When the River Song arc has ended, i'm going to rewatch them all in the order River experiences them as i would have already experienced the Doctors already.

Who else would think that would be interesting to watch? It would make things much clearer in my mind. (I don't find it that much confusing now anyway.

But surely the only way they could ever signal the end of the arc would be to kill off the Doctor?

nope - River dies before the Doctor, therefore we should actually see her arc end.

River already has died in the show's chronology. We've seen her arc end from her point of view but the show is being told in a different order.

I think a good way to use River's character without interferring with the general series, would be to use her for the next Doctor Who animated series (assuming there will be one)

for a start it allows the story writers to do stuff that can't be filmed within the show's normal budget, plus it give us a nice stand alone episode.

I hope that River's arc doesn't end this series, but I could understand if SM didn't want to keep bringing her back

River could easily have killed the Doctor in his future, his past. Of course, they made a point in ToA that the Doctor could die, despite his supposed future with River. Could work either way.

The Doctor and River Song's story doesn't have to be told in exact reverse order. We (and the Doctor) are experiencing it in a linear manner. We've seen his first meeting (in the library) his second with the angels (there were probably others offscreen in between involving 10 that we'll never see), and the series finale at Stonehenge will be the third.

But that series finale could be her first meeting with him or her hundredth. The story line we are seeing linearly can skip back and forth within her personal timeline. So we're never guaranteed to see a final meeting after which we'll never see her again.

How many more episodes is she due to be in then? There's the obvious problem of AK getting older when she's supposed to be younger than when we first saw her.

Well she's in two more this year. No way of knowing if that will finish her story or if she's back in 2011.

Realistically, Stephen Moffat will probably do 2-3 more series before he moves on and will want to finish her off during that period, so AK's normal aging shouldn't be much of a problem. He might, of course, have first met her when she was much, much younger and she could be played by someone else.

Wonder if AK has a young cousin she's never met...

Kate Winslett maybe

As I just mentioned in another thread it's possible River has access to technology that slows her aging down (Humans had it over 2000 years before Rivers time period as seen in TBB) so for all we know the River we saw in ToA could be 60 years old and 90 years old by the time of SitL.

If this was the case AK could easily play the role even if the River we see is from 20 years eariler than ToA.