Duncan Hunter takes $36K from the President of the company building this plane, but says continued support6 for thius piece of junk has nothing to do with him supporting the company of the man investing $36k for his campaign! And the Navy doesn't want it!

don't we already have an airplane like this: Harrier?

As a past operational test engineer for the Air Force - this is not the first or last "doomed-to-fail" pork-barrel project I've seen hawked by a senator or congressmen to strictly benefit some local industry. Congressman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. you should apologize and then resign. You are not a patroit but instead a greedy enemy of the state.

No we dont, the harrier is a british plane

Your headline is very misleading. This was a GOP controlled congressional pork/kickback/boondoggle, championed by Republican congressmen. Don't indict the whole current branch of congress for past GOP crimes.

The Harrier is British - but I believe the Marines utilize it in their operations

Gene

Hmmmm...
There is a "-R" behind the Congressman name. I think that means he is a Republican. And also, aren't most of the Congressmen incumbents.
Conclusion: They are watching videos of what they got for $63 million.

It was never meant to fly. It's a cover for a black project. This is how they do it. You will never see your money again.

Why don't we just pay the congressman $36,000 and no one says anything and then he doesn't screw us out of $6 million. It might be the best money the US ever spent.

We tend to blame our senators and representatives for these types of projects. But who keeps electing them.....

A Republican behind it all... why am I not surprised? And speaking of fiscal irresponsibility.... this congressman lobbied for the company to build this plane for 63 million....and all he got was 36k??? Honestly, I think we could take up a collection, raise 50k, get someone elected who would work for us, and save 63 million....

A US manufacturer has the license to manufacture the Harrier.

This thing looks like a pig that can't fly. Those thick wings couldn't go more than 400 knots.

Yes, the United States Marine Corps uses the AV8-B Harrier, perhaps this project is about a transport "heliplane", not a combat like the Harrier. The nearest aircraft to that description would be the V-22 and variants, which is pretty efficient. Just slower than the "expected" speed of that thing but -hey, the V-22 Osprey flies!

Just think the money wasted on this plane might have been used to get our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan the equipment they truly need. Shame on
Congressman Hunter. Now can you claim to support our troops when you waste money like this on something the military tells you they don't want? Explain that to my son and his fellow soldiers.

This cracks me up. I work for a legitimate Disabled Veteran Owned Business and wrote Mr. Hunter about the inequities in government contracting (the company I work for is a small company)and for some helpt/guidance for him to take to Capitol Hill. Needless to say I never received a response. I guess the fact I have not provided at least $36,000 in money to his campaign says that until I do, there is no fair representation. If I had that much marketing money to spend on one person I doubt we would be a small business. Thanks politicians for showing your true side!

ABC has politicized the issue but this is not limited to the Republican or Democrat party! Earmarks are an institutionalized "right" that our "leaders" utilize to bilk us out of billions every year. Look it up!

The President (yes, an "evil Republican") called for either the elimination of earmarks or transparency into the process. However, this has been resisted by almost ALL members of Congress (both sides) because they have never been held accountable for their actions.

A previous post indicated this as cover for a "Black Ops" project - good call they must be overstocked on $400 toilet seats.

As an aeronautical engineer I can look at this "project" just for a few minutes - configuration and a few other details - to
identify it as a hoax. Tax payer have been
taken on a ride with the assistance of a
congressman! Is this not this Hunter guy
who wants to run for president?

$63 million over 20 years is nothing compared to Hunter's other boondoggles.

What about that "60 mph boat" he is so proud of or the Affordable Weapon that just got canceled for not meeting cost and performance objectives? Both are managed by Titan (now L3), a company that pleaded guilty to three felony international bribery charges and agreed to pay a record $28.5 million in 2005. Google Titan and Abu Ghraib for a nice character reference. HUNDREDS of millions have been earmarked for those programs.

I hold you SoCal residents accountable for continuing to elect these crooks (Cunningham, Hunter, Cox, Rohrabacher, Feinstein, etc.)! Quit bitching about Dupont and start voting the REAL problems out of office!

Political pork goes across party lines and we pick up the tab. There are no bounds to the greed and incompetence of congress in nearly all areas. Public financing of campaigns and term limits are the only answer out of this horrible situation.

I believe an audit is proper and FBI investigation is warranted for this kind of waste. $63M is not peanuts.

I'm an other country citizen.
I thought that everywhere we go, a higher officials are much the same.without exception..
Where will you use it?
The plane might be used to get your troops in Iraq and Afghanistan..
I hope to live in peace...

Campaign contributions from anyone apart from private individuals who make their donations through a third party which can be trusted to keep the identities and affiliations of donators from the recipients should be banned. Otherwise we'll continue to get politician's caring more to please these lobbyists and contributers than they do the actual voters.

Oh my people. Yer all morons. I am an engineer, and sure this thing can't fly at the moment, but where would we have been if Wilbur and Orville gave up? It is a continous effort of trial and error when it comes to producing new technology and innovations. Who knows this plane may fly. Right now it has not been designed well and needs lots of work. Come on and get your heads out of your rear-ends for once. It could take another ten years to perfect the technology and get the thing to fly. Because it doesn't fly now is no reason to attack the project.

The world is truly full of stupid people when it comes to reading your replies.

I'm an engineer also, and although I agree with LAB on many points, I must point out that the Pentagon DOESN'T WANT this plane. It should not be the place of Congress (or Congressmen) to determine what should be a tactical advantage to the military. This is Pork, pure and simple, and Congressman Hunter should be an ex-Congressman and an ex-Presidential-hopeful.

LAB - You are not too bright yourself. This technology has been developed in the AV-8 Harrier and in the F-35 version for the Marines. Why these guys have been trying to re-invent the wheel for 20+ years is inexcusable. Even the most basic moron Engineer should be able to get thing to hover in this day and age.

Funny, look at the promos for this thing. The concept is for a large troop carrier, for the Navy? Here we have an uglied up Cessna. When I saw the pics I thought this was some old Soviet Era fighter. Even the most basic moron Engineer should be able to get thing to hover in this day and age.

Duncan Hunter, R-Calif is a fraud and so is Anthony DuPont.

With news like this can we start to put into regular use the phrase "spendthrift Republicans"?

This plane, I can say as an engineer, is a waste of money. The airframe appears to be a much uglier, less aerodynamic version of the F-84 Sabre II that the US used during the Korean War (1951-53)... look it up.

I fail to see how the Navy needs a "high speed transport VTOL" when they have larger capacity, longer range, tried and true C-130s, C-2A Greyhounds, and now MV-22s that SEALs can (and probably do) use for combat/black ops insertion.

The Navy is making a move towards ease of maintenance by using the F/A-18 Superhornet platform for Interception, Strike, Electronic Warfare, Reconnaisance, and everything but early warning and transport. Within transport and early warning aircraft, as within all combat aircraft these days, interchangability of parts is critical while deployed or at sea. This aircraft obviously does not fit that criteria, as the E-2C and the C-2A are the same airframe with completely different missions, this would be an unnecessary complication to the supply of spare parts, maintenance and flight training, etc.

The FBI should tear Representative Hunter (and other elected officials)"a new one" for essentially taking bribes and wasting valuable defense funds.

Oh, and just to rebut earlier comments, the Fly-by-wire, computer stabilized vectored thrust system used by the F-35A,B,and C are NOT so easy any moron could do it... They are beyond what most mechanical and aerospace engineers consider EXTREMELY complicated, and require highly skilled and constant maintenance.

looks like a WWII Spitfire !!

The article said the project started in 1986. For those that are casting stones if I remember correctly wasn't the democrats in charge of congress then? Repub didn't gain control until 1995. Sounds to me like there's plenty of blame to go around.

Oink, oink.

Um, just how high was it expected to get before it hit the end of the tether which appears to be the cause of the failure.

I reluctantly took a job there a number of years back and I could not wait to get out. The place was a joke, run by a bunch of jokers and as you can tell, the "thing" is the biggest joke. Man- the stories I could share. You can't even call that thing a plane - don't you think in order to call it a plane, it has to fly? Duh...

What should we expect? from a useless government? you guessed it right, Colladeral damage, or in short American deaths. 0-49. My fellow Americans. ITS TIME! Bush is worried about terorrist and fighting them here. Dont worry GW you forgot, your worst nightmare is the American People, so continue to piss them off, and when something nasty does happen,the politicains should leave the USA, they will no longer be relavent.

What a bunch of dummies to continue to feed a dead horse.

I believe that the Osprey is supposed to be our new vertical take-off plane, although it also had serious initial problems. This new plane looks ill conceived, and I wouldn't personally want a ride in the Osprey either. After four fatal crashes, they say they've finally fixed it. Hope so.

Don asked "Don't we already have an airplane like this: the Harrier".

Hell no, the Harrier FLIES man ... !!

As a previous comment stated, this was not meant to fly. The money is being diverted to a secret aircraft in development. It is called Dis-Information. How do you think we paid for F117's?

63 million of wasted dollars, and the US Government is going after the Brown's?? How about their own waste of money? INSANE.

Well, every government and every military "wastes" a ton of money on projects that never exactly get off the ground. They do that because sometimes they stumble upon a good idea. During ww2, Japan and Germany gambled on several ideas for weapons that never worked and would be considered laughable today. I guess rather than look at it in perspective its more hip to just bash.

That looks like an awesome machine! I hope they can get it to work. Make the US military kick more butt than it already does. Love the graphics where the aircraft flies into Iran!

This is how the fund the Stargate Program.

Uncle Sugar does this ALL THE TIME.

They take a bunch of incompetent old gas bags and ply them with money and "secret (not really) technology".

What Uncle Sugar wants Uncle Sugar gets. - The real deal of funding black projects. I am sure after all this smoke and mirrors are said and done the USGvt. has 600 million in the BLACK project world.

The other cute way to do this is fund some idiotic study and pay a front company for a mountain of paperwork all the while the real cash is in the BLACK project.

Now if you people want to see where this all came from step back to 1954 and look up Bell X-14 with viper engines and Beechcraft airframe and tell me if this is not Deja vu all over again?

The Black & White operator.

Kudos to Rick McDaniel and his comments revolving around the tether. The aircraft is clearly seen hovering in the video. Once it reaches the end of the tether, it is clearly yanked back to the platform.

An R behind his name? Are you kidding? You're not surprised? Gimme a break! Democrats are pure as the wind driven snow when it comes pork barrel project money in return for campaign donations? Yeh, RIGHT!
Sorry, but there is corruption on BOTH sides of the isle! Vote those jerks out and keep the good ones. That's our responsibility!

CLA - I just got done working on the Joint Strike Fighter project. Yes the ability to hover has been around, but when coupled with a new plane design things don't work the way they did on a previous plane. It IS reinventing the wheel every time this technology is put to use. The JSF as example. Took a lot of work and engineering development to get the hovering version to work properly. And now it is awesome and ready for production after eight or more years and countless trial exceeding the 49 the plane in question here has been thru.

JCA - Most if not all those planes you mentioned are due for retirement in the next 10 to 15 years. There needs to be something developed to replace them. Otherwise we won't have an air force or military.

All - Where would we be today if gobs of money were not thrown at developing technology and trying to get a good idea to work. All you lazy video gamers would not have Playstation 3s or Wii's. Crap get your heads out of your arses and quit complaining. You now have plasma screen TVs and screens that can bend from such wasted money. Most development is trial and error. And if you don't get it the first time you try again. Keep trying till something works.

Aw who am I trying to convince here. Go back to your video games. Ya'll got nothing else in your lives.

Looked like a running dog at the end of his leash.What do you think is going to happen?Very,very obvious this thing has potential.This thing can be fixed and I could do it.

LAB

1) You are a dismissive jerk

2) You work for the military-industrial complex, so no one should believe anything you say

3) The navy DOESN'T WANT IT

$63 million for 21 years of military aviation R & D is very nearly nothing by industry standards.

By contrast, in Fiscal Year 2005 alone, Bell-Boeing's new V-22 Osprey VTOL military transport cost us over $1.7 BILLION. I'm not going to take a cheap shot about the Osprey's safety history - military aircraft manuals are written in blood, unfortunately, because they must be designed to make hazardous maneuvers no civilian aircraft is asked to perform.

However, the Osprey is the end point of several decades of inglorious and shaky trial-and-error development work at NASA on tilt-rotor aircraft.

By comparison, if research into a viable and much less-expensive alternative to the Osprey ONLY cost us $63 million over 21 years, it's a bargain. If this were a NASA show, it'd probably have cost us ten times that amount.

This isn't to say that we should write this guy a blank check, or that we shouldn't ask for better performance after 21 years. However, this is a case where one wonders why, if it was worth doing at all, it wasn't better funded from the beginning.

And one also wonders how, over twenty one years and through both Democratic and Republican Congresses and Administrations, this project managed to survive even perfunctory oversight if it's as bad a deal as Brian Ross and his Investigative team make it out to be. They obviously don't have any idea of what military aircraft development usually costs.

Quoted:

"don't we already have an airplane like this: Harrier?

Posted by: don | Jun 12, 2007 4:16:45 PM

No we dont, the harrier is a british plane

Posted by: Juan | Jun 12, 2007 4:23:50 PM

The Harrier is British - but I believe the Marines utilize it in their operations

Gene"

Actually, the version of the Harrier the US Marine Corps flies, the AV-8 and its successor airframes AV-8A and AV-8B, is built in the United States (under license to British Aerospace) by Boeing at its Saint Louis, Missouri plant (formerly McDonnell-Douglas).

The British also build American-designed aircraft under license - the most recent example is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which will be produced under license by British Aerospace for the Royal Navy Air Arm and RAF.

I believe the latest JSF (F 35)aircraft is being built with this capability. They are building three different versions and one of them is vertical takeoff, which does function as it should, and as shown on the History Channel. So why keep dinkin' with this other clunker???? If no one wants it, why continue to pacify a politician??

0 for 49?? That's either bad odds, or good odds......depending on how you want to look at it.

its just to keep you guessing