All Aboard the Skytanic: A Fun, Fact-Based Reality Check for the Nuclear Flying Hotel

The Dream of a Castle in the Sky (That Never Left the Ground)

It appeared on social media feeds like a vision from a forgotten future: a colossal, gleaming aircraft gliding serenely above the clouds, its fuselage transformed into a glass-walled atrium revealing a luxury hotel within. This was the "Sky Cruise," a nuclear-powered vessel promising to host 5,000 guests in perpetual flight, staying airborne for years at a time.1 The animated video presented a world of unparalleled opulence, featuring panoramic observation decks, shopping malls, theaters, swimming pools, and even wedding venues, all suspended in the heavens.4 Passengers and supplies would be ferried to and from the mothership by conventional jets, docking seamlessly with the airborne hotel.7 It was a captivating promise, a modern-day invocation of humanity’s timeless dream to build castles in the sky.

The vision is so compelling that its creator, science communicator Hashem Al-Ghaili, cited inspiration from the Studio Ghibli classic Castle in the Sky, where massive flying ships are home to entire communities.2 However, before anyone starts packing their bags for a decade-long celestial vacation, a crucial clarification is in order. The Sky Cruise is not a top-secret project from Boeing, Airbus, or any aerospace giant. It is a beautifully rendered CGI animation by Al-Ghaili, bringing to life a piece of concept art that artist Tony Holmsten created over a decade ago for a video game developer.2 Holmsten himself expressed surprise on social media when his old drawing suddenly went viral, animated into a compelling "sales pitch" for a future that isn't quite on the horizon.2

Almost immediately, the internet, in its infinite wisdom, christened the concept with more fitting, if slightly ominous, nicknames: the "Flytanic" or the "Skytanic".2 This comparison, as a deep dive into the science reveals, is alarmingly apt. The goal here is not to mock a beautiful dream but to lovingly, and humorously, tether it to the unyielding laws of reality.

The immense viral appeal of the Sky Cruise lies in its powerful blend of futuristic technology with a distinctly nostalgic optimism. It is a perfect piece of modern retrofuturism. The concept taps into the same boundless enthusiasm that defined the "Atomic Age" of the 1950s and 60s, a time when nuclear power was heralded as a near-magical solution to all of humanity's problems.11 Post-war scientists and engineers envisioned a world transformed by the atom, with proposals for everything from nuclear-powered cars to dirt-cheap electricity that would desalinate the oceans.11 The Sky Cruise video echoes this sentiment with its grand promises of "unlimited energy," a flight with "no carbon footprint," and the ability to "remain suspended in the air for several years".1 This vision of a clean, limitless future is deeply appealing. Yet, the public reaction to the video—a mix of awe and immediate, physics-based takedowns—perfectly mirrors the historical reality of these atomic dreams. Back then, eminent physicists like J. Robert Oppenheimer privately thought the idea of nuclear-powered flight "perhaps bordered on lunacy" given the available technology.11 The Sky Cruise, therefore, isn't just a vision of the future; it's a high-definition echo of a past vision of the future, one that never came to pass precisely because of the stubborn, real-world constraints we are about to explore.

The 'Flying Building' Problem: A Hilarious Clash with Aerodynamics

It's Not the Size, It's the Shape (Actually, It's Both)

The first and most glaring problem with the Sky Cruise is that it looks less like an aircraft and more like a luxury condominium that has sprouted wings. The fundamental principles of flight rely on a delicate balance of four forces: lift, weight, thrust, and drag. An aircraft's wings are shaped as airfoils, designed so that air moves faster over the top surface than the bottom, creating a pressure difference that generates upward lift to counteract the aircraft's weight. The engines provide thrust to overcome drag—the resistance of the air. It is an elegant, if complex, dance.

Now, consider the Sky Cruise. With its bulbous, multi-deck fuselage, massive viewing platforms, and external elevators, its design is a masterclass in maximizing drag.1 It is the aeronautical equivalent of trying to throw a crumpled ball of paper and expecting it to glide like a paper airplane. The design prioritizes the "hotel" experience at the complete and utter expense of the "flying" one. As many online commentators immediately pointed out, "If physics and aerodynamics didn't exist, then this vessel might actually be able to take off".1 The sentiment was widely shared, with another observer noting it looked like "someone was designing the ultimate luxury cruise vehicle and was only told when they were 80% done that it's supposed to fly".14 The laws of fluid dynamics are famously unforgiving, and this design offends every single one of them.

A Tale of the Tape: Putting the 'Mega' in Megalomania

To truly grasp the impossible scale of the Sky Cruise, it is helpful to compare it to the largest aircraft ever actually built. The undisputed king of passenger aviation is the Airbus A380, the only full-length, double-decker jetliner in the world.15 The heavyweight champion of all aircraft was the one-of-a-kind Antonov An-225 Mriya, a colossal cargo plane that was tragically destroyed in 2022.17 These machines represent the absolute pinnacle of what is currently possible in aerospace engineering. The Sky Cruise concept doesn't just push these boundaries; it obliterates them with a cheerful wave.

The numbers reveal a leap in scale that is not just ambitious but physically nonsensical. The Sky Cruise proposes carrying nearly six times the maximum certified passenger load of the A380. This isn't just a matter of adding more seats. It means accommodating the weight of 5,000 people, their luggage, and the entire infrastructure of a luxury resort—restaurants, theaters, pools, a shopping mall, and, most critically, a nuclear reactor with its requisite shielding. The resulting weight would be orders of magnitude greater than any flying machine ever conceived.

This is where the concept collides with the tyranny of the square-cube law, a fundamental principle of geometry. As an object increases in size, its surface area increases by the square of its dimensions, but its volume (and thus its mass, assuming constant density) increases by the cube. For an aircraft, this is a catastrophic problem. If you double the size of a plane, its wing area (which generates lift) increases by a factor of four, but its weight (which lift must overcome) increases by a factor of eight. Simply "scaling up" an aircraft design is impossible because the weight will always outpace the wings' ability to generate lift.

The Sky Cruise, as depicted, is a textbook example of this fallacy. To accommodate its immense internal volume, its mass would be cubically greater than an A380, yet its wings, as rendered, are not proportionally larger. They appear stubby and wholly inadequate for the task. The Antonov An-225, the heaviest aircraft ever, needed a colossal 88.4-meter wingspan and six powerful engines just to hoist its 640,000 kg maximum takeoff weight into the air.18 The Sky Cruise would weigh many times that. It wouldn't just need a long runway; as one commenter joked, it would need "all of I-40, from one end of Tennessee to the other for a landing strip".14

"Just Add a Nuclear Reactor": A Heavy, Hazardous, and Half-Baked Proposition

Fission vs. Fusion - A Distinction with a Difference

The Sky Cruise video boldly claims its 20 electric engines are powered by "clean, nuclear energy" generated by a "small nuclear reactor" using a "highly controlled fusion reaction".3 This is perhaps the most scientifically audacious claim of the entire concept. Nuclear fusion—the process that powers the sun—involves smashing light atomic nuclei together to release energy. Achieving a sustained, net-positive energy gain from fusion is one of the greatest scientific and engineering challenges of our time, a holy grail pursued by massive, multi-billion-dollar international experiments like ITER in France.2 The idea of a compact, lightweight fusion reactor that could fit on an airplane is, for the foreseeable future, pure science fiction.

For the sake of a charitable analysis, we will assume the creators meant nuclear fission, the technology we have been using for decades in power plants and naval vessels. Fission works by splitting heavy atomic nuclei, like uranium, to release energy. While this technology is well-understood, strapping it to an airplane presents a set of problems that have proven, historically, to be insurmountable.

A Lesson from History: The ANP Program

The dream of a nuclear-powered airplane is not new. During the height of the Cold War, the United States invested heavily in the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion (ANP) program.25 The strategic goal was to create a fleet of bombers that could stay airborne for days or even weeks, providing a constant, nuclear-armed deterrent against a Soviet first strike.11 The program culminated in one of the most unique aircraft ever to fly: the Convair NB-36H "The Crusader".25

Between 1955 and 1957, this modified B-36 bomber made 47 test flights with a fully operational 1-megawatt nuclear reactor on board.29 However, there is a critical caveat: the reactor was never connected to the engines. It did not power the plane in any way. The sole purpose of the NB-36H was to test whether it was even possible to shield a flight crew from the intense radiation produced by an airborne reactor.29 The answer led to the program's biggest, and heaviest, challenge: shielding. Radiation is relentless, and stopping it requires mass. The NB-36H's reactor was encased in heavy materials, and the five-person crew was housed in a specially designed 11-ton capsule of lead and rubber, with windows made of 10-12 inches thick leaded glass.29 This single, overwhelming problem of weight makes the Sky Cruise concept a non-starter.

The NB-36H needed over 10,000 kg of shielding just to protect a five-person crew. Now, imagine trying to shield 5,000 passengers, plus hundreds of crew members, spread across a vast, multi-deck fuselage with enormous glass windows. The sheer mass of the required lead, concrete, or water shielding would be astronomical, weighing more than multiple Airbus A380s combined. No conceivable airframe could lift such a weight, let alone the passengers and amenities. The weight problem alone relegates the nuclear-powered flying hotel to the realm of fantasy.

The 'What If It Crashes?' Conundrum

Beyond the weight, there is the terrifying safety question that hangs over any discussion of airborne reactors. An aircraft crash is always a tragedy, but a crash involving a nuclear reactor would be a radiological catastrophe on an unprecedented scale.5

In a high-impact crash, the reactor's containment could be breached, dispersing highly radioactive materials like Cesium-137 and Iodine-131 into the atmosphere.35 The fallout could contaminate thousands of square kilometers of land, rendering it uninhabitable for decades or even centuries. The Chernobyl disaster in 1986 contaminated over 28,000 square kilometers and led to the establishment of a 4,143 square kilometer exclusion zone that remains largely uninhabited to this day.37 The Fukushima accident in 2011 resulted in a 600 square kilometer evacuated zone.37 A Sky Cruise crash over a populated area would be an event of similar, or even greater, magnitude.

Ultimately, the ANP program was canceled in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy after 15 years and about $1 billion in expenditure.25 The decision was driven not only by the intractable weight and safety issues but also by the realization that the technology had become strategically obsolete. The advent of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) and nuclear-powered submarines provided a more effective and safer means of nuclear deterrence, making the immense risk of a flying reactor no longer worth the reward.26 It is a crucial lesson from history that the Sky Cruise concept conveniently ignores.

The Galactic Buffet and the Mid-Air Maintenance Mayhem

Feeding the 5,000

Let us, for a moment, suspend our disbelief in the laws of physics and assume the Sky Cruise can fly. The proposal that it can stay airborne for "years" introduces a logistical problem of biblical proportions.1 The video depicts conventional airliners docking with the Sky Cruise to transfer passengers and supplies, but the sheer scale of this operation is glossed over. To understand the magnitude of the challenge, one need only look at the consumption rates of a modern sea-based cruise ship.

A large cruise ship like the Oasis of the Seas serves up to 30,000 meals per day, consuming over 100 tonnes of raw ingredients every week.41 On a typical week-long voyage with around 6,000 passengers, consumption includes 60,000 eggs, 6,800 kg of beef, and over 9,000 kg of potatoes.42 Furthermore, water consumption on a standard cruise ship averages 282 liters per person per day.44 For 5,000 people, this translates to a mind-boggling amount of cargo that needs to be flown up to the Sky Cruise, and an equally mind-boggling amount of waste that needs to be flown back down.

The numbers are staggering. Just to supply the daily drinking, cooking, and sanitation water for 5,000 people would require nearly six flights per day from the world's largest cargo plane, the An-225, which had a maximum payload of about 250 tonnes.18 Then there is the waste. A ship with 6,000 people can generate over 12,000 tons of wastewater per day.42 Removing this would require a fleet of dozens of the largest cargo planes flying in a continuous, 24/7 cycle. This isn't just a logistical challenge; it's a physical and economic impossibility.

This constant aerial ballet of resupply reveals a fundamental flaw in the concept's premise. The Sky Cruise is pitched as having "no carbon footprint" thanks to its clean nuclear power.3 However, this completely ignores the colossal carbon footprint of the massive, conventional, jet-fuel-burning fleet required for its daily survival. The fuel burned by dozens of heavy cargo planes shuttling water and waste would far exceed any emissions saved by the mothership's nuclear reactor. The entire concept is not an environmental solution but an environmental shell game, outsourcing its pollution to a far less efficient and absurdly complex support system.

In-Flight Repairs: "Can Someone Pass the Wrench from That 747?"

The video's claim that "all maintenance and repairs are also done above the clouds" is perhaps the most fantastical of all.40 Modern aircraft are some of the most complex machines ever built, and their maintenance is a highly regulated, labor-intensive, and ground-based enterprise. Aviation maintenance professionals already face significant challenges, including dealing with aging aircraft, sourcing specialized parts, working on incredibly complex integrated systems, and a persistent shortage of skilled labor.46

Now, imagine trying to do this while cruising at 35,000 feet. How do you perform a detailed inspection for metal fatigue on a wing spar? Where do you store the millions of spare parts, from tiny rivets to entire landing gear assemblies? How would you swap out one of the 20 engines? A single Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine for an Airbus A380 weighs over 6,200 kg.49 The idea of transferring such an object from one aircraft to another in mid-air is pure fantasy. Current military aerial resupply technology is focused on delivering small payloads of a few hundred pounds over short distances using drones.50 The technology for transferring multi-ton components between massive, flying platforms simply does not exist, and for good reason.53 An aircraft, especially one with a nuclear reactor, requires constant, meticulous, and grounded maintenance to remain airworthy. The notion of a flying, self-contained MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) facility is a logistical nightmare that makes the food and water problem look simple by comparison.

Conclusion: A Wonderful Fantasy That Should Stay That Way

After a thorough examination, the verdict on the Sky Cruise is clear. As an engineering proposal, it is a spectacular failure. It is an aerodynamic brick that, according to the square-cube law, would be too heavy to lift its own weight, let alone 5,000 passengers and a shopping mall. Its proposed nuclear fusion reactor is science fiction, and even a conventional fission reactor would require a mass of shielding that would make the aircraft unflyable. Its safety profile is terrifying, with any potential crash threatening to create a Chernobyl-scale radiological disaster zone. Finally, its daily grocery run alone would require a dedicated air force of the world's largest cargo planes, creating a logistical and environmental nightmare that defeats its own purpose.

However, as a piece of art and inspiration, the Sky Cruise is an undeniable success. The viral video captured the imagination of millions because it speaks to a deep-seated human desire for a grander, more wondrous future of travel—a return to a "golden era" that is more luxurious and awe-inspiring.2 Hashem Al-Ghaili, the video's creator, readily admits that "it's just a concept" and that he is happy it "made you take a moment to dream of a future where such stuff could exist".2

In that, he has succeeded brilliantly. We should never stop dreaming about the future of flight and what marvels it might hold. But those dreams are best and most successfully realized when they are built upon the solid foundations of science, engineering, and the hard-won lessons of reality. The Sky Cruise is a beautiful, imaginative castle in the sky. And for the sake of physics, logistics, and public safety, that is exactly where it should remain.

Works cited

1. Nuclear-Powered Flying Hotel Is a Fun (if Ridiculous) New Concept - IGN, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.ign.com/articles/nuclear-powered-flying-hotel-fun-ridiculous-new-concept

2. This 5,000-Person Sky Hotel Can Stay Airborne for Years, accessed September 4, 2025, https://mymodernmet.com/sky-cruise-hashem-al-ghaili/

3. Introducing Sky Cruise: A Futuristic Nuclear-Powered Flying Hotel - 12 Tomatoes, accessed September 4, 2025, https://12tomatoes.com/introducing-sky-cruise-a-futuristic-nuclear-powered-flying-hotel/

4. Sky Cruise, design of 'flying hotel' that can house 5000 guests, stay airborne forever, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.vanguardngr.com/2022/06/sky-cruise-design-of-flying-hotel-that-can-house-5000-guests-stay-airborne-forever/

5. Science fiction or reality? Sky Cruise, the first flying luxury hotel - Secret Stuttgart, accessed September 4, 2025, https://secretstuttgart.com/en/science-fiction-or-reality-sky-cruise-first-flying-luxury-hotel/

6. Nuclear-powered futuristic sky hotel can stay in the air for several years, accessed September 4, 2025, https://parametric-architecture.com/nuclear-powered-futuristic-sky-hotel-can-stay-in-the-air-for-several-years/

7. 'Flying hotel of the future' would be piloted by AI and never land ..., accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/sky-cruise-flying-hotel-ai-nuclear-b2110050.html

8. This Sky is the Limit - Plans for Sky Cruise that never Lands Take Off | Rockland Daily, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.rocklanddaily.com/news/this-sky-is-the-limit-plans-for-sky-cruise-that-never-lands-take-off-1

9. Concept Design for a Nuclear-Powered Flying Cruise Ship - Core77, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.core77.com/posts/116222/Concept-Design-for-a-Nuclear-Powered-Flying-Cruise-Ship

10. I cannot underestimate the sense of dread that this Sky Cruise concept video installs in me. Terrifying : r/megalophobia - Reddit, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/megalophobia/comments/vng2yu/i_cannot_underestimate_the_sense_of_dread_that/

11. The World Wasn't Ready for Nuclear-Powered Bombers | National Air and Space Museum, accessed September 4, 2025, https://airandspace.si.edu/air-and-space-quarterly/issue-14/nuclear-bomber

12. CONVAIR NUCLEAR PROPULSION JET - LeeHite.org, accessed September 4, 2025, https://leehite.org/anp/documents/NX-2_ANP_1951-1961_Convair_Nuclear_Propulsion_Jet.pdf

13. June | 2022 - Kozminski Techblog, accessed September 4, 2025, https://techblog.kozminski.edu.pl/2022/06/

14. Who wants to go on a sky cruise? : r/RetroFuturism - Reddit, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/RetroFuturism/comments/17s2svc/who_wants_to_go_on_a_sky_cruise/

15. The Airbus A380 – the world's largest passenger aircraft | MTU AEROREPORT, accessed September 4, 2025, https://aeroreport.de/en/good-to-know/the-airbus-a380-the-world-s-largest-passenger-aircraft

16. Airbus A380 - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380

17. The Biggest Planes in the World: Exploring the 15 Largest Aircraft Ever Built, accessed September 4, 2025, https://aviex.goflexair.com/blog/the-biggest-planes-in-the-world-exploring-the-15-largest-aircraft-ever-built

18. Antonov An-225 Mriya - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya

19. The 9 Largest Aircraft in the World: How Many Can You Name? - Pilot Mall, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.pilotmall.com/blogs/news/the-9-largest-aircraft-of-the-world-how-many-can-you-name

20. This Is How Powerful The Airbus A380 Is - Simple Flying, accessed September 4, 2025, https://simpleflying.com/how-powerful-airbus-a380/

21. Tag Archives: Antonov An-225 Mriya - This Day in Aviation, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/tag/antonov-an-225-mriya/

22. A new Antonov AN-225 could easily use 4 engines and obtain more power - Reddit, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/t52pwc/a_new_antonov_an225_could_easily_use_4_engines/

23. Discover the AN-225 Mriya: World's Largest Cargo Aircraft - Chapman Freeborn, accessed September 4, 2025, https://chapmanfreeborn.aero/news-and-blog/worlds-largest-cargo-aircraft/

24. Sky Cruise Concept Takes Luxury Hotels Aerial and Nuclear | stupidDOPE | Est. 2008, accessed September 4, 2025, https://stupiddope.com/2022/06/sky-cruise-nuclear-powered-hotel/

25. Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion

26. Nuclear-powered aircraft - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft

27. Flashback: Boeing B-52G Nuclear Engine Testbed - Air Force Materiel Command, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.afmc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3381692/flashback-boeing-b-52g-nuclear-engine-testbed/

28. Will Nuclear-Powered Planes Ever Take to the Sky? - The National Interest, accessed September 4, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/will-nuclear-powered-planes-ever-take-sky-182421

29. Convair NB-36H - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_NB-36H

30. The NB-36H was A Bold Experiment in Nuclear Aviation - PlaneHistoria -, accessed September 4, 2025, https://planehistoria.com/the-nb-36h-was-a-bold-experiment-in-nuclear-aviation/

31. Tag Archives: Convair NB-36H Nuclear Test Aircraft - This Day in Aviation, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/tag/convair-nb-36h-nuclear-test-aircraft/

32. Nuclear Powered Sky Hotel : The Futuristic Sky Cruise hotel That Never Land - YouTube, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDZfY2xRuek

33. Why has there never been a successful nuclear powered aircraft? : r/aviation - Reddit, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/yd4bic/why_has_there_never_been_a_successful_nuclear/

34. Future Of Flight: This Nuclear Powered 'Sky Cruise' That Can Carry 5000 Passengers Will Never Land - Mashable India, accessed September 4, 2025, https://in.mashable.com/science/33995/future-of-flight-this-nuclear-powered-sky-cruise-that-can-carry-5000-passengers-will-never-land

35. Nuclear Power Plant Safety - International Atomic Energy Agency, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull16-1/161_202007277.pdf

36. What about attacks on nuclear facilities?, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.icanw.org/what_about_attacks_on_nuclear_facilities

37. Nuclear Exclusion Zones | Britannica, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/story/nuclear-exclusion-zones

38. Nuclear and radiation accidents and incidents - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents

39. The Reason Why Nuclear Powered Aircraft Have Not Been Created Until Now - YouTube, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTrG18FzRUI

40. Nuclear-Powered Sky Hotel - YouTube, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrodDBJdGuo

41. How Much Food & Drink Does Oasis Of The Seas Need? - Reasons To Cruise, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.reasonstocruise.com/oasis-seas-food-drink/

42. How To Feed Everyone On 6000 Passenger Ship, accessed September 4, 2025, https://cruisepassenger.com.au/news/how-much-does-it-take-to-feed-a-6000-passenger-ship/

43. Cruise Food - How Much do Cruise Ships Spend Per Cruise and Per Person?, accessed September 4, 2025, https://emmacruises.com/cruise-food-how-much-do-cruise-ships-spend-per-cruise-and-per-person/

44. www.dccruising.com.au, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.dccruising.com.au/pdf/69funfacts.pdf

45. Antonov AN-225 Mriya - Air Charter Service, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.aircharterserviceusa.com/aircraft-guide/cargo/antonov-ukraine/antonovan-225

46. 7 Main Problems in Aviation Maintenance (and How New Technologies Will Solve Them), accessed September 4, 2025, https://nsflow.com/blog/problems-in-aviation-maintenance

47. Common Challenges Faced by Experienced Aircraft Mechanics - Total Aviation Staffing, accessed September 4, 2025, https://totalaviationstaffing.com/common-challenges-faced-by-experienced-aircraft-mechanics/

48. Overcome Aviation Maintenance Challenges with Modern Solutions - AirNxt, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.airnxt.ai/post/how-to-overcome-common-challenges-in-aviation-maintenance

49. Rolls-Royce Trent 900 - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Trent_900

50. Unmanned Logistics Systems - Air - NAVAIR, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.navair.navy.mil/product/Unmanned-Logistics-Systems-Air

51. Tactical Resupply Unmanned Aircraft System Demonstration - Marines.mil, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/3358199/tactical-resupply-unmanned-aircraft-system-demonstration/

52. A Large Unmanned Logistics Aircraft Is Critical to Sustain EABO - U.S. Naval Institute, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2025/february/large-unmanned-logistics-aircraft-critical-sustain-eabo

53. Air cargo - Wikipedia, accessed September 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_cargo

54. Cargo Configuration for Air Shipping - Front Page | Logistics Operational Guide, accessed September 4, 2025, https://log.logcluster.org/en/cargo-configuration-air-shipping

55. A luxury cruise ship in the sky? What flying will look like in the future according to a cabin designer | The Independent, accessed September 4, 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/flying-in-the-future-what-will-it-look-like-air-cabin-designer-a7649056.html