can you change it further? My project has changed significantly due to equipment issues and I changed the focus towards what I liked. You could probably edge the project towards what you want to do. As long as it is achievable and the data is publishable, he would probably agree.

It sucks when supervisors claim your work. My supervisor did that to me recently at an internal talk, were she claimed my work and did not acknowledge me at all. As you aren't in academia they think they can claim your work and that nobody would notice. The funny thing there isn't much you can do about it except promote it yourself. I think this is pretty common and I have just accepted it.

With regards to data, first I would check your PhD contract. Some of contracts specifically state that your data belongs to the university. But are you trying to publish the work yourself? I think if you aren't trying to publish it is fair for him to try. Part of research is disseminating the results and if you aren't doing that why did you bother at all?

I think you should talk with him and talk about authorship. You could still be first author and let him be the corresponding author (if your field allows). That way both of you get acknowledged and he does most of the work. Maybe you could write it or copy and paste from your thesis. However I don't think you should outright block publication.