To understand why the Marines' V-22 Osprey program has survived over the years, it helps to know a little about where the aircraft is built. And that's just about everywhere. The Osprey's two primary contractors are based in Texas and Pennsylvania, and it's no coincidence that lawmakers from those states have been among the biggest champions of the program in Congress. For just one Texas representative, production of the Osprey is now responsible for about 6,500 jobs in her Fort Worth-area district -- a figure that is certain to grow if the military moves ahead with plans to build 458 of the aircraft.

But that's only the beginning.

Since the launch of the $40 billion program nearly two decades ago, the two primary contractors, Fort Worth-based Bell Helicopter and Philadelphia-based Boeing Helicopter, have enlisted help from other companies in 45 states to build the Osprey. In all, $12 billion has been spent so far.

The V-22's engine is made at a plant in Indianapolis. Its de-icing system is produced in Connecticut. An auxiliary power unit is made in San Diego. And for a time, the starter on its main engine was manufactured in Rocky Mount, N.C., by Honeywell International. The relatively modest contract steered more than $2 million of work to the district now represented by U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge.

Bell and Boeing have turned over Osprey-related work to companies based in 276 different congressional districts since 1992, according to contractor records. That's 63 percent of all the U.S. House districts in the nation. And in many of them the work is substantial: More than $1 million has flowed thus far to each of 71 districts.

That's no accident, experts say. While work on major defense contracts is often spread around the country, it has been done to a remarkable degree with the V-22.

The contractors say all the help is needed because of the complex, innovative design of the Osprey. But others suggest politics are at work as well.

The Marines and the Osprey's contractors "have gone to great lengths to broaden the potential base of political support for the program," said Chris Jones, a professor at Northern Illinois University who has studied the politics of the V-22 program. "They laid all this groundwork years ago that is continuing to pay off today."

The contractors have also gone to great lengths to reward their friends in Congress with campaign contributions. Over the past decade, political action committees affiliated with Bell and Boeing have collectively given more than $25,000 to 19 different members -- many of them home-town representatives or those with key roles in funding defense projects.

It remains to be seen whether the Osprey's latest troubles -- the December crash in North Carolina and recent allegations of falsified maintenance records -- will doom the V-22.

But its survival thus far offers a classic illustration of how the converging interests -- and political skills -- of military contractors and key members of Congress can create enough momentum to sustain a troubled weapons program.

The V-22 has endured numerous setbacks since its inception in the mid-'80s: scathing audits questioning both its cost and safety, a string of deadly crashes and efforts by Vice President Dick Cheney to kill the program during his days as defense secretary.

Boosters of the Osprey have managed to trump all that with promises of new jobs and arguments about the pressing need for the Marines Corps to replace its aging, Vietnam-era helicopters.

Along the way, proponents of the program have brought others on board by touting the potential commercial applications of the Osprey's tilt-rotor technology, which allows it to fly like a plane but take off and land like a helicopter.

The powerful United Auto Workers union, which represents workers at Bell and Boeing's V-22 facilities, has also been enlisted in the fight. In the early 1990s, the UAW launched a letter-writing campaign to Congress, making sure lawmakers were aware that killing the Osprey could cost them 8,000 union jobs. A decade later, with the Osprey again in jeopardy, union leaders are contemplating a similar lobbying effort.

Campaign cash

While funding for the Osprey has been more secure in recent years, the contractors have continued to be generous at campaign time.

During the 2000 election cycle, the PAC affiliated with Boeing Helicopter's parent company in Seattle gave $703,926 to 280 House candidates and 31 Senate candidates, with little regard for party affiliation. Boeing -- which has a wide array of interests before Congress -- also steered nearly $700,000 in so-called soft money to various Republican and Democratic party committees for their use in promoting candidates.

Meanwhile, the PAC affiliated with Textron -- Bell Helicopter's parent company -- gave $239,500 during the last election to 82 House candidates and 12 Senate candidates, and $235,450 more to party committees.

Those getting the most help from Bell and Boeing included Reps. John Murtha of Pennsylvania and Martin Frost of Texas. Over the past decade, both of those Democrats have received $50,000 -- the maximum allowed under the law -- from the political action committee affiliated with Bell.

Murtha, a former Marine, is the top Democrat on the House panel that makes recommendations about defense spending; Frost represents a Fort Worth-area district that is home to hundreds of Bell employees.

"Everyone wants to make sure the craft is safe," Frost said. "But having said that, every one of us who's supported the program has every confidence that any shortcomings can be worked out."

Rep. Kay Granger, a Republican, is newer to Congress, having first been elected in 1996, but she has also been embraced by the contractors. She represents the Fort Worth district where the Bell plant is located and has received $10,000 from Bell's PAC during each of the last three election cycles.

A spokeswoman for Granger said that the campaign contributions have "absolutely nothing" to do with Granger's support of the Osprey but that the program is "obviously near and dear to her heart."

Many of the Osprey's subcontractors also have political action committees that reward their friends in Congress.

In 2000, for example, Rolls-Royce North America -- which makes the Osprey's engines -- gave money to 34 House candidates, including U.S. Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina. Since his first election to Congress in 1994, Jones has received $3,500 in campaign contributions from Rolls-Royce, and $17,600 from Boeing and Bell.

Jones, a Republican from Farmville who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, has been an Osprey booster for several years. The testing squadron is based in his district, at Marine Corps Air Station New River near Jacksonville.

Jones said he doesn't want Marines to fly in an unsafe aircraft, but he said the public should understand that mishaps do happen in the military.

"Anytime you've got a new plane, tragically, you're going to have a certain number of accidents," Jones said.

Over the years, the Osprey has probably had no greater friend than Rep. Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican.

In 1989, as a junior member of the Armed Services Committee, he formed the Tilt-rotor Technology Coalition, a group of House members that met every week to plot ways to save the V-22 from Cheney's budget knife. In 1990, to boost the program's profile, the group staged a dramatic landing on the Capitol grounds of a tilt-rotor aircraft painted in red, white and blue.

Cheney's 1990 attempt to kill the program was, until recently, the most perilous time in the Osprey's history.

Rallying support

The program got its start in 1981, when President Reagan took office and the Marines intensified their search for a more modern helicopter.

John Lehman, Reagan's secretary of the Navy, became intrigued by Bell's XV-15, an earlier tilt-rotor aircraft, after seeing it fly at a Paris air show. Lehman became convinced that by using a similar aircraft, the military could have avoided the disaster that befell the 1980 attempt to rescue American hostages from Iran. As envisioned, the V-22s would fly faster and farther than the helicopters utilized in the rescue attempt, eliminating the need for a perilous refueling stop in the Iranian desert.

Within two years of the air show, the Department of the Navy, which includes the Marines, had awarded a $550 million contract to Bell and Boeing to design the V-22.

In 1986, the military took the next step, giving Bell and Boeing a $1.84 billion contract to start developing the aircraft.

The Osprey's future looked bright until Cheney was installed as defense secretary in early 1989.

In April, he announced that the V-22 would be the first major weapons system to be eliminated by the Bush administration due to increasing pressures for defense cutbacks.

At that point, Weldon, with more than 2,000 jobs in his district at stake, swung into action.

He rallied the Texas and Pennsylvania delegations around the aircraft and also reached out to lawmakers who had home-district ties to the New York manufacturer of the F-14 fighter, another weapons system targeted by Cheney for elimination.

A furious lobbying campaign paid off, and Congress allocated money for continuing development of the Osprey over Cheney's objections.

The battle of wills would continue for the next two years, with Cheney trying to eliminate the program and Weldon and other boosters fighting to save it. The Osprey supporters became increasingly sophisticated, reaching out to lawmakers in states with significant subcontractors and drumming up support among those who saw potential for commercial applications of tilt-rotor technology.

Jobs back home

For many lawmakers, the benefits back home of the Osprey have been obvious.

For Rep. Dan Burton, an Indiana Republican, continued deployment of the Osprey will mean more than $600 million in work for his district, which is home to Rolls-Royce. The company is under contract to produce 290 turboshaft engines at its Indianapolis plant between now and 2005.

Osprey contracts have the potential to bring millions of dollars to smaller communities as well.

Washington, Mo., is a town of about 15,000 people, located 45 miles southwest of St. Louis. One of its mid-size employers, Tradco, has a contract to produce titanium parts for the casing around the V-22's engines. If the Osprey goes into full production, the job will account for about 35 percent of the company's parts business, said Tradco spokesman Mike Schroeder.

"It's an important issue for us," he said. "We hope they can get everything worked out."

So far, the company, which is located in the district of Republican Rep. Kenny Hulshof, has received nearly $3 million for its work, according to contractor records.

Another $6 million is flowing to Engineered Fabrics Corp. of Rockmart, Ga. The company, located in Republican Rep. Bob Barr's district, supplies fuel tanks for the Osprey. It is one of the largest employers in struggling Polk County, a mostly rural area northwest of Atlanta.

Presidential level

In the history of the Osprey, geography has mattered at the presidential level as well.

When President George Bush faced a tough re-election fight in 1992, his administration's opposition to the Osprey suddenly waned.

"Texas and Pennsylvania are not only sites of the two V-22 plants but large electoral states," noted Jones, the political science professor.

In August 1992, while campaigning in San Antonio, Democratic nominee Bill Clinton pledged to support the Osprey. Running mate Al Gore repeated the pledge three weeks later in an appearance before 300 Bell employees in Arlington, Texas.

In October, Republican Vice President Dan Quayle appeared at Boeing's Philadelphia-area plant and -- sporting a white jacket with a red "V-22" on the back -- announced a $550 million contract to continue Osprey development.

Just a few years earlier, Quayle had criticized members of Congress who balked at defense cuts as "more interested in pork than ... in the overall national security picture."

Before the December crash in North Carolina, the Marines were poised to push ahead with plans for full production of 360 aircraft. The Navy and the Air Force Special Operations were also planning to buy 98 of their own.

That's all on hold now, pending the review of a blue-ribbon panel appointed by outgoing Defense Secretary William Cohen. The four-member committee, whose recommendations for the program are expected within the next few weeks, is headed by former Marine Gen. John Dailey, and its other members all have military or defense-industry ties.

Panel members have heard from an array of technical experts, as well as grieving widows of Marines killed in Osprey accidents.

While public skepticism about the program has grown considerably in recent months, most boosters of the program in Congress have remained quiet.

Their patience is clearly appreciated by the Marines. Earlier this month, Marine Commandant Gen. James Jones appeared at a national-security think tank to talk about the future of the Marines.

Responding to questions about the Osprey, he had this to say about Congress: "The Hill has been very reasonable in its willingness to wait until all the facts are in."

Staff writers Joseph Neff and Anne Saker contributed to this report.

Get $150+ in coupons in every Sunday N&O. Click here for convenient home delivery.