The author of this is a card carrying Liberal/Socialist whom worked for Willie Brown, and other Leftist nutbags. He also taught at the Socialist University at Berkeley, California. Personally I discount his credibility.
Does anybody have sensible, accurate information about Duncan Hunter’s involvement with the mentioned research?
Not sure about the plane....thought it was Osprey since described plane is similar. Osprey has been in development for more than 20 years, costing more than 30 Billion (in 1988)...don’t know about costs since.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-22_Osprey
Osprey began production in 2005.
UC Berkeley is not the socialist university it used to be my friend....besides being the top graduate school in the U.S. and #1 ranked public university in the world, the largest student organization there now is the College Republicans ..... only the poor citizens of the city itself are the hippies of old....and they are liberal morons..
(VSTOL) airplane DP-2.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:04 AM
VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING TECHNOLOGY: ANTHONY A. DUPONT
05-09-2001 TESTIMONY OF ANTHONY A. DUPONT
To address the problem of runway saturation at the large metropolitan airports, the duPont Aerospace Company is developing a high performance, vertical and short field takeoff and landing (VSTOL) airplane, the DP-2. The 50-passenger aircraft has both commercial and military applications. Technology to produce this aircraft is available and well proven. Modern turbofan engines currently in worldwide airline service combined with the capabilities of new composite materials provide a vectored thrust propulsion system. A simple mechanical control system powered by the pilot’s hand controls the aircraft in both hover and up and away flight. An autopilot can be clutched in to greatly reduce the pilot workload in hover or for conventional flight autopilot functions.
http://www.skyaid.org/Skycar/congress_dupont.htm
By pissant
1 - the notion that you can find some folks in the Pentagon that “don’t want it” is like saying you can find some freepers that have their own opinion on politics.
2 - Duncan Hunter has butted heads with the Pentagon ever since he got there. The average Pentagon planner, pro-curement types have a life span in the job of about 2 to 4 years. Then take the fact that the Pentagon leadership is political appointees.
3- Hunter fought the “pentagon” to retain far more in SDI/Missile defense funding than was “wanted” during the Clinton Years. He made the Pentagon invest in more stealth, more ships, more C-17 airlifters thatn they “wanted”. He put the brakes on Rumsfelds desire to make the Army even smaller than it is, and he FORCED the Pentagon at various times to purchase ammo they were sorely lacking but not requesting.
4 - 63 million for this type of R&D is peanuts.
5 - This particular program had advocates in the Pentagon and the Military.
Here is the Statement of Thomas D. Taylor, Chief Scientist and Program Manager of Naval Expeditionary Warfare Science and Technology, Office of Naval Research in the 2001 testimony to the Armed Services Committee:
24
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1849081/posts
http://taylorwood.townhall.com/g/4f2cb9c3-2adf-4ecb-888c-fb4bcdd1fed7
author of this is a card carrying Liberal/Socialist