Duncan Hunter continues support
for flightless aircraft

By Michael Mason
The Alpine Sun

     EL CAJON — In a message relayed through his communications director, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) took a no-nonsense approach to his support of an experimental aircraft program that’s landed the presidential hopeful in hot water with some constituents.
     “If people want to support me, that’s fine. If they don’t, that’s fine too,” Hunter said to Joe Kasper, his communications director.
     It’s tough talk for the congressman, who is not considered a front-runner in the Republican presidential primary.
Hunter last week said he supported more funding for DP-2, a Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) aircraft, which is a fixed-wing plane that can lift off and land like a helicopter. It was developed by Dupont Aerospace, a company with headquarters in La Jolla and a branch in El Cajon, and a contributor to Hunter’s campaigns.
     Hunter has received $36,000 in campaign contributions from Dupont Aerospace, and has been an outspoken proponent of earmarking funds. His stance on the DP-2 has encouraged many to speak out against earmarks.
     According to Dupont, the DP-2 has the capability of carrying 48 fully equipped troops and even a Humvee. This carrying capacity separates the DP–2 from the Harrier, an operational vertical takeoff attack aircraft, and the turboprop powered V–22, which is currently the fastest vertical takeoff transport.
     The DP-2 has an estimated top speed of 723 miles per hour, which is approximately three times as fast as the V-22. The maximum range is around 2,500 miles, to the V-22’s range of 450 miles.
     But the project, quite literally, can’t seem to get off the ground.
     The development program, which has spanned the last 20 years, has been beset by design and testing problems. The prototype is parked at Gillespie Field in El Cajon, and after $63 million in taxpayer money received by Dupont, the best the prototype can do is raise itself a couple of feet off the ground and hover for three seconds before coming down.
     Speaking on ABC News, Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., said, “There have been four accidents in the last four years. The good news is, when it crashes, it only crashes from a foot or two off the ground.”
     Brian Ross of ABC News then commented, “That’s no surprise to military experts. Pentagon documents obtained by ABC News showed the military, since 1986, has consistently rejected the aircraft design as technically flawed.”
     On the same show, John Enery, a former Analyst for the United States Navy, said, “We quickly reached the conclusion with substantiation that it was not worth pursuing at any level for any amount of money.”
     Hunter has supported funding for the DP-2 almost since its inception. All funding for the DP-2 has been by congressional earmarked money. Almost every year Congress appropriates funding for the DP-2 despite strong opposition to the program within the Department of Defense (DOD).
     The Navy had concluded in 1986 that Dupont’s DP-2 concept should be dropped. This was two years before the DP-2 received its first congressional dollar
     In 1990, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), whose mission deals with the feasibility of futuristic technologies, questioned the practicality of pursuing the DP-2.
     According to a May 1991 letter obtained by the Project on Government Oversight, Duncan Hunter together with Duke Cunningham tried to pressure Dick Cheney to push through an earmark program for the DP-2.
     An excerpt of the letter reads, “The Congress has spoken on the DP-2. We respectfully request that you advise DARPA to put an immediate halt to bureaucratic delays and get on with the DP-2 testing. This is the final testing essential to provide the opportunity for the Special Forces and other military users to procure this aircraft. The military have a clear need for this aircraft and we have to stop a few bureaucrats from standing in the way.”
     On June 12, The House Committee on Science & Technology Subcommittee on Investigations & Oversight met to examine the history, technical viability, critical assessments, testing mishaps and management of the DP-2 aircraft. Congressman Hunter voluntarily agreed to speak before the committee, of which Rep. Brad Miller is the chairman.
     Hunter said, “The project has been supported by a number of Members of Congress over the years and I have been a strong supporter from the outset…The project has experienced quite a few technical challenges, but should it be successful, it could provide superior capabilities for our armed forces in terms of the speed, range, and stealth capability of our transport aircraft. Moreover, it is not uncommon for aviation technology to require significant resources and time to mature.”
     He mentioned that the V-22 aircraft, which will be deployed in combat for the first time this year, expended $11.3 billion in research and development costs.
     Hunter said, “The investment in DP-2 represents pennies on the dollar to expand the scientific knowledge-base for vertical takeoff and landing, or VTOL, aircraft and its continued funding will be re-evaluated annually depending on future progress.”
     Hunter went on to say, “One of the key lessons I have learned is that not everything our armed forces need is captured as a validated requirement by the Department of Defense. Similarly, not every good idea to address war-fighting needs comes out of the Pentagon or large defense companies…I have found that most innovative concepts emerge from small companies that operate outside of the defense establishment.”
     He also defended the policy of congressional earmarks.
     “As Chairman, and now Ranking Member, of the Armed Services Committee I cede my constitutional responsibility to nobody, least of all the Pentagon,” Hunter said. While some may cast aspersions on earmarks, I guess you could call it earmarking when I added more money to the President’s budget request for up-armored Humvees. I also added money to the budget for portable jammers that our soldiers and Marines could wear during dismounted operations. For that matter, we’ve added funds for body armor and have been relentless in our pursuit of alternative technologies and the development of testing standards.
     “We have saved American lives with these earmarks, and I am proud of them.”

 E-mail the Editor