Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[Luepola]

The ships wouldn't had have been completely defenseless.

Losses would have still been high for the air fields, maybe a few more aircraft in the air if they had any sitting prepared.

The difference might have been more crew members on machine and anti-aircraft guns earlier, but otherwise there would have been no difference to ships in the harbor. The time it takes for a ship which is moored to build up enough steam to sail out of a harbor is hours, they simply were unable to move.

Now, here's an insane-ish question (I'm not expecting very positive answers on this): How easily could a stealth bomber, such as the B2 or upcoming PAK DA, be converted to a troop transport aircraft, assuming this would include pressurizing the bomb bay and adding seats? And would there be any benefit in doing this?

With difficulty and probably with impossibility if you wanted to add anymore than four or six extra seats or so.

I can't see why you'd want to:
-Parachuting from the aircraft means the enemy will easily be able to detect the parachutes.
-B2s are very difficult to fly and are designed to operate of long, smooth and wide runways, not the sort you're likely to find in a tactical insertion.

Seems pointless.

Yeah, sort of what i thought. I asked this because someone on GE&T wanted a stealth transport aircraft, and all I have is a (google images lelelel) stealth bomber. I personally don't care for the idea myself anyway.

[Crookfur]

Now, here's an insane-ish question (I'm not expecting very positive answers on this): How easily could a stealth bomber, such as the B2 or upcoming PAK DA, be converted to a troop transport aircraft, assuming this would include pressurizing the bomb bay and adding seats? And would there be any benefit in doing this?

oops ninjaed on the Oh no John Ringo! thing.

yeah conversion won't happen but you could likely biuld a "stealthy" transport from the ground up if you really really needed to. Of coruse you have to ask yourself do you devote billions upon billions to design such specialist aircraft or do you just buy a bunch of second hand civilian turboprop utility types and fly in discretely uing dummy flight plans, or even under the radar.

[New Vihenia]

Now, here's an insane-ish question (I'm not expecting very positive answers on this): How easily could a stealth bomber, such as the B2 or upcoming PAK DA, be converted to a troop transport aircraft, assuming this would include pressurizing the bomb bay and adding seats? And would there be any benefit in doing this?

Inefficient. You'd better go with dedicated low observable transport instead if you need such capability.

..Aside from that well finally i looked upon Dr Carlo Kopp's solution for low RCS transport.
CVS-X and C-X

With this preliminary model :




It looks quite boxy because i haven't make further improvements

My expectation however the RCS reduction feature will work as intended.

The above transport is named as "Mystina Verea" It's quite large aircraft with 71 m length and 78 m wingspan. Payload is similar as C-17 though cargo bay is shorter. Range would be similar as my previous transport planes of 6200 Km. Propulsion would be four high bypass turbofan.

[Padnak]

ZSU-57-2 is stronkest SPAAG

---

Time for another air force assessment if you guys could be so kind-

The Padnaki Air Force

-bumpidy bump-

[Imperializt Russia]

Now, here's an insane-ish question (I'm not expecting very positive answers on this): How easily could a stealth bomber, such as the B2 or upcoming PAK DA, be converted to a troop transport aircraft, assuming this would include pressurizing the bomb bay and adding seats? And would there be any benefit in doing this?

Inefficient. You'd better go with dedicated low observable transport instead if you need such capability.

..Aside from that well finally i looked upon Dr Carlo Kopp's solution for low RCS transport.
CVS-X and C-X

With this preliminary model :




It looks quite boxy because i haven't make further improvements

My expectation however the RCS reduction feature will work as intended.

The above transport is named as "Mystina Verea" It's quite large aircraft with 71 m length and 78 m wingspan. Payload is similar as C-17 though cargo bay is shorter. Range would be similar as my previous transport planes of 6200 Km. Propulsion would be four high bypass turbofan.

Nifty.

[The Akasha Colony]

Now, here's an insane-ish question (I'm not expecting very positive answers on this): How easily could a stealth bomber, such as the B2 or upcoming PAK DA, be converted to a troop transport aircraft, assuming this would include pressurizing the bomb bay and adding seats? And would there be any benefit in doing this?

Inefficient. You'd better go with dedicated low observable transport instead if you need such capability.

..Aside from that well finally i looked upon Dr Carlo Kopp's solution for low RCS transport.
CVS-X and C-X

With this preliminary model :




It looks quite boxy because i haven't make further improvements

My expectation however the RCS reduction feature will work as intended.

The above transport is named as "Mystina Verea" It's quite large aircraft with 71 m length and 78 m wingspan. Payload is similar as C-17 though cargo bay is shorter. Range would be similar as my previous transport planes of 6200 Km. Propulsion would be four high bypass turbofan.

Seems to bear something of a resemblance to those Speed Agile concepts, perhaps unsurprisingly given the broadly similar objective.

[Imperializt Russia]

Can't help but think though, judging from Kopp's sketches, are these aircraft quite large for their usable internal volume?
I guess it's just a tradeoff that needs made.

[New Vihenia]

Can't help but think though, judging from Kopp's sketches, are these aircraft quite large for their usable internal volume?
I guess it's just a tradeoff that needs made.

It's built like B-2. Very wide leading edge to ensure shaping effectiveness up to VHF Band as well as providing internal volume for fuel and other stuff.

[Gallia-]

If it's Peak Stealth like B-2 why does it have a tail?

[Triplebaconation]

Why does it have a pokey nose?

[Gallia-]

I suppose it could have been designed in 1965. o:

[Imperializt Russia]

If it's Peak Stealth like B-2 why does it have a tail?

Ask Kopp, both his proposed designs feature a V-tail.

[Triplebaconation]

If it's Peak Stealth like B-2 why does it have a tail?

It's just Senior Peg with a pokey nose.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

The ships wouldn't had have been completely defenseless.

Losses would have still been high for the air fields, maybe a few more aircraft in the air if they had any sitting prepared.

The difference might have been more crew members on machine and anti-aircraft guns earlier, but otherwise there would have been no difference to ships in the harbor. The time it takes for a ship which is moored to build up enough steam to sail out of a harbor is hours, they simply were unable to move.

Although true, several ships actually managed to build steam and get underway before the second wave.

Things were going pretty fast for the first wave, though.
tl;dr: It took 3 minutes (180 seconds) between call to arms and the first shots being fired upon the attackers.

Other ships to get underway:
USS Aylwin (boilers lit at 0800 hrs, 60 seconds before Helena opened-fire [but generally began the engagement earlier as well], was underway by 0857 hrs, only 420 seconds after a bomb lit-up its masthead, made it out to sea to engage the Japanese fleet and claimed 3 surface-to-air kills; a near-miss ~20 seconds after getting underway tossed Aylwin's stern into a marker-buoy bending a crankshaft)
USS Nevada** (was underway by 0840 hrs, 17 minutes [1020 seconds] earlier than Aylwin after shooting down four planes during that time)
USS Enterprise (launched fighters [Dauntlass scout/dive bombers*, out on long-range patrol] to intercept)

Boil the hours down to minutes and convert to seconds, and fractions of a second, and every single one counted.

Nevada ran aground 1800 seconds after getting underway and remained in fighting-condition throughout the battle (taking a further 3 planes down), having rendered itself 'unsinkable'.

The first wave was spotted 136 miles, or 1800 seconds away from their targets.

[Oaledonia]

How do you guys think the future B-37 is going to be used?

[Organized States]

How do you guys think the future B-37 is going to be used?

It's going to be a drone. Probably with Air Sea battle if it wasn't already used.

[Gingeska]

http://republicofgingeska.webs.com/air-force

[Rabbidskiya Republika]

Updated List of Air Force aircraft:

Large two-seat multirole (F-14 Tomcat, F-34 (Sukhoi SU-34), StormningAviatik F-14NO GrumpyCat (new Rabbidish-built F-14 Variant to be delivered by end of July, 2014))
Small single seat multirole (F-7 (Saab JAS 39 Gripen), FS-35 (Sukhoi Su-35BM), StormningAviatik F-27 Devastator (Rabbidish Designed and Built Generation 5 Fighter Jet))
Jet trainer based off prior fighter (F-29 (Saab 29 Tunnan))
Interdictor/fighter-bomber/strike fighter (F-37JA (Saab 37JA Viggen), F-32 (Saab 32 Lansen), FJ-35 (Saab 35 Draken))
Planned Future Purchases (Sukhoi T-50/PAK FA, Chengdu J-20, StormningAviatik F-27D DevastatorStealth, MiG-35)
Single-seat Trainer (StormningAviatik F-27T DevastatorTrainer (to be delivered by end of July, 2014))
Dedicated ground attack fixed wing (A-10 Thunderbolt II)
Strategic bomber (B-52 Stratofortress)
Surveillance/recon aircraft (StormningAviatik F-27B DevastatorRecon)
UAV (AeroVironment RQ-20 Puma, AAI RQ-7 Shadow, AeroVironment Wasp III)

Retired, but still kept in Flyable condition in case of attack by a larger nation (Sukhoi Su-22, Saab 21R, F-262 Svälja (Swallow)(Reverse-engineered Messerschmitt Me-262 "Schwalbe" (Swallow) Fighter, English Electric Lightning, McDonnell F-101 Voodoo, McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II, Mitsubishi F-1, North American F-86 Sabre, North American F-100 Super Sabre, Panavia Tornado ADV, Republic F-105 Thunderchief (Yes, we have a couple "Thuds"), Tupolev Tu-28, MiG-29, MiG-27, MiG-31)

Armored attack helicopter (AH-64 Apache, StormningAviatik AH-1SA SvartKobra (Black Cobra))
Small attack helicopter (Bell UH-1 Iroquois, Bell AH-1 Cobra)
Trainer helicopter (Bell UH-1 Iroquois)
Recon helicopter (Bell UH-1 Iroquois, StormningAviatik AH-1SA SvartKobra (Modernized AH-1 Variant))

strategic airlifter (C-5 Galaxy)
tactical airlifter (C-5 Galaxy)
VTOL Aircraft (Harrier)
Civilian-Based Troop Transport (Sukhoi Superjet 100)
really small transport with STOL (American Champion Citabria, not very good for carrying stuff, used to carry important personnel into danger zones)

helicopter gunship/transport (Mil Mi-24 HInd)
medium transport (Chinook)
large transport (Chinook)

COIN aircraft (F-4U Corsairs, Saab 18 Bombers, Saab 17A Dive-Bomber/Light Bomber)

[Bratislavskaya]

Any point in me having the Il-10 as a COIN aircraft? Or should I just use regular ground attack aircraft?

[Rabbidskiya Republika]

Any point in me having the Il-10 as a COIN aircraft? Or should I just use regular ground attack aircraft?

In my opinion it would be best to have both if possible.

[Rabbidskiya Republika]

Inefficient. You'd better go with dedicated low observable transport instead if you need such capability.

..Aside from that well finally i looked upon Dr Carlo Kopp's solution for low RCS transport.
CVS-X and C-X

With this preliminary model :




It looks quite boxy because i haven't make further improvements

My expectation however the RCS reduction feature will work as intended.

The above transport is named as "Mystina Verea" It's quite large aircraft with 71 m length and 78 m wingspan. Payload is similar as C-17 though cargo bay is shorter. Range would be similar as my previous transport planes of 6200 Km. Propulsion would be four high bypass turbofan.

Nifty.

Looks suspiciously like the F-117 Nighthawk.

[Imperializt Russia]

Nifty.

Looks suspiciously like the F-117 Nighthawk.

All large stealth aircraft will feature apparent aesthetic nods to the F-117 or B-2, because shaping is an important aspect of signature reduction. All surfaces should face in the same direction, bouncing signals away from the radar that emitted them.

[New Vihenia]

If it's Peak Stealth like B-2 why does it have a tail?

more ground controllability, extra lift... Hmm i wonder what else.

[Rabbidskiya Republika]

Looks suspiciously like the F-117 Nighthawk.

All large stealth aircraft will feature apparent aesthetic nods to the F-117 or B-2, because shaping is an important aspect of signature reduction. All surfaces should face in the same direction, bouncing signals away from the radar that emitted them.

I wasn't saying it is a bad thing. There are a few other shapes that are stealthy. The Horten Ho-229 Flying Wing prototypes actually were the first stealth aircraft because of the general shapes and construction. They were stealth in the 40's but due to lack of modern materials, it isn't stealthy against modern radar. It is not angular and boxy like the F-117 and B-2 are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horten_Ho_229

[Luepola]

All large stealth aircraft will feature apparent aesthetic nods to the F-117 or B-2, because shaping is an important aspect of signature reduction. All surfaces should face in the same direction, bouncing signals away from the radar that emitted them.

I wasn't saying it is a bad thing. There are a few other shapes that are stealthy. The Horten Ho-229 Flying Wing prototypes actually were the first stealth aircraft because of the general shapes and construction. They were stealth in the 40's but due to lack of modern materials, it isn't stealthy against modern radar. It is not angular and boxy like the F-117 and B-2 are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horten_Ho_229

IIRC, they just built the plane that way, without actually realizing that it was a good design for defeating radar (knowledge of radar in the 40's was understandably limited). I might be wrong though.

Now, for my main question. I'm considering venturing into the world of past-tech, so I'd like to start here. Given WWII tech (say, 1942-44), would it be possible for me to create a (preferably single-engine) fighter aircraft whose sole advantages are its climbing and dive capabilities (I guess it would be fast, too) and maximum altitude? I envision an aircraft whose best tactic is to boom-and-zoom (dive on a bogey from high altitude and light them up in one pass, before pulling up and climbing to reposition for another run) from extreme altitudes, and having less-than-par dogfighting capabilities