I think that it is too simplistic to think that all Rolls-Royce will do is replace the onboard crew with computers and an on-shore control center. Granted that

I think that it is too simplistic to think that all Rolls-Royce will do is replace the onboard crew with computers and an on-shore control center. Granted that I don't know anything about shipping I can see some areas that could change: - Not having a crew onboard means a ship can be underway any amount of time as long as it doesn't run out of fuel or misses cargo deadlines (I don't know but there's probably a good amount of stuff that is allowed to take a good while to arrive). - Not having a crew onboard means that the drawbacks for having many smaller ships is significantly less than it would be otherwise. - Not having a crew onboard means onboard maintenance either needs to be automated (not very likely to be possible) or it should no longer be needed. Perhaps smaller ships with replaceable parts or sufficient backup systems are low maintenance enough to only need servicing at ports. Usually running costs far outweigh the cost of materials so shifting the balance to having less of the former and more of the latter makes complete sense to me. Perhaps I'm missing key information but I can definitely see why Rolls-Royce would want to go in this direction. I see a lot of comments about what happens when something goes wrong with helicopters not being able to reach the ship if something happens. But I fail to see how that is different from the current situation with crew on board; surely they can't fix every problem that could occur. And in the event of an emergency the crew could require immediate evacuation which a drone would never need. Doesn't seem like a problem?