Minting a token that represents a private aircraft is the easy part. Deciding what makes that token wrong is the hard part.
I built NFT generation and lifecycle on Ethereum for high-value physical assets, where the token accumulates signed documents and deal state from listing through closing. The instinct is to treat the token as the source of truth. It isn't. The asset exists in the physical world, the obligations exist in signed paper, and the chain only knows what someone chose to write to it.
So the token drifts. A deal stage advances off-chain, a signature is collected but never anchored, a party walks away — and on-chain state now claims something the world no longer supports. Nothing reverts it, because the chain is append-only and perfectly happy holding a stale claim forever.
What worked: no state transition without a signed document behind it. The document and signature live off-chain in the workflow system; the chain holds the commitment and the ordering. The token becomes a log of attested events, not an assertion of fact.
Most of the engineering in an RWA deal turns out to be e-signature and document lifecycle. The chain is the smaller half.
If you're building RWA flows: what do you anchor on-chain, and what stays in the document system?