re: #512 Shiplord Kirel

Another striking example from way back: The famous B-17 Flying Fortress was not designed as a strategic bomber, but as an anti-shipping aircraft to protect the US coast from potential invaders. The name originally referred to this role, in fact, and not to the aircraft’s defensive armament, which was actually very light in early versions.

Well, no, not at all. It was designed for strategic bombing from the get go. The ideas were very clear in the writings of Mitchell and Seversky and others and both Boeing and the Army were paying close attention.

Congress being a bunch of isolationist idiots would not fund an offensive weapon but would fund a defensive one. Hence the fantasy of land based bombers playing maritime interceptors.

The Fortress name was given by reporters. They didn’t know anymore then than they do now and so all those bristling .30’s seemed like a huge armament to them.