The NEW B-52 ENGINES Will DESTROY The Entire Aviation Industry! Here's Why

The Boeing B52 Stratofortress has been flying for the U.S. Air Force for nearly 70 years since its introduction in February 1955. But now, this strategic bomber is getting a lot of updates to keep it flying possibly until it reaches 100 years of service. One major part of these updates is a huge engine replacement project, so big that it will change the current model name to B52H, after nearly two generations. The updates, especially the engine chosen for the B52H shocked a lot of people in the military industry, let’s see why.
✈️ Don't forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE for more aviation content! ✈️
Tags: Aviation,Boeing,Airbus,WingedWorld,Planes,Plane,Airplane,Airplanes,aviation,planes,flying,avgeek,aviationnews,flight,flight review,b-52,b-52 engine,b-52 new engine,new engine b-52 fly 100 years,b-52 engines just shocked everyone,comac c919,airbus vs boeing vs comac,aviation compilation,aviation moments,b52 stratosphere,b52 aircraft,b52 carpet bombing,military aircraft,us air force,b52,b52 shot,b 52 bomber,b52h,b52h stratofortress,b52 engine,b52h engines

[@jesperpedersen3156]

WARNING: There is zero reference to how the new engines will destroy the aviation industry.

[@keith6400]

Most civil aircraft these days only have two engines. My theory is that when they need to have eight engines like the B52 the fares will go up and the airlines will go bankrupt due to the down turn in the world economy.

[@TauntYou]

​@@keith6400And why will civilian aircraft eventually need eight engines?

[@keith6400]

@@TauntYou This is to get in line with the B52 layout to prevent the destruction of the entire aviation industry.

[@TauntYou]

@keith6400 Huh? Maybe I'm overlooking your sarcasm. Sometimes, it takes me a while to catch onto a joke. At least the oil sector will be fine when all aviation ramps up to eight engines.

[@foxstrangler]

Thanks, saved me 13 minutes.

[@premkudva]

The only reason I watched this video was to find out how it would "destroy the entire aviation industry" and as expected there was no reference to that at all. Just a click bait this was!

[@railbaron9]

Total BS in the title. Interesting video.

[@daleeasternbrat816]

They make a decent vid but annoy people with stuff like that. I've been a fan of the B-52, even when it looked like they were all going to the Boneyard. That was because I felt confident that they would be kept flying. A Very Useful and Reliable Airplane with too many useful characteristics to name now. Perhaps When Kirk and Spock drop off the Enterprise at the Boneyard.......

[@ddhh6552]

Thanks for the warning. I'm out

[@user-yi6nb9sj9i]

And this is why I don't subscribe to these channels . I refuse to condone their bullshat!!

[@Subgunman]

Thanks for the heads up!

[@johnathansaegal3156]

The title of this video has NOTHING to do with what is mentioned in the video - that is: clickbait!

[@CaptApple]

F both Robot Voices and Tabloid headlines. Also, no destroyed aviation industry anywhere in the video.

[@lunarpollen]

i really wish there were laws against bot content like this video

[@mickstocks]

also picturing a b2 whilst talking about the b21

[@CaptApple]

@@mickstocks It's like it was assembled by a not very bright AI.

[@mickstocks]

@@CaptApple surely not that would be evil

[@andrewwmacfadyen6958]

B52H has been the designation since the last series left the factory, B52F and B52G models are have been in the boneyard for three decades because of SALT Treaty and just getting worn out in the Vietnam war

[@SpamSucker]

Thank you, I was confused by the title, as I'd heard B-52H for a long time. Edit: and now the presented documents make clear, the new designation is J, not H. Should have waited for Alex Hollings to cover this topic.

[@jeffreyhixenbaugh5931]

If it becomes a new model, It would be I model

[@tombradscott]

START* treaty. Strategic Arms Reduction. But yeah, I worked as a maintainer on the H models back in 08 lol.

[@tombradscott]

Hey... looking back. The SALT treaty was older. You're right. START was Obama era.

[@mikaelbiilmann6826]

The last b52h was made in 1962, so you are correct.

[@Turboy65]

Thumbs down for the clickbait title.

[@CalgarGTX]

Man the aviation industry keep getting destroyed or shocked, they need to get it together smh

[@Turboy65]

When the B-21 Raider is retired, the B-52K will take over its role.

[@user-fu8vn7xo6c]

A time when competent engineers ran Boeing.

[@andynaz5631]

Now they have an engineering staff that meets all DEI requirements. Now that's more important than a useless aeronautical engineering degree.

[@devnom9143]

​@@andynaz5631The problems can be oversimplified to the cost cutting suits from McDonald Douglass whose civilian planes were killing people at a greater rate than any other American plane builder & a lack of engineers needed to design, build, & maintain aircraft as the commercial aviation industry is growing at a faster rate than the number of engineers; In fact the 2020s only made things worse as a bunch of engineers retired due to the furloughs & layoffs; As such post 2020-2022 we've got a bunch of newer & greener engineers with the mentorship or oversight of the more experienced ones. These factors alone are a recipe for disaster

[@KamasKirian716]

I remember B-52s in Minot were testing new engines and a new biofuel back in the '90s, including a commercial airline engine. I'm surprised it's taken 30 years to actually implement ideas tested out back then.

[@Strike_Raid]

Uh, B52-H is what is flying now, and for decades.

[@goodtimea6]

yeah. The vid started off calling it the "H" then the "J". I lost interest once they started getting the facts wrong

[@K-Effect]

I think it’s sad that Pratt & Whitney either couldn’t meet or didn’t get the contract to replace the engines with a upgraded model

[@TheDavidlloydjones]

1955-2060 -- "almost a century." Ah, yes, American high-school arithmetic.

[@dameceliamolestrangler3379]

The current version of the b- 52 is the H version, the next version will be B-52J get your facts right.🙄

[@stevemartin7464]

Doesn't I come after H? Why not "I"?

[@user-ij7mp2nv2z]

@@stevemartin7464 Maybe because 'i' or 'l' could be confused for a number one (1). Similar as to why there is no seat number 'i' in an airliner. At least none that I have seen. Just speculating.

[@user-yq4sp5ij6u]

How are people going to fly if the whole aviation industry has been destroyed?

[@davidwright8432]

Glad you asked. As we're the good guys, our angel wings will do all.

[@stevemartin7464]

Amazing engines that can somehow destroy the entire aviation industry! Clickbait.

[@marvinmcelvin1419]

I served in the Air Force from 1986 to 1990. I proudly served in Quam from 1986 to 1987. I worked with the B-52G tail number 0255. She never missed any missions. The big, ugly flying fellow is still one badass bird. Older than father time but still flying. Can't wait to see the B52J flying

[@norman7179]

B - 52 flying 70 years, ............. sometimes they just get it RIGHT !

[@BBD40]

I exited USAF 30 years ago. They were discussing such a modification way back then. I loaded the BUFF and even got to be in the back of a KC10 to watch one mid air refueling.

[@australiasfirstmate1556]

outstanding memory! Love the BUFF.........."Major Kong, where in the hell is Major Kong?" Plan "R?" R for Robert.............. "Ain't nobody's got the go-code yet!" B-52, yesterday, today, and into the 22nd century!

[@michigreen8943]

Why would they want to "destroy the entire aviation industry"? That would be counterproductive to future advancements...

[@gottfriedheumesser1994]

How will the B-52 engines destroy the entire aviation industry? Can you explain that? Stop with your ridiculous titles as they show some lack of intelligence!

[@stevemartin7464]

Very true, its clickbait.

[@williamcharles9480]

What an amazing feat, the B-52 being in service for 100 years. Who would have thought.

[@endreadam5123]

I think the word Aviatrix was looking for was "disrupt"

[@etherealbolweevil6268]

Perhaps the idea of (foreign) RR engines in a US aircraft is scary for them, even though RR has had to jump through the Berry Act hoops and set up manufacturing in the USofA. Because no US aircraft has ever employed RR engines before (ha!). On the other hand, the B-52 will be able to bomb European aerospace industries to further US commercial interests and maybe the doors won't fall off.

[@cameronalexander359]

No whisleblowers were killed in the creation of this video.

[@stevemartin7464]

We think! Lol

[@colinw7205]

When I was in AFROTC in the late '70's there was a little diddy that was recited among aircrews especially SAC personnel. It went like this: " You too can flew the B-52, like your father and his father and his father before that". Remember even in the 1970's the B-52 was considered too long in the tooth with Vietnam War vet B-52Ds and the later B-52Gs and then considered relatively hot B-52Hs still sitting alert around the country and a few foreign forward bases.

[@Storm-lg4mx]

The Air Frame is still ancient.

[@harryschaefer8563]

The advances in technology from B29s in 1945 to B52s in the early 50s is mind blowing. Well done, America!

[@Jack-bs6zb]

@harryschaeffer8563 ... yes, well done America .... for choosing British Rolls Royce engines.

[@cheersgxp2466]

Numerous errors in fact detract from piece.

[@robertkerby2581]

The B52 Stratfortress is an Absolutely Amazing Aircraft! I cannot wait to see the completed upgrades on the B52!

[@jacksons1010]

The re-engined BUFF will be designated *B-52J*

[@genebohannon8820]

II had a Professor who was dropping 48000 pounds of joy on Hanoi before I was born. The static display in front of the Orlando airport has his initials scratched in the cockpit. Captain Earl "The Pearl" Simpson.

[@lilibethdoherty295]

The Russians made a Copy of a B-52 But it would not lift off the Runway, Buffy is a Winged Wonder !

[@dilbertfirestorm4851]

they did???

[@alancranford3398]

I suspect that the Bear bomber was what the turbo-prop edition of the B52 was supposed to be. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95 The Tu-95 and B-52 are contemporaries, and both have "been replaced" but then outlasted their replacements.

[@onenote6619]

Rolls-Royce proposed re-engining the B52 fleet back in the 1990s using the tried-and-true RB211. It was nixed (probably) because RR were not an American company. The current refit program involves RR engines as well. Let's just hope that the military arm of Boeing is doing a better job of quality control than their airliner arm.

[@kennethhawley1063]

How would they have fitted the RB211 under the wings?

[@onenote6619]

@@kennethhawley1063 Remember that RB211 is a family of engines, not a single engine. So they would have used engines with smaller bypass fans than those you see on airliners. The proposal was also to replace the existing 8 engines with 4. The new proposal is 8-for-8. media.defense.gov/2020/Feb/21/2002253097/-1/-1/1/HN2-%20B-52%20RE-ENGINING.PDF

[@stevemartin7464]

Well they can't do worse! I say confidently! Lol

[@colinw7205]

It wasn't b/c RR was a non American company, maybe a small factor but not a deal killer. Of the First Generation of high bypass turbofans the P&W JT9, the GE CF6 and RR RB211. The RB211 was always put out the most thrust . Now in the early 21stcentury we have small diameter powerful high bypass regional and corporate engines that can fit into the original nacelles of B-52H's without a total wing redesign and keep the super redundancy of 8 powerful engines instead of just 4.

[@edwardwilcox6606]

RR will supply their F130 ( basically the BR725 ) for the B52, this engine is already in service with the USAF on the E-111A & C-37 aircraft with something in the order of 200,000 hours of combat operations so it`s beyond well-proven. For the B52 F130 will be built at RR`s plant in Indianapolis. Can`t wait to see a smokeless Stratofortress!!

[@hectordiaz537]

C 37 is based on the G500/G550 using the BR710. The F130 is used on the G650/G650ER Aircraft which as far as I know doesn't have a military version

[@stevemartin7464]

It will seem odd to not see smoke!

[@keithpardini9065]

What are they6 planning to do with the wing vent boxes / surge tank system? That was a real problem when I was crewing the BUFF's requiring lots of fuel cell MX just to patch them until they cracked somewhere else.

[@tensecondtwoii4182]

The "H" designator was ALREADY used when the B52 was upgraded from turbojet engines to turbofans.

[@yclept9]

They're not high-bypass which means they're still very inefficient. It's a diameter constraint. To be efficient you have to move lots of air slowly instead of a little air fast.

[@ouroboris]

Would it not make sense to build hangars for the B-52 fleet?

[@christopherjohnson2171]

The new engines are supposed to be militarized versions of the Rolls Royce 700s used on the latest Gulfstreams, the 650/700/800. 2 of them let those jets cruise at Mach .9 at up to 52,000 I believe, I'm sure the B-52 sporting 8 of them will be much more efficient than it is now.

[@kermecke]

These "NEW" engines had once been developed in GERMANY by the former joint venture BMW Rolls Royce as the BR725, the smaller sister of the BR715 that powers the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 aka Boeing 717. BMW (that had been a renowned aircraft engine maker in WW II) later sold its share of the joint venture to Rolls Royce. Its premises in Berlin Dahlewitz are the place where much of the Ultrafan development is done.

[@gordonadams5891]

The B-52 is one of the first aircraft models I built. It's amazing it's still flying.

[@johnc1014]

I feel like the air force is still in a process of reducing the number of airframes and consolidating all sorts of roles. For bombers, we really only need the 2. The new Raiders can deal with operations that need stealth and heavy payloads. B-52s can deal massive payloads in situations that don't beed the stealth. F-16s are still around as a small, cheap, multirole fighter. But, I can easily see everything being consolidated into F-35s and the NGAD fighter. F-16s are great. But, they really are outdated. Even with upgrades, fighters just need to be far nore stealthy. And, the F-22 is far too expensive to even upgrade.

[@keithdurose7057]

The B52H flew during the Vietnam War! Along with B52D and B52G versions. Even the British (sometimes) upgrade their equipment! Even the very small amounts that they have of it.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

After spending the past 30 years designing Military/Commercial Jet engines for both P&W and GE, I was really worried about how this single program was going to "destroy" the entire aviation industry... but as I suspected click bait Bull $hit! This is how I learn which channels to "block" from my recommendations, and you should too.

[@Genjokoan]

I knew it was click-bait but hoped to get some cool sights and sounds of b-52s. And lo, I was rewarded at 4:25 with a lovely rendition from Kerbal Space Program using the Shuttle flight deck. Nice!

[@stevedunningduckinggiraffe6296]

WTF ! What's a British WW2 wooden Mosquito fighter/bomber doing at 5.17. Truly a random collection of clips!

[@paulissus8974]

Let's hope Boeing assign at least one member of the workforce to be responsible for the securing of engines to wings & doors to fuselage etc.

[@phildiegidio4658]

We already have an H model. It would change to J.

[@melangellatc1718]

CLICK BAIT VIDEO!!!

[@magnuszerum9177]

There will always bee a need to deliver large amounts of boom for the lowest cost.

[@Z4Zander]

Better known as Bang for Buck.

[@davidwright8432]

'Lowest cost???' There's no serious competition going on here! This isn't a pork barrell, it's a dinosar barrell.

[@rael5469]

It's already the B-52H. There will be an avionics upgrade and it will be the B-52J. Then the engine upgrade will make it the B-52K.

[@HarryB-cj6tg]

Lots of these people are easily shocked and for some reason believe that the rest of humanity will have a similar response.

[@galesams4205]

I seen these bad boys in oakwannia, Japan (30) on my way to vietnam.

[@ADobbin1]

The buff will still be flying at the heat death of the universe.

[@grumblesa10]

The current (i.e. summer 2024) name of the BUFF is...B52H. So....not sure what "name change" is being referred to here. But yes, the BUFF IS getting numerous updates to further digitize its cockpit and weapon stations, AND being re-engined. Though, the original plan of 4 was axed a few years back.

[@samfrancisco8095]

The B1 Lancer is a cool looking aircraft.

[@felixgarcia3074]

That Hook, Reeeeels Us All In. Lol

[@JCMills55]

Ellsworth AFB was getting B-52H's when I was there in the mid '70's! WTF?!

[@beeble2003]

Never expect accuracy from any video that's robonarrated.

[@australiasfirstmate1556]

love that base and Mt. Rushmore in Keystone...........the "Missiliers"..........

[@warpig417]

Notice at the 4:25 mark that the aircraft's cockpit section was borrowed from the space shuttle.

[@miket2120]

Why does their Model 462 look like a space shuttle nose and slab side fuselage with an awkward circular tail body? Because it is! The Rolls Royce F130 is a slightly upgraded version of their BR725 (17000lbf on the F130 vs 16900lbf on the BR725). The BR725 the latest of the BR700 regional and corporate jet engine, first flown in 1998. While there was speculation that the B-52 could go with 4 turbofan or possibly 2 turbofans, it was decided to stick to a size similar to the original engines so the wing would not have to be totally redesigned.

[@colinw7205]

I totally agree with you. I remember the various schemes of putting the RB211 on the B-52. Of the First Generation of high bypass turbofans the P&W JT9, the GE CF6 and RR RB211. The RB211 was always put out the most thrust . Now in the early 21stcentury we have small diameter powerful high bypass regional and corporate engines that can fit into the original nacelles of B-52H's without a total wing redesign and keep the super redundancy of 8 powerful engines instead of just 4.

[@cliffordnelson8454]

It appears that still using 8 engines. Seems crazy since that will significnatly increase the cost of maintenance since a lot of the cost is the engines. From what I remember the GAO suggesting strongly replacing the engines 40 years ago to 4 engines. At the time the Air Force was planning to replace them. LOL.

[@taotoo2]

75 x Boeing 787s @ $300m each = $22.5bn. That leaves $25bn to add bomb bay doors.

[@badboy10350]

You lack the electronics....LMFAO If it were only that simple.

[@warringtonminge4167]

​@@badboy10350 $25bn should run to bomb bay doors and some new electronics plus a bit left over for a couple of 6-packs and chips.

[@martineastburn3679]

Radar ? likely in badboy10350 response. The engine comes from England. No issue. The US supplier is busy with Boeing and other companies overseas.

[@stevemartin7464]

Hmm, sounds like a good idea, but I suspect it isnt quite that simple. Why not a 747?

[@PeaceMarauder]

When you say 'B-52 bomber' you're saying 'Bomber-52 bomber'.

[@goaway3717]

So it'll actually cost somewhere between 50-100 billion since these things never cost what they say.

[@OneWildTurkey]

WOW! This text to speech audio on this one is really good quality. Just a few little quirks that need attention. WTG!

[@androtekman6131]

I think we should build replacement airframes of similar design to replace the shrinking fleet.

[@Tonetwisters]

Holy cow! I thought this had been done and the thing was already up and flying with new engines. What's taking so long?

[@irabourstein]

Bureaucracy.

[@kennethbolton951]

I never thought that an operation military aircraft fleet would out live me. Unless of course I live to a hundred and forty.

[@richardkroll2269]

I remember seeing B-52s at Hartford-Springfield Airport with a single, huge engine of the type on the huge Boeing commercial jets (P&W) 40+ years ago. There have been many articles written on why 2 engines on every pylon versus a single YUUUGE engine for decades. Dropping bombs is getting to be so old fashion given ground forces have better and better air defenses like the S-400/500.

[@richardpearcy6149]

Aviatrix could even get the logo right. U.S. Army Air Forces. 1941-1947?

[@alancranford3398]

The last B-52 was built back when Boeing could still build airplanes that didn't fall apart in flight. Given the estimated development time and the rule that a new aircraft will always go over budget and always be behind schedule by years, upgrading the B-52H to B-52J standards will maintain a credible force while the replacements for the B-52 are made. The B1 and B2 were supposed to replace the B52 and the B70 was cancelled before it flew (and a few were completed for research)--looks like BUFF is going to out-live its replacements.

[@mypuppydogtizzy1058]

we have a saying in the UK, Triggers broom

[@jamesszabadics5911]

The model 462 had a space shuttle cockpit :) 4:26

[@temijinkahn511]

The B52 needs to be turnee into a drone swarm mothership for stand off drone attacks in mass. Modern air defense systems create a defensive environment best attacked with with stealth aircraft both manned and unmanned.

[@edmanzini3664]

Probably cheaper to build large 3D printer to make parts for the current engine. Great Britain has developed one recently. It can make parts for old military vehicles that are not manufactured anymore.

[@athelwulfgalland]

Oooooh! Will we get new-build Rolls-Royce Merlin engines ... or maybe flying replicas made bolt for bolt like the originals?!

[@SpamSucker]

Any turbine engine will wear out over time. Makes sense to replace with new, not old.

[@terencerucker3244]

Already there. Many of the parts are made with 3D technology. However no desire to keep the old engines. You wouldn’t want a flathead 6 in your new Ram pickup. The new engines will add a lot of range and reliability.

[@athelwulfgalland]

@@terencerucker3244 What?! Then you don't understand the beauty of the sound of a well tuned Rolls-Royce Merlin engine! lol Jokes aside I know they did that for the bolt-for-bolt replicas of the Messerschmitt Me-262s because the original engines were drek. However it's more difficult to do that with the prop-planes of the past. Oftentimes the appearance of the aircraft directly corresponds to the shape of the engine itself, as well as inlets for cooling & exhausts for the specific engine fitted. It's just not as easy as dropping a new engine under the hood of a pickup. A prime example would be to look up images of the Messerschmitt Bf-109 vs the Hispano Aviación HA-1112. Put these two images side by side. The latter are Spanish license-built Bf-109s that are fitted with Rolls-Royce Griffon engines. (The Griffons were a more powerful successor to the Rolls-Royce Merlin.) Do you see how much it changes the profile of the aircraft though?

[@stevemartin7464]

Really? Sounds like a good idea. But I think the engines are just too old and inefficient so it probably makes sense to replace them. I think it will be amazing to see a plane in service for 100 years! Amazing.

[@blackbirdpie217]

The math? Okay it says it entered service in February 1955. The upgrades will extend it to 2030, "almost a century" (100 years).. Yet that's 105 years.

[@irabourstein]

This is the internet. You expect accuracy? Or even basic math skills? Nuh-uh!

[@floyd6545]

Well, that sucks. Didn't show the entire interview.

[@nwolinsP]

I think the fortune of airpower will be delivering drones and self gilded weapons to near the front. So, large platforms like the B-52 can do that.

[@Killerspieler0815]

Spaceshuttle bomber at 4:28 ... edit: the B-52 is USA´s "Miranda Class"

[@bobfeller604]

I'm sure there's nothing wrong with the B1 or B2, they can be flown for many years.

[@oxcart4172]

I guess they would help it drop nukes on the factories?

[@BeechSportBill]

H is the CURRENT model

[@paulwestwood4417]

They probably use 3D printing to replace some of the parts. 3D printing was used to extend the life of the U.K. Tornado G4 before its retirement.

[@stothal]

might as well just order new planes and have them built from the ground up. the metal stress on these old birds has to have been unbelievable after 70 years of service.

[@Kev5565]

I take it there's going to be a part 2 that tells how the aviation industry is being destroyed.

[@vc7393]

I wish we would give a new upgrade to the B1- Lancer or create a new model. I understand that the F-35 is supposed to escort the B-53, but it can't fly low at he speeds as the B1- Lancer

[@heyoldtime8969]

The B 52 new engines are the same engines that Gulfstream uses on their new jets. No more black smoke.

[@stevemartin7464]

Not only that, it means there are lots of spares available.

[@user-dm1jw1gy5q]

If we can give you Crane a 100 billion dollars that we're not gonna get back.We can certainly keep our b one and b two in service

[@sandyago4735]

BOEING? It will be a decade late, and cost $80 billion

[@swdw973]

Operational airframes around 62 years old (H was delivered in 1962). The adage, "They don't build them like they used to" is highly applicable in this case. 👍 As for destroying the aviation industry- Clickbait. There were no planes to replace the B-52, and replacing old engines that are hard to get parts for will only affect those companies that are in business because the only thing they do is still provide parts for B-52 engine. This will NOT affect the entire aviation industry as those would be small niche companies.

[@wrdennig]

Who will make the engine change? Boeing? The Air Force? Rolls Royce?

[@xh3598]

Fuck the history, just show the NEW FUCKING ENGINE.

[@univibe23]

The current model is B52-H so when they make the engine change its new name will be B52-H. Humm

[@Spawn-td8bf]

The content of this video is strangely familiar. It is a shame that some people can't create their own content. Even the script is the same, except he other one doesn't have the same click bait title.

[@ZilogBob]

I had this deju vu feeling that I've already seen most of this video somewhere else on YT.

[@Spawn-td8bf]

@@ZilogBob Agreed.

[@thearcher9940]

@ 1:20 why does that say B-52 J?

[@mikaelbiilmann6826]

What? The B52H has been there a looooong time!

[@michaelkawasaki4764]

Why not 4 instead 8 engines?

[@RooEfx]

'New' would be an Indigo model. wtef? ChatGPT?

[@fleetwarrior75]

There was already a B-52 H

[@raginroadrunner]

Why, in the age of missles, do we need a bomber of any kind?? Sounds like a shady deal.

[@StevePemberton2]

Here is what will happen and why this is such a dire situation: reengining the B-52 will prove to be so difficult that the U.S. government will mobilize the entire aviation industry to assist with this massive effort, similar to what happened to aviation in WWII. However it will just prove to be too hard and they will all go bankrupt.

[@stevemartin7464]

Ah is that why? I was wondering. Lol