I never bought the whole prototype/production model idea because it doesn't actually answer the question of why they look so different. It just says they are and expects that to sell.
Is there any particular explanation owed there? All things considered, that seems pretty comprehensive: the square ones were prototypes on which to test the cloak and the dagger-like ones are the spaceframes that are using them off the production line. Heck, there's no better analogy than real stealth aircraft... compare the rectangular Tacit Blue technology demonstrator to the sweeping B-2 bomber it lead to.
(The fact that they use "Strakha" to refer to the Shroud-style Sartha prototype on Academy suggests that the word actually means something along the lines of 'invisible.' Or maybe something more prosaic.)
(Good thing the Privateer version didn't make the cut!
https://cdn.wcnews.com/newestshots/full/privstrakharender.jpg)
I never considered Strategic bombers as insperation for Longbow and Broadsword because so many light and medium aircraft had turrets back then. I can see the corilations but think that planes like the TBF Avenger, Douglas A-20 or Mitsubishi Ki-51 might better discribe the roles the designers where tring to fill. The Broadsword, because she is so much bigger then other WC fighters might actually have been inspiered by the B25s used in the Doolittle raid off of Hornet and Enterprise.
I think the Broadsword is pretty blatantly a B-17. Others have already noted the designation and the paint scheme... but the big give-away is the distinctive ball turret which appears in the flight deck background shots of the ship. (You have to remember that the people responsible for the ships weren't hardcore aviation enthusiasts... nobody was saying "make this like a Mitsubishi Ki-51"... they were drawing from broad cultural touchstones like the Flying Fortress.)
and thrakhath strikes me as the kind of cat who would pimp his own ride when the mood fits.
Yes, we're told in Secret Missions 2 that he's considered the Empire's greatest pilot... so obviously he has been flying in combat.
No just that no Confed forces that encoutered the fighter lived to tell the tail. Without an earlier contact report that's the most logical conclusion
Or that it's just not a Bloodfang in the first place. We're only calling it a Bloodfang because it looks (somewhat) like the fighter he flies at the end of Wing Commander 2... which is also never called a Bloodfang.
(Here's some fan speculation that I like: maybe "Vatari" is the Kilrathi name for the Bloodfang...)
The bloodfang's backstory is listed in the WC3 manual(Only thrakhath himself and members of his elite personal guard are allowed to fly them), The Excalibur was created exactly to counter the Bloodfang after Blair's encounter with the fighter in the end of WC2's main campaign. You find a bloodfang wreckage in Ultima7, so yes, there is more than one fighter and other people then Thrakhath get to fly it.
The only mention of the Bloodfang in Victory Streak is: "His ship of choice is the Bloodfang, which is said to be poundfor-
pound a match for our own new Excalibur-class fighter."
Well, here's the thing - there are two games with ground attack missions, WC3 and WC4. In one, you use the Excalibur for ground attacks. In the other, you use the Hellcat. You never have the option of using the Longbow. That doesn't mean the Longbow is not capable of atmospheric combat, obviously - but if we never see a Longbow in a ground attack role, how can we possibly discuss the ship's advantages as a ground attack craft? Based on the information we actually have, the Longbow is simply not used for ground attacks.
You don't really use the Hellcat for ground attack missions. It's a photo recon mission and then a shuttle escort, right? The Vindicator, on the other hand...
