On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 22:55:10 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote in message
.. .
"Firefighting certainly wasn't what Glenn L. Martin had in mind for
the design of the Martin Mars. Originally conceived as a bomber for
long range missions and patrols, the production aircraft were
redesigned and classified for long-range general transport because of
the demonstrated heavy-lift capability of the prototype."
http://www.martinmars.com/mars.html

Key word: "redesigned".

Right. Indicating a change in design. All that the other guy said
was that the Mars was intended originally to be a bomber.
Not a water bomber. A military bomber. When the Navy
changed its mind, the innards got redesigned so that they
could be used for other things.

The prototype was never used as a water bomber.

Neither the original poster nor I claimed that it was.

The airplanes in use as
water bombers (and not of the same design as the prototype) were never
intended for use as a bomber. Claiming that they were doesn't make it so.

You said we should read the histories. I went out on the net and
read enough to make me quite sure that the original poster's
point was accurate. Now you want to change the terms of the
debate.

You may have the last word.

Marty