Tesla’s flying machine, 2

October 29, 2010

updated 08-11-2013

from Tesla’s Flying Machine, page 1

Tesla’s Flying Machine
Page 2

“Tesla’s Flying Stove”

“Not the airplane, the flying machine,” responded Dr. Tesla.

This wood frame etc. was my 1st attempt at building the machine

A few weeks later, I traded these motors for 10,000 rpm 1/5hp motors.


see enlargemen

Sept.12th, 1992

Second Tesla Space Drive Design
Since nothing is said about weight being an issue, my second
(all steel) frame was built to be rigid, not light-weight.

it was right after this that I figured out the speed
requirement and the variables that affect it


Third model, with 10,000 rpm ele. motors

Tesla parts

The only expensive parts are the motors, (aluminum) pillow blocks, and mitre gears.
The pillow blocks, and mitre gears, combined, totalled $138.44. About a 2 foot square sheet of aluminum was less than $10. The shafts are also aluminum and cheap.

The shafts and pillow blocks are also, now, aluminum alloy. This model was fine but, the frame was just a little flimsy.

Note: I used the red/orange (Lovejoy) jaw couplings because they were a cheap easy way to attach weights on a shaft. I just replaced the set-screws with bolts. For a good close-up, click on the photo above (the 3 photos) to see an enlargement.


Experimenting out in the back yard, 1993

here I and a friend discovered the frame flexed a little


Final design: January 1994
using .090 inch aircraft aluminum ($9)
and 2 22,000rpm air motors ($50)

the frame is rigid and the motors are very light weight

I made the frame taller to accommodate longer arms and, slower speed requirements but, that was not necessary. However, there is an increased strength and reduced stress benefit to the double arms.



photographed on Fri., March 24th, 2006


Oct. 20th, 2007:
A few weeks ago +/- I tried it without any crossbars but, the weight and inertia were still too much for the motors. we got maybe 200 rpm but, we need maybe 600 to 800 rpm?   I think the air pump where I am trying it, is not as strong as the one I used in Phoenix.

Nov. 2007:

I bought 2.5″ bolts and 1.5″ bolts so I have 2 more options. If the 2.5″ does not reduce the weight and inertia enough to enable the motors to get up some significant speed, I can try the 1.5″ bolts.

Cutting the length, and weight, in about half (from 4.75″ to 2.5″ bolts) reduces our net radius from about .1″ to about .025″ and our needed speed from about 600+ rpm to about 1200 rpm. Although it was an improvement, It just was not enough improvement and we switched to the 1.5 inchers. (see “December 2007″ photo below) We started it up and the speed finally seemed significantly improved. A mechanic said it looked like it was going about 5 or 6,000 rpm. Great! Finally! Still, nothing more happened and we turned it off.

(we have no way of confirming how fast it was going – I think maybe only 1 or 2,000 rpm)

December 2007

Afterwards, I realized several potential problems. (1. The force may have been exerted downward instead of up (we need to try turning it upside down) and, (2. the 2 air hoses were adding weight to the system, holding it down. We need to prop the hoses up so that they do not add weight to the system.


Jan. 30th 2008:

We tried it again, right side up and upside down. We held up the 2 air hoses. But, no movement, no lift. It may be that we need 3-4000 rpm but are only getting 1 or 2000.

Testing at an auto body shop, Jan 30th 2008

June 30th 2008

If we got several thousand rpm, enough(?), then, it didn’t work. If not, then either a further reduction in the mass and inertia of the rotating weights and / or a change to stronger motors is needed.

Hopefully, we can get a sufficient speed increase by further reducing the weights & inertia. If not that, then by getting the weight of the motors off the frame by using couplers to extend the 2 shafts out beyond the frame.

March, 2009

I started getting calls from a TV production co. in Calif. wanting to put my flying machine on a Discovery Channel special.

I stopped at the auto shop, told them about it. They told me that they have gotten a new, stronger, compressor. Now is the time to try again!

Saturday, March 21st, 2009

Saturday was a disappointment. The new compressor provided significantly more power than the old one. The speed was much improved, very impressive, “more than enough”. This time I do think it was up to 3 or 4000 rpm, if not more. However, the weather was bad, raining, and I only did half the test. Still, it did not move. There was plenty of speed in the rotating masses. So, either I had it upside down, 50-50 chance of that being true, since it is totally symmetrical, or there is some stumbling block, some criteria I have not thought of.

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009, 9am

Tried it again. The speed, again, seemed enough. But, again, I can’t be sure, and it did not go up.


2011, Footnote:

A frame is cheap, a person can design and build one around motors they come up with, the smaller the better, perhaps. Smaller motors can generally run at higher speeds. Extension rods, longer rods, can be used to get the motors off the system, and that will reduce the total weight greatly.


back to Tesla’s Flying Machine, page 1


65 Responses to Tesla’s flying machine, 2

  1. Marty on July 24, 2014 at 11:02 am

    I have looked at this and if I may try to help, in the drawings of Tesla’s there is no insulator between the motors and the rods on any drawings that I have seen, you may try to remove the lovejoy, and go with a keyed collar to them rods, also I see no frame in any of the Tesla drawings you may want to try to insulate the pillow blocks to the frame.
    It is just a thought but it might help.

    True, the frame is not shown nor described in the text. I built a minimal frame to keep the weight to a minimum and still be rigid – durable. I was even able to find aluminum rods and throw out my steel ones. Since Tesla does not mention the frame, it must be arbitrary – wood, steel, aluminum, … whatever. Weight is the issue.
    This is purely mechanical, no electricity-magnetism involved-detected, but generating an inertia around the center of gravity of the device. the Lovejoys are keyed collars – steel. Yes, if I had been able to find aluminum collars, anything lighter, smaller, that would have been better. Thank you.

  2. jordan on July 12, 2014 at 7:33 am

    you tell all the people who comment to build their own instead of doing it yourself the right way and proving Tesla correct. I suspect this is because you can’t do it and are afraid to admit defeat.

    If you could read a blueprint, (given by Tesla, above) you would know the “right” way. All who want to try something different are encouraged to do so.

  3. Bill on June 9, 2014 at 7:55 pm

    Have you tried putting this thing on a scale while in operation? Any fluctuation in the reading would indicate that a force is being applied, with or against gravity. It’s not highly scientific, but would show if you’re on the right track. BTW, keep up the awesome work!

  4. anon on April 28, 2014 at 1:54 am

    You do know that that’s just the gyro system that’s used twice in his flying machine, vertically and horizontally beneath the skin of the aircraft, but around the passenger area to cancel out the excessive g-force that would be applied.

  5. thomas on March 7, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    Unless you can bend spacetime I don’t think you will be lifting off too soon.You in effect,built a gyro,a gyro is not capable of canceling the effects of gravity.Study Newton’s orbital mechanics,that may put things into perspective a little better.Gyros are great for stabilizing,dampening,balancing input and outputs to get a desired result, and are used in just about everything from RC Helicopter’s to Lit Motors C-1 motorcycle for balance to rockets,sats,etc. you name it .But don’t stop dreaming,you just never know when you might see a better way.
    thomas lewis

    If you don’t understand it, let it go.

  6. fanie on January 26, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    Do the eccentrics as the drawing but change the shaft to fibre for isolation and the eccentrics to the best static plastic material it worked on static forces remmeber to use two different sorses for the drivers to prevent static discharge and remember it works on static change the main frame to a neutral material
    Fanie Nel

  7. John on December 17, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    Your using the wrong eccentrics! Tesla didn’t work with wood or weights. He worked using electromagnetic forces. This device would generate electromagnetic forces if you would use the right eccentrics…….

  8. Grant on December 16, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    Would you like to sell me yours? Is this site glitchy to anyone else? Keeps booting me.

    no problem that we know of. Try going through a proxy server (do a google search for free proxy servers and try one) and see if that gets around, stops, the problem.
    We don’t have any Tesla Drives to sell. We recommend you build one smaller.

  9. Grant on December 13, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    Think of the weights as wings, when the weight is thrown down it causes a slight lift of the frame. However when its thrown up it forces the frame back down. Now, spin the whole frame from the center and centrifugal force will amplify the outer stroke and numb or weaken the effect of the inner stroke. That seems like it would work to me, I wish I could afford to build one.

    spinning does not change the fact that the up and down inertial forces are balanced. No one has any excuse to not experiment themselves. The materials are cheap.

  10. Man on December 10, 2013 at 6:37 am

    Check out Inertial Propulsion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIt661hfr9c
    And do research on that
    Tesla Man

    If the materials are cheap, you should try it yourself. otherwise … there is a lot of experimenting with electromagnetic propulsion.

  11. puru on November 14, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    I noticed you attached the weights not in accordance with the actual plan. Difference being that weights opposite each other are exactly aligned. And are phases out 90 degrees of one another. Hope helps.

  12. Ross on November 11, 2013 at 4:13 am

    I’ve been looking into inertia drive for a while and have built a few. The stove drive if you look at the plan, the Whole thing is meant to spin at a 1 to 1 ratio on a center shaft. This would make the weights stay out one side. I haven’t built it yet but have a go
    Ross Richards

    spinning an electrical coil will not generate an electric field but, you can try it.

  13. John on October 21, 2013 at 6:57 am

    …Just my 10 pence worth, but if you were to replace the weights with hollow plastic circular containers (think of the cheap concrete filled weight lifting gear) and fill with ferrofluid, you would be able to spin up to the maximum RPM (with no magnetic field you would essentially be spinning up a flywheel) and control the amount of eccentricity in the weight distribution using electromagnets. This would additionally allow you to tune the direction of force for each weight.
    On the downside it could just heat up thefluid due to friction with the container sides – would make an interesting experiment though…
    John Davies

  14. Gary on August 23, 2013 at 7:12 am

    Hi, just an idea? Have you ever thought about your counter weights spinning to be magnets? all with the north or south poles faceing the same way?, get those spinning then, also spin the entire box counter clock wise, like tesla drawing shows? also try spining your counter weight magnets the other way? Anyway I wonder if that would make some type of effect? kind of like the goerge green magnet motor?

    magnets are for electro-magnetic propulsion. Do a google search on it. The Germans in WWII used it in their flying saucers and supposedly went to Mars with one. It is said that their trip took 8 months. This uses nuclear forces that are a thousand times more powerful.

  15. Free on August 13, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    In regards to Sid’s serious comment above: That is U.S. Patent 3,626,605. Using Bismuth as the dynamic and stationary sources. (vaguely unmentioned and secret therefore excluded from the patent). Bismuth has unusual gravitational properties.

    If each dynamic weight was made of bismuth like pictured in the revolving secondary rotor in the patent above, this then could generate the stationary non-electromagnetic force, but correlated unknown forces focused in a Tesla Coil like spiral upward direction from the 4 rotating bismuth weights.

    Then apply the voltage potential to current correlation equation from a tesla coil , but in regards to the newly generated (and proven back in the day until classified) non-electromagnetic force spiral algebraic summation.

    And you should be able to blast off in a amplified gravity (b) wave bending of space and time , as planetary G forces are very weak comparison.

    As a plus, power the motors with Aethic Cosmic Rays (Radiant Energy) from U.S. Patents (on Tesla Radiant Energy pages).

    Neither Sid nor I said anything about Bismuth or patent 3,626,605.
    However, the military is always secretly ahead of all of us: I have read about element 115 (an alien fuel source) reverse engineered and used in “flying disks” at the military site S4 near Groom Lake. Unoficially called Ununpentium, “It has the unique quality of having an electric field greater than other elements.” In stable form it is a “powerful energy source”.
    From another source, I read that the military has “at least 12 known advanced aerospace craft currently in use…” They may be using all 3 of these methods mentioned here – if they found them worthwhile – as well as others unmentioned.

  16. sid on July 28, 2013 at 11:38 pm

    This reminds me of a patent for an antigravity engine utilizing nuclear spin force, using a gyrating primary structure made of material with aligned spin nuclei, modulated by orthogonally rotating secondary members (also of aligned spin nuclei, but of course aligned with secondary rotation). This created a sine wave modulation of the spin interaction, which is anti-gravity.
    sid briscoe

    not likely, it sounds so different, however I found an article on the “Cook Inertial Propulsion Engine” (Robert L. Cook) which does sound similar.
    Actually, it is hard to keep track of the many designs written about these days and maybe this is the second one you have read about. ok.
    Some using electrical fields have interested me as well.

  17. vivaldino on July 18, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    Hello! Where do I find such materials to make a Flying Machine and has to explain the functionality of the flying machine.

    Tesla’s flying machine, page 1 … tells about the materials needed and explains how it works.

  18. Michael on June 28, 2013 at 11:02 pm

    I feel like you went at this the wrong way and this is going to sound a little vague:

    Teslas flying machine was based off of tesla coils. I swore it had something to do with a gyroscope like the ones you see in the M1A1 Abhram tanks (looks similar to a toy gyroscope) except you have four that are properly polarized electromagnets spinning at specific rotations together to create an X/Y/Z axis although I don’t remember what I thought one of the gyroscopes was specifically used for. The magnets are then charged individually for each axis to balance and compensate to create the desired direction of propulsion or stationary vector. You literally use Fundamental Forces you create from electromagnetism to push and pull you where you want to go. I couldn’t tell you the specifics although one of my instructors at my old A+P school does this for a living.

    Though I’m glad someone is on the tesla flying machine project, ever since the U.S. government classified his documents and patients the night he died it would be awesome for some else to recreate it.

  19. Peter on April 9, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    I recall reading that Tesla said the ideal shape for his flying vehicles would be cigar or saucer shaped, is that correct? If so isn’t it interesting that only less than a decade passed after his papers vanished that the first reports of “ufo’s” we’re of cigar and saucer shaped craft?

  20. Robert on April 4, 2013 at 7:33 am

    Hey nice build have u read any on frequency levitating like monks in Tibet if I had a guess I’d say the gears are gyros to keep the craft stable and the frequency they put off is the lift. think of a gyro it doesnt lift just stables but vibration is sound and I think he was going for the sound thy put off at a certain rpm but gl like ur craft
    - Robert Combs

    frequency levitation is a different but very interesting topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *