[lwrzujfd] Helicarrier

Why aren't there airborne aircraft carriers in real life, as depicted in The Avengers, Dr. Who "The Sound of Drums", and elsewhere?

The inspiration was, aircraft carriers already have nuclear reactors on board for power, so the huge amount of power needed to lift a helicarrier could easily be provided by a slightly larger reactor.  The amount of nuclear fuel it would have to carry on board to provide that power would also not be an issue, because nuclear fuel is very energy dense.

Benefits of a helicarrier:

1. It is a vessel that can transport a large number of aircraft and a runway to anywhere they are needed, just like an ocean-bound aircraft carrier.
2. It can be stationed anywhere, not just in oceans.
3. It can travel faster through air than an aircraft carrier can through water, so it can be deployed more quickly.
4. Because it is high up, an attacker would need to battle gravity even to reach it.  Its higher speed will also make it a little more difficult to attack.

This video calculates (possibly incorrectly, because it omits the significant benefit of the ducts around the propellers as seen in the movie) that the exact design seen in The Avengers doesn't provide enough lift (by only a factor of 10), but more propellers, larger propellers, and faster propellers should be able to lift an aircraft carrier.  The latter two factors provide quadratically more lift.

Difficulties:

1. Takeoff and landing near propellers which are producing a huge amount of wind might be difficult.  We can easily imagine things going wrong and planes getting sucked into the huge spinning blades.
2. Nuclear reactors don't like hugely variable power demands, so there might be some issues in getting rid of heat when the reactor is running but its power is not needed.  This difficulty might be exacerbated by wanting to avoid heat-seeking missiles.

If the Mythbusters had infinite resources, this is a movie myth they should tackle.