Building Your Own UFO “Flying Saucer”

Last Updated on June 7, 2020 by admin

October 16, 1990

listed on KeelyNet as



How to Build a Flying Saucer

After So Many


Have Failed

An essay in Speculative Engineering

by T. B. Pawlicki


At the  end  of  the nineteenth century, the most distinguished

scientists and engineers  declared  that  no  known  combination  of

materials and locomotion could be assembled into a  practical flying

machine.  Fifty years  later  another  generation  of  distinguished

scientists and engineers  declared   that   it  was  technologically

infeasible for a  rocket ship to reach the moon.  Nevertheless,  men

were getting off  the  ground  and  out  into space even while these

words were uttered.

In the last half of the twentieth  century,  when technology is

advancing faster than   reports  can  reach  the   public,   it   is

fashionable to hold  the  pronouncements  of  yesterday’s experts to

ridicule.  But there is something  anomalous  about  the consistency

with which eminent  authorities  fail  to  recognize   technological

advances even while they are being made.  You must bear in mind that

these men are  not  given  to making public pronouncements in haste;

their conclusions are  reached  after  exhaustive  calculations  and

proofs, and they are better informed about their subject than anyone

else alive.  But by and large, revolutionary advances  in technology

do not contribute  to  the advantage of established experts, so they

tend to believe that the challenge cannot possibly be realized.

The UFO  phenomenon  is  a   perversity   in   the   annals  of

revolutionary engineering.  On the one hand, public authorities deny

the existence of  flying  saucers and prove their  existence  to  be

impossible.  This is  just  as  we  should  expect  from established

experts.  But on the other hand,  people  who  believe  that  flying

saucers exist have produced findings that only tend to prove that

UFOs are technologically  infeasible  by  any known  combination  of

materials and locomotion.

There is  reason  to suspect that the people who believe in the

existence of UFOs do not want to discover  the technology because it

is not in the true believer’s self interest that a flying saucer be

within the capability of human engineering.  The true believer wants

to believe that  UFOs  are  of extraterrestrial origin because he is

seeking some kind of relief from debt  and taxes by an alliance with

superhuman powers.

If anyone with mechanical ability really wanted  to  know how a

saucer flies, he  would  study  the  testimonies to learn the flight

characteristics of this craft, and  then  ask,  “How  can we do this

saucer thing?”  This is probably what Werner Von Braun  said when he

decided that it  was  in his self-interest to launch man into space:

“How can we get this bird off the ground, and keep it off?”

Well, what is a flying saucer?  It is a disc-shaped craft about

thirty feet in diameter with a dome  in the center accommodating the

crew and, presumably, the operating machinery.  And  it  flies.   So

let us begin  by  building  a disc-shaped airfoil, mount the cockpit

and the engine under a central canopy,  and  see  if  we can make it

fly.  As a  matter  of fact, during World War II the  United  States

actually constructed a number of experimental aircraft conforming to

these specifications, and  photographs  of  the  craft are published

from time to time in popular magazines about science and flight.  It

is highly likely  that some of the  UFO  reports  before  1950  were

sightings of these test flights.  See how easy it is when you ‘want’

to find answers to a mystery?

The mythical saucer also flies at incredible speeds.  Well, the

speeds believed possible  depend  upon  the time and  place  of  the

observer.  As stated earlier, a hundred years ago, twenty-five miles

per hour was  legally  prohibited in the belief that such a terrific

velocity would endanger human life.  So replace the propeller of the

experimental disc airfoil with a modern  aerojet  engine.  Is mach 3

fast enough for believers?

But the true saucer not only flies, it also hovers.   You  mean

like a Hovercraft?   One  professional engineer translated Ezekiel’s

description of heavenly ships as a helicopter-cum-hovercraft.

But what of the anomalous electromagnetic  effects  manifest in

the space surrounding   a   flying  saucer?   Well,   Nikola   Tesla

demonstrated a prototype of an electronic device that was eventually

developed into the  electron  microscope,  the television screen, an

aerospace engine called the Ion  Drive.   Since  World  War  II, the

engineering of the Ion Drive has been advanced as the most promising

solution to the propulsion of interplanetary spaceships.   The drive

operates by charging   atomic  particles  and  directing  them  with

electro-magnetic force as a jet to  the  rear,  generating a forward

thrust in reaction.   The advantage of the Ion Drive  over  chemical

rockets is that  a spaceship can sweep in the ions it needs from its

flight path, like  an aerojet sucks  in  air  through  its  engines.

Therefore, the ship  must carry only the fuel it needs  to  generate

the power for its chargers; there is no need to carry dead weight in

the form of  rocket  exhaust.   There  is  another  advantage  to be

derived from ion rocketry: The top  speed  of  a  reaction engine is

limited by the  ejection velocity of its exhaust.   An  ion  jet  is

close to the  speed  of  light.   If  space  travel  is  ever  to be

practical, transport will have to  achieve  a  large fraction of the

speed of light.

In 1972 the French journal Science et Avenir reported Franco-

American research into  a  method  of ionizing the airstream flowing

over the wings to eliminate sonic  boom,  a serious objection to the

commercial success of  the  Concorde.  Four years  later  a  picture

appeared in an  American  tabloid  of  a  model aircraft showing the

current state of development.  The  photograph  shows  a disc-shaped

craft, but not so thin as a saucer; it looks more like a flying

curling stone.  In silent flight, the ionized air flowing around the

craft glows as  a proper ufo should.  The last word  comes  from  an

engineering professor at   the   local   university;  he  has  begun

construction of a flying saucer in his backyard.

To the true believer, the flying  saucer  has no jet.  It seems

to fly by some kind of antigravity.  As antigravity  is not known to

exist in physical  theory  or  experimental fact in popular science,

the saucer is  clearly alien and beyond  human  comprehension.   But

antigravity depends upon what you conceive gravity  to  be,  doesn’t


For all  practical purposes, you do not have to understand what

Newton and Einstien mean by gravity.   Gravity  is  an  acceleration

downward, to the center of the earth.  Therefore, antigravity  is an

acceleration upward.  As  far as practical engineering is concerned,

any means to achieve a gain in altitude  is  an  antigravity engine.

An airplane; a balloon; a rocket; a stepladder; all  are antigravity

engines.  See how easy it is to invent an antigravity engine?

There are three basic kinds of locomotive engines.  The primary

principle is traction.  The foot and the wheel are traction engines.

The traction engines  depend  upon  friction  against  a surrounding

medium to generate movement, and locomotion  can proceed only as far

and as speedily  as  the  surrounding  friction will  provide.   The

second principle is  displacement.   The  balloon  and the submarine

rise by displacing a denser medium;  they descend by displacing less

that their weight.   The  tertiary  drive is the rocket  engine.   A

rocket is driven  by  reaction  from the mass of material it ejects.

Although a rocket  is  most  efficient   when   not   impeded  by  a

surrounding medium, it must carry not only it’s fuel  but  also  the

mass it must  eject.   As  a  consequence, the rocket is impractical

where powerful acceleration is required  for  extended  drives.   In

chemical rocketry, ten minutes is a long burn for powered flight.

What is needed  for  practical antigravity locomotion  is  a  fourth

principle which does   not  depend  upon  a  surrounding  medium  or

ejection of mass.

You must take notice that none  of the principles of locomotion

required any new discovery.  they have all been around for thousands

of years, and  engineering  only  implemented  the   principle  with

increasing efficiency.  A  fourth  principle  of locomotion has also

been around for  thousands  of  years:   It  is  centrifugal  force.

Centrifugal force is  the principle of the military  sling  and  the

medieval catapult.

Everyone knows that centrifugal force can overcome gravity.  If

directed upward, centrifugal   force   can   be  used  to  drive  an

antigravity engine.  The problem engineers have been unable to solve

is that centrifugal force is generated  in  all  directions  on  the

plane of the  centrifuge.   It won’t provide locomotion  unless  the

force can be  concentrated  in  one  direction.  The solution of the

sling, of releasing the wheeling at the instant the centrifugal

force is directed  along  the  ballistic  trajectory,  has  all  the

inefficiencies of a cannon.  The  difficulty  of  the problem is not

real, however.  There  is  a  mental  block preventing  people  from

perceiving a centrifuge as anything other than a flywheel.

A bicycle wheel is a flywheel.  If you remove the rim and tire,

leaving only the  spokes  sticking  out of the hub, you still have a

flywheel.  In fact, spokes alone make a more efficient flywheel than

the complete wheel; this is because  momentum  only  goes up only in

proportion to mass but with the square of speed.  Spokes are made of

drawn steel with  extreme  tensile  strength,  so spokes  alone  can

generate the highest  level  of centrifugal force long after the rim

and tire have  disintegrated.   But   spokes  alone  still  generate

centrifugal force equally  in  all  directions  from  the  plane  of

rotation.  All you  have  to  do to concentrate centrifugal force in

one direction is remove all the  spokes  but  one.   That  one spoke

still functions as a flywheel, even though it is  not  a  wheel  any


See how  easy  it is once you accept an attitude of solving one

problem at a time as you come to it?   You  can even add a weight to

the end of the spoke to increase the centrifugal force.

But our   centrifuge   still  generates  a  centrifugal   force

acceleration in all  directions  around  the  plane of rotation even

though it doesn’t generate acceleration equally in all directions at

the same time.  All we have managed  to do is make the whole ball of

wire wobble around the common center of mass between  the  axle  and

free end of the spoke.  To solve this problem, now that we have come

to it, we need merely to  accelerate the spoke through a few degrees

of arc and  then  let  it  complete  the cycle of revolution without

power.  As long as it is accelerated  during  the  same  arc at each

cycle, the locomotive   will   lurch   in   one  direction,   albeit

intermittently.  But don’t forget that the piston engine also drives

intermittently.  The regular centrifugal pulses can be evened out by

mounting several centrifuges  on  the same axle so that a pulse from

another flywheel takes over as soon  as  one  pulse of power is past

it’s arc.

The next problem facing us is that the momentum imparted to the

centrifugal spoke is  carries  it all around the cycle  with  little

loss of velocity.   The  amount  of  concentrated  centrifugal force

carrying the engine  in the desired  direction  is  too  low  to  be

practical.  Momentum is  half  the  product  of mass  multiplied  by

velocity squared.  Therefore,  what  we  need  is a spoke that has a

tremendous velocity with minimal mass.   They don’t make spokes like

that for bicycle wheels.  A search through the engineers’ catalog

however, turns up just the kind of centrifuge we need.   An electron

has no mass  at  rest  (you  cannot find a smaller minimum mass than

that); all it’s mass is inherent  in  its  velocity.  So we build an

electron raceway in  the  shape  of  a  doughnut  in  which  we  can

accelerate an electron  to  a  speed close to that of light.  As the

speed of light  is  approached,   the   energy  of  acceleration  is

converted to a  momentum approaching infinity.   s  it  happens,  an

electron accelerator answering   our   need  was  developed  by  the

University of California during the  last years of World War II.  It

is called a betatron, and the doughnut is small enough to be carried

comfortably in a man’s hands.

We can visualize the operation of the Mark I from what is known

about particle accelerators.   To  begin with, high energy electrons

ionize the air surrounding them.   This causes the betatrons to glow

like an annular neon tube.

Therefore, around the rim of the saucer a ring  of  lights will

glow like a  string  of  shining beads at night.  The power required

for flight will ionize enough of the surrounding atmosphere to short

out all electrical wiring in the  vicinity  unless  it  is specially

shielded.  In theory, the top speed of the Mark I  is  close  to the

speed of light;  in  practice  there  are  many  more problems to be

solved before relativistic speeds can be approached.

The peculiar  property  of  microwaves   heating  all  material

containing the water molecule means that any animal  luckless enough

to be nearby  may  be cooked from the inside out; vegetation will be

scorched where a saucer lands; and  any  rocks  containing  water of

crystallization will be blasted.  Every housewife with  a  microwave

knows all this;  only  hard-headed  scientists  and soft-headed true

believers are completely dumbfounded.   The UFOnauts would be cooked

by their own  engines,  too,  if they left the flight  deck  without

shielding.  This probably  explains  why  a  pair  of UFOnauts, in a

widely published photograph,  wear   reflective  plastic  jumpsuits.

Mounting the betatrons outboard on a disc is an efficient way to get

them away from the crew’s compartment, and the plating  of  the hull

shields the interior.   At high accelerations, increasing amounts of

power are transformed into radiation,  making  the centrifugal drive

inefficient in strong  gravitational  fields.   The  most  practical

employment of this   engineering  is  for  large  spacecraft,  never

intended to land.   The  flying  saucers  we  see  are  very  likely

scouting craft sent  from mother ships moored in orbit.   For  brief

periods of operation,  the  heavy fuel consumption of the Mark I can

be tolerated, along with radiation  leakage  –  especially  when the

planet being scouted is not your own.

When you  compare  the  known  operating features  of  particle

centrifuges with the eyewitness testimony, it is fairly evident that

any expert claiming  flying  saucers  to be utterly beyond any human

explanation is not doing his homework,  and  he should be reexamined

for his professional license.

For dramatic purpose, I have classified the development  of the

flying saucer through five stages:

Mark I    – Electronic centrifuges mounted around a fixed disc,


Mark II  – Electronic centrifuges  mounted  outboard  around  a

rotating disc.

Mark III  –  Electronic centrifuges mounted outboard  around  a

rotating disc,  period  of cycles tuned to harmonize

with ley lines, for jet assist.

Mark IV  – Particle centrifuge tuned to modify time coordinates

by faster than light travel.

Mark V    –  No centrifuge.   Solid  state  coils  and  crystal

harmonics transforms  ambient  field   directly  for

dematerialization and      rematerialization      at

destinations in time and space.

Now that the UFO phenomenon has been demystified and reduced to

human ken, we  can  proceed  to prove the theory.  If your resources

are like those of the PLO, you can  go  ahead  and  build  your  own

flying saucer without any further information from  me,  but  I have

nothing to work with except the junk I can find around the house.

I found  an  old  electric motor that had burned out, but still

had a few turns left in it.  I drilled  a  hole  through the driving

axle so that  an eight inch bar would slide freely  through  it.   I

mounted the motor  on  a  chassis so that the bar would rotate on an

eccentric cam.  In this way in end of the bar was always extended in

the same direction while the other  end  was always pressed into the

driving axle.  As  both ends had the same angular  velocity  at  all

times, the end  extending  out  from  the  axle  would always have a

higher angular momentum.   This   resulted  in  a  concentration  of

centrifugal acceleration in one direction.  when  I  plugged  the in

the motor, the  sight  of my brainchild lurching ahead – unsteadily,

but in a constant direction, – gave  me  a  bigger  thrill  than  my

baptism of sex – lasted longer, too.  But not much  longer.  In less

than twenty seconds the burned-out motor gasped its last and died in

a puff of smoke; the test run was broadcast on radio microphone but

the spectacle was lost without television.  Because my prototype did

not survive long  enough  to  run in two directions I had to declare

the test inconclusive because of mechanical breakdown.  So, what the

hell, the Wright brothers didn’t  get  far  off the ground the first

time they tried either.  Now that I know the critter  will  move, it

is worthwhile to  put  a  few  bucks  in  to  a new motor, install a

clutch, and gear the transmission  down.   One  problem at a time is

the way it goes.

A rectified centrifuge small enough to hold  in  one  hand  and

powered by solar  cells,  based  on my design, could be manufactured

for about fifty dollars (depending  on  production  and  competitive

bids).  Installed on  Skylab,  it would be sufficient  to  keep  the

craft in orbit  indefinitely.   A larger Hyperspace Drive (as I call

this particular design)  will   provide   a   small   but   constant

acceleration for interplanetary  spacecraft  that  would  accumulate

practical velocities over runs of several days.

It is  rumored  that  a  gentleman by the name of Dean invented

another kind of antigravity engine  sometime  during  the past fifty

years, but I  have  been  unable to track down any more  information

except that its   design   consists  of  wheels  within  wheels.   A

gentleman in Florida, Hans, Schnebel,  sent  me  a  description of a

machine he built and tested that is similar in principle to the Dean

drive.  Essentially, a large rotating disk has a smaller rotating

disc on one  side  of  the main driving axle.  The  two  wheels  are

geared together so  that  a weight mounted on the rim of the smaller

wheel is always at the outside of  the  larger wheel during the same

length of arc of each revolution, and always next to  the  main axle

during the opposite  arc.   What happens is that the velocity of the

weight is amplified by harmonic coincidence  with  the  large  rotor

during one half of its period of revolution, and diminished during

the other half  cycle.   This  concentrates  momentum  in  the  same

quarter continually, to  rectify  the  centrifuge.   The  result  is

identical to my Hyperspace Drive, @ut has the beauty of continuously

rotating motion.  Now, if the Dean  drive  is  made with a huge main

rotor, – like about thirty feet in diameter – there  is  enough room

to mount a series of smaller wheels around the rim, set in gimbals

for attitude control,  an  Mr.  Dean  himself  has himself a model T

Flying Saucer requiring no license from the AEC.

In 1975, Professor Eric Laithwaite,  Head  of the Department of

Electrical Engineering at  the  Imperial  College   of  Science  and

Technology in London,   England,   invented   another   approach  to

harnessing the centrifugal  force   of   a  gyroscope  to  power  an

antigravity engine – well, he almost invented it,  but  he  did  not

have the sense to hold onto success when he grasped it.  Professor

Laithwaite is world-renowned  for his most creative solutions to the

problems of magnetic-levitation-propulsion systems, and the fruit of

his brain is  operating today in  Germany  and  Japan,  his  railway

trains float in the air while traveling at over three  hundred miles

per hour.  If  anyone  can  present  the  world  with  a proven anti

gravity engine, it must be the professor.

Laithwaite satisfied  himself   that   the  precessional  force

causing a gyroscope  to wobble had no reaction.   This  is  a  clear

violation of Newton’s  Third Law of Motion as ‘generally conceived’.

Laithwaite figured that  if  he   could   engage   the  precessional

acceleration while the  gyroscope  wobbled  in  one   direction  and

release the precession while it wobble in other directions, he would

be able to demonstrate to a forum of colleagues and critics at the

college a rectified  centrifuge  that worked as a proper antigravity

engine.  His insight was sound but  he  did  not  work it out right.

All he succeeded in demonstrating was a ‘separation  between  action

and reaction,’ and  his  engine did nothing but oscillate violently.

Unfortunately, neither Laithwaite  or his critics were looking for a

temporal separation between action and reaction, so  the loophole he

proved in Newton’s  Third Law was not noticed.  Everyone was looking

for action without  reaction,  so   no  one  saw  anything  at  all.

Innumerable other inventors  have  constructed  engines  essentially

identical to Laithwaite’s, including a young high school dropout who

lives across the street from me.

Another invention  described  is  U.S. Patent disclosure number

3,653,269, granted to Richard Foster, a retired chemical engineer in

Louisiana.  Foster mounted his gyroscopes  around the rim of a large

rotor disc, like a two cylinder flying saucer.  Every time the rotor

turns a half cycle, the precessional twist of the gyros  in reaction

generates a powerful  force.   During  the  half cycle when Foster’s

gyros were twisting in the other direction,  his  clutch grabbed and

transmitted the power to the driving wheels.  During  the other half

cycle, the gyros twisted freely.  Foster claims his machine traveled

four miles per hour until it flew to pieces from centrifugal forces.

After examining the  patents,  I agreed that it looked like it would

work, and it  certainly would fly  to  pieces  because  the  bearing

mounts were not  nearly  strong  enough  to  contain   the  powerful

twisting forces his  machine  generated.   Foster’s design, however,

cannot be included among antigravity  engines  because  it would not

operate off the  ground.   He  never  claimed it would,  and  Foster

always described his  invention  truthfully  as nothing more than an

implementation of the fourth principle of locomotion.

What Laithwaite needed was another  rotary  component, like the

Dean drive, geared to his engine’s oscillations so  that  they would

always be turned  to drive in the same direction.  As it happens, an

Italian by the name of Todeschini recently secured a patent on this

idea, and his working model is said to be attracting the interest of

European engineers.

When the  final  rectifying  device  is  added to the essential

Laithwaite design, all the moving  parts  generate  the vectors of a

vortex, and the  velocity  generated  is  the axial  thrust  of  the

vortex.  Therefore I call inventions based on this design the Vortex


By replacing the Hyperspace modules of the Mark I Flying Saucer

with Vortex modules,  still  retaining the essential betatron as the

centrifuge, performance is improved for the Mark II.  To begin with,

drive is generated only when the  main  rotor  is  revolving, so the

saucer can be  parked with the motor running.  This  eliminates  the

agonizing doubt we all suffered when the Lunar Landers were about to

blast off to  rejoin  the  command  capsule:  Will the engine start?

This would explain why the ring of lights around the rim of a saucer

is said to  begin  to revolve immediately  prior  to  lift  off.   A

precessional drive affords  a  wider  range  of  control,   and  the

responses are more  stable  than  a direct centrifuge.  But the most

interesting improvement is the result  of  the  ‘structure’  of  the

electromagnetic field generated by the Vortex drive.   By amplifying

and diminishing certain  vectors  harmonically,  the Mark III flying

saucer can ride  the  electromagnetic   current   of   the   Earth’s

electromagnetic field like the jet stream.  And this is just what we

see UFO’s doing,  don’t  we,  as  they  are reported  running  their

regular flight corridors   during   the   biennial  tourist  season.

Professor Laithwaite got all this  together when he conceived of his

antigravity engine as  a  practical  application of  his  theory  of

“rivers of energy  running  through space”; he just could not get it

off the drawing board the first time.

The flying saucer consumes  fuel  at  a  rate  that  cannot  be

supplied by all the wells in Arabia.  Therefore we  have  to  assume

that UFO engineers  must  have  developed  a practical atomic fusion

reactor.  But once the Mark III is  perfected,  another  fuel supply

becomes attainable, and no other is so practical for  flying saucer.

The Moray Valve  converts  the Mark III into a Mark IV Flying Saucer

by extending its operational capabilities  through ‘time’ as well as

space.  The Moray  Valve,  you  see,  functions  by   changing   the

direction of flow of energy in the Sun’s gravitational field.  It is

the velocity of energy that determines motion, and motion determines

the flow of  time.   We  shall  continue  the  engineering of flying

saucers in the following essays.

My investigation  into antigravity  engineering  brought  me  a

technical report while  this  typescript  was  in preparation.   Dr.

Mason Rose, President   of   the  University  for  Social  Research,

published a paper describing the  discoveries  of  Dr.  Paul  Alfred

Biefeld, astronomer and  physicist at the California  Institute  for

Advanced Studies, and   his  assistant,  Townsend  Brown.   In  1923

Biefeld discovered that a heavily charged electrical condensor moved

toward its positive pole when suspended  in  a  gravitational field.

He assigned Brown  to  study  the effect as a research  project.   A

series of experiments showed Brown that the most efficient shape for

a field propelled condensor was a disc with a central dome.  In 1926

Townsend published his   paper   describing   all  the  construction

features and flight characteristics  of  a flying saucer, conforming

to the testimony of the first flight witnessed over Mount Rainer

twenty-one years later  and  corroborated  by thousands of witnesses

since. (The Biefeld-Brown Effect explains  why  a Mark III rides the

electromagnetic jet stream.)

We may speculate that flying saucers spotted from  time to time

may not only  include  visitors  from  other  planets  and travelers

through time, but also fledglings from an unknown number of cuckoo’s

nests in secret experimental plants  all  over the world.  The space

program at Cape Canaveral may be nothing more than  a  supercolossal

theatre orchestrated by  Cecil B. Demille to reassure Americans that

they are still ‘numero uno’ after  Russia  beat  our  atomic  ace by

putting Sputnik into  orbit.   We  need  not doubt that  the  Apollo

spaceships got to  the Moon, but we may wonder if Neil Armstrong was

the first man to land there.  The  real  space program may have been

conducted in secret as a spin-off from the Manhattan  Project  since

the end of  World War II, and Apollo 13 may have been picked up by a

sag wagon to make sure our team scored  a  home  run every time they

went to bat.   The  exploration  of  space  is  the  most  dangerous

enterprise ever taken on by a living species.  Don’t you ever wonder

why the Russians  are  losing  men  in  space  like  a  safari being

decimated in headhunter country, while  nothing  ever happens to our

boys except accidents during ground training?

-T.B. Pawlicki

Well, I hope  you  enjoyed  that.   Coming  soon in  our  series  of

informational speculations:

Build your own Time Machine,

Build your own Pyramid or Megalith,

Turn lead into gold,

Create a worldwide communications network,

and my personal favorite,

How to build an atomic bomb.

Now if someone  knows  how  we  can  clone  a person using household

materials, that would be the topper  of the toppers.  Keep your mind

open, but not so open that your brains fall out…


This file courteously supplied to KeelyNet

by the Darkside (Ken Geest) at



Vanguard Notes

I had the  pleasure  of  meeting  Tom  at  the  1987 Global Sciences

Congress in Denver.  He is as fascinating  in person as his writings

indicate.  Tom has also written 2 excellent books,  “How  to Build a

Flying Saucer” and  “Hyper-Space”.   We  have  kept in contact since

that time by mail.

You may write Tom at :  T. B. Pawlicki

843 Fort Street

Victoria, B.C.

V8W 1H6