Early in the year 1903 the U.S. government awarded a grant of $70,000 to Samuel Langley to develop a heavier-than-air flying machine. Dr. Langley, director of the Smithsonian Institute, was amply qualified for the undertaking, being one of the most respected scientists of his time.

Naturally, no government enterprise could proceed without a staff of administrators, committees and overseers, which were hired with the $70,000 budget. The government airplane was to be launched from a ramp on a house boat, and much of his budget was expended for this.

On October 7, 1903, the government airplane developed by Dr. Langley's team was ready for a test launch. The house boat was towed to the launch site amid great fanfare. A large crowd gathered, fireworks were displayed, and newsmen jostled each other for a good view of what they hoped would be the momentous occasion of man's first powered heavier-than-air flight.

The excitement mounted as the aircraft's engine roared to life. When it reached full throttle the machine was released, and it lumbered along the catapult toward launch. A few seconds of wonderful acceleration were followed by an ignominious plunge into the Potomac.

The soggy pilot and the aircraft were salvaged from the river, and preparations were made for another test flight. On December 8, with less fanfare, another test flight was attempted. This time the aircraft became entangled in the launching mechanism, was ripped apart, and again plunged into the icy waters of the river.

While Dr. Langley was engaged in his government-sponsored program, two entrepreneur brothers named Wilbur and Orville Wright were conducting their own experiments in heavier-than-air flight.

In stark contrast to the Langley project, the Wright Brothers were limited to a budget of $2000 of their own money, earned from their bicycle shop business. They worked on their flying machine in their spare time.

On several occasions the Wright Brothers actually refused financial assistance, even from private contributors, fearing that strings would be attached and that they would lose control over the project. They used wind tunnels and tested models to work the bugs out of their design long before an actual test flight. They reasoned that if either of them were hunt they would lose time and money. It was much easier to correct design errors on paper than to continually rebuild actual airplanes. Many daring test pilots of the day were too quick to fly poorly designed craft and lost their lives as a result.

On December 17, 1903, just nine days after the second government failure, the Wright Brothers successfully launched their flyer on the dunes of Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. Their ramp cost $4 to build. The historic flight lasted 59 seconds and the airplane traveled 852 feet. Can you imagine the exhilaration that minute contained?

Though the Wright Brothers received due recognition for their achievements, it is interesting to note that Langley was rewarded for his failures by having an airport named after him.

Why did Langley's $70,000 tax-funded boondoggle fail, where the Wright Brothers succeeded with only $2000 of their own money?

The answer lies in the motivations behind each experimenter. While Langley was pursuing the development of aircraft for the "public welfare" at public expense, the Wright Brothers were seeking profits at their own expense.

The two budgets clearly speak of this difference in attitude. Although Langley had over $70,000 to work with, he failed, and even complained of insufficient funding! He failed because his budget wasn't his own money. This kind of economic power invariably leads to waste of resources and questionable results.

The Wright Brothers, on the other hand, had a budget of which every dollar was their own. They weren't about to whittle away money, time and resources. It isn't profitable.

This obscure episode in aviation history isn't taught in the government schools because the Langley debacle is so embarrassing.

The year 1903 was a long time ago. However, the principles of motivation involved in government research vs. private experimentation still apply. Government programs waste money and accomplish little. They make everybody a little poorer.

Conversely, private experimentation and development is self-funded. If profits are the motivation, then consumers are the ultimate winners, because profits can only be earned by serving others.

Although the profit motive has always had a bad press from economics-ignorant people, it is the best way to promote the most productive use of scarce resources. Consumers, having more spending power because they weren't taxed for government programs, are better able to purchase and benefit from privately developed products. And, instead of having to rely on political intrigue to satisfy their needs, consumers can make their own choices, directly, freely and peacefully.