Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Paxus

G.Cooper encountered man-made flying saucers

575 posts in this topic

I have a question for people who have read Gordon Cooper's book "Leap Of Faith" (If you haven't, I recommend it - It's great!).

Ok, do you remember how he mentions meeting the son of a Wendell Welling (a man who was building prototypes of disc shaped flying craft)?

What I want to know is if anyone knows if this Mr Welling's son continued working on those flying machines and what they are up to now?

Excerpts of the section of the book I'm talking about below:

NOTE: Excerpt of the prototype disc shaped craft that Cooper saw and tested

Page 232

And so Wendell Welling began to build saucers. He hoped they might furnish some answers to whether "a craft shaped like the saucer I had seen could show lift on a test stand, and whether the lift potential could be ascertained."

We arrived at Welling's six-hundred-acre wheat farm, situated in a fertile valley with mountains on either side. Inside a large, barn-like building, I came face-to-face with a collection of genuine made-in-the-USA flying saucers.

Some of the early ones were small, no more than two feet in diameter. The largest disk, fifty to sixty feet in diameter, had been under construction when Welling died.

(Page 233) continued...

There were several completed models of varying sizes up to twelve feet across.

I reviewed schematic drawings Welling had made to figure out how the size and weight of the vehicle affected lift, how much horsepower was required to drive it, and the revolutions per minute (rpm) needed to achieve lift and increase the vehicle's "tip speed" - the speed out on the periphery, or spinning lip, of the saucer.

Welling had found that using a dome-shaped top and relatively flat bottom caused a saucer shaped craft to act as a round on-piece airfoil - something like a Frisbee. Comparing it to a vertical wheel, which had proved to be an effective means of moving things on the ground for thousands of years, Welling had concluded that a "horizontal wheel" was an efficient air-foil with which to travel through the atmosphere.

I saw his point, and it seemed so logical as to be obvious. The lift area of a winged aircraft was limited to the underside of the wing and tail section. A saucer of equal "wing span" had much more lift area: 100 percent of it's surface provided lift.

Welling had incorporated into his design the "spinning top" he had seen on the UFO, putting a lot of thought into what he did and why it was important. His theory was that the spinning platter on top took advantage of a buildup of kinetic energy, equating it to what happened with a favorite children's toy: the spinning top.

He was certain that the giant "fly wheel" on the saucer he had seen furnished the thrust that lifted and drove the ship. He believed that the engines he and the other witnesses had initially heard were warming up

(Page 234) continued...

the saucer's huge spinning top - he estimated it might have weighed as much as twenty tons - to the necessary rpm before shutting down. "Once that weight is spinning like a huge top", he wrote, "the energy requirement to hold the rpm drops way down and the craft is able to take advantage of a great power potential with the fly wheel acting as a centrifuge pump, battery, and huge gyroscope all wrapped into one."

In theory, I found Welling's descriptions sound. He had spent the last years of his life and thousands of dollars of his own money to prove these theories, and I now wondered: Did they fly?

I was invited to take the controls of the largest "flyable" saucer in the barn and give it a whirl. Approximately twelve feet in diameter, the saucer was constructed of silk cloth stretched over balsam wood, making it very light. The bigger saucer still under construction was being crafted of more durable materials.

Welling had not attempted to develop a propulsion system. Having focused his efforts on aerodynamics, he chose to power his man made saucer by an electrical generator that drove an onboard fan, which pushed cold air around for thrust.

In addition to a heavy-duty electrical cord that ran from the generator to the fan unit, the saucer was tethered to the ground by a half-inch steel cable that looked to be about twenty feet long - meaning that I wouldn't be going for any altitude records.

I sat at the control station about ten feet away. The sole "flight control" was an airplane-type stick. Pulling it back increased the rpm to the fan and provided greater lift, I was told; pushing it forward decreased lift.

(Page 235) continued...

When the generator was fired up, the top section of the saucer began to spin, just as in the big saucer Welling had reported seeing twenty years earlier. Then the bottom section started spinning too, so there were two counter-rotating discs. In Welling's design, the speed with which the bottom disk spun controlled the slots that the air flowed through. The cold air flow, which kept it airborne, was pushed horizontally over the curved surfaces of the facing plates and downward toward the ground. The more air that was moved, the greater the lift.

The only noise in the room was the slight whir of the generator.

I applied gentle backward pressure on the stick, and the saucer jumped off the test stand, soundlessly, and rose into the air effortlessly to ten feet or so. I was amazed at the ease with which the bird took flight. Up and down it went as I moved the stick forward and back.

Compared with other aircraft I'd tested, this was a pretty crude model. But from the moment I first pushed back on the stick, I was extremely impressed with the saucer's lift capabilities. With very little power - the fan wasn't even powerful enough to move air effectively through a large room on a hot day - this thing flat-out flew.

There was a device - a counter-balanced scale with weights of known quantity on the other end - hooked up to the saucer to measure the lift it attained in pounds, but I didn't need to check the numbers. I could tell by the feel of the stick. I flew the saucer for about ten minutes, and the experience really opened my eyes to what a vehicle of this configuration would do; specifically, the tremendous lift that could be developed from the saucer shape.

Page 236 continued...

Boy, I thought, we've been going the wrong way all these years with winged aircraft.

Excerpt from Page 237:

(Paragraph 2)

Ever since that day in Utah, I have been convinced that saucers are the aircraft design of the future - both for this world and for travel beyond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First man-made flying saucers had BMW engines (haunebu)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First man-made flying saucers had BMW engines (haunebu)

Hey SolarPlexus, what has that got to do with my question?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saying

What I want to know is if anyone knows if this Mr Welling's son continued working on those flying machines and what they are up to now?

No idea bro sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it weird that when such amazing claims are made, especially from someone as respected or famous as Gordon Cooper, that they aren't investigated?!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah man, but its easier to judge and condemn then put effort into research and open your mind... so maybe it doesn't surprise me that much. There is a lot of NASA personnel (remember my Astronauts talk about UFOs thread) who made claims and reported stuff but people just ridicule them. It's funny how someone who is a national hero one day, is ridiculed as a 'nut' afterwards ...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I might have missed that one - checking it out now!

Cheers

[Edit] Scratch that, I do remember that thread now.

Great stuff! Makes one think there is something going on when you read all that.

Edited by Paxus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah there is simply too much testimony from a broad spectrum of people. Something is going on the question is what

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p.202. His name is Scott Holmgren and was, according to Gordon Cooper,

not the son but the son-in law of Wendell Welling. He was in his thirties in

1978, which means that he should be +/- 70 yr old today, if still alive.

There are several people called Scott Holmgren in the U.S., but none in

Utah.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Edited by dom20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p.202. His name is Scott Holmgren and was, according to Gordon Cooper,

not the son but the son-in law of Wendell Welling. He was in his thirties in

1978, which means that he should be +/- 70 yr old today, if still alive.

There are several people called Scott Holmgren in the U.S., but none in

Utah.

Welcome to UM, dom20.

And thanks for the added info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it weird that when such amazing claims are made, especially from someone as respected or famous as Gordon Cooper, that they aren't investigated?!

What I find weird is how when serious investigations are made of major 'VIP UFOs', the results are covered up by UFO promoters and people can act as if they don't exist.

Check out my G. Cooper section at www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html

You don't have to agree with it. But you owe yourself some sharp slaps to the face about your silly assumption that just because you never heard of some research, it can't exist and you can make false fun of people for never having performed it.

Wise up.

To some degree, though, you may have tripped over the same principal I developed some years ago. It is correct to say that reports from famous people are not investigated -- by the UFO believers, who fear risking finding explanatikons thay want to not know about.

So they never check, or verify. They keep their eyes and minds closed to potential prosaic explanations, to avoid harming the propaganda value of the raw reports. They just demand that famous people be automatically believed.

Was that what you were arguing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah man, but its easier to judge and condemn then put effort into research and open your mind... so maybe it doesn't surprise me that much. There is a lot of NASA personnel (remember my Astronauts talk about UFOs thread) who made claims and reported stuff but people just ridicule them. It's funny how someone who is a national hero one day, is ridiculed as a 'nut' afterwards ...

Nope, people DO investigate the stories, find that many were pure inventions of UFO writers, others were honest misperceptions of prosaic phenomena, etc etc, and publish their results. People like YOU seem then to close their minds and ridicule research whose results they fear to believe. It's easier to judge and reject research results that threaten beliefs that you enjoy holding because they make you feel smarter than other people. Is that what you are doing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find weird is how when serious investigations are made of major 'VIP UFOs', the results are covered up by UFO promoters and people can act as if they don't exist.

Check out my G. Cooper section at www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html

With all respect for which you might be due, you ain't no Gordon Cooper. Not even close.

(Careful of that link, btw...I clicked it and my anti-self-serving-disinformation-book-hawker/erectile-pill-popup-ad software went nuts)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all respect for which you might be due, you ain't no Gordon Cooper. Not even close.

(Careful of that link, btw...I clicked it and my anti-self-serving-disinformation-book-hawker/erectile-pill-popup-ad software went nuts)

is there really any need to be that disrespectful?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there really any need to be that disrespectful?

A wonderful rhetorical question. Pristine, in fact.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all respect for which you might be due, you ain't no Gordon Cooper. Not even close.

(Careful of that link, btw...I clicked it and my anti-self-serving-disinformation-book-hawker/erectile-pill-popup-ad software went nuts)

Too bad you weren't around in the 1980s when Cooper, unwillingly retired from NASA in disgrace, spent his time hawking a string of money-making aviation industry schemes. People thought like you did -- his word alone was adequate proof the ideas were legit. People lost MILLIONS of dollars as the schemes collapsed, and often, the principals were jailed.

I wish you could have put a few thousand bucks of your own into one of those projects. You might have learned -- at great cost -- a lesson in 'trust but verify' that you clearly still need, chronically hurrahed by NASA hero-worship propaganda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad you weren't around in the 1980s when Cooper, unwillingly retired from NASA in disgrace, spent his time hawking a string of money-making aviation industry schemes. People thought like you did -- his word alone was adequate proof the ideas were legit. People lost MILLIONS of dollars as the schemes collapsed, and often, the principals were jailed.

I wish you could have put a few thousand bucks of your own into one of those projects. You might have learned -- at great cost -- a lesson in 'trust but verify' that you clearly still need, chronically hurrahed by NASA hero-worship propaganda.

You failed to mention that according to this Wall Street Journal article, Cooper also lost most of his own money in one of these failed businesses. In another one, he was also being used and manipulated by a con artist.

I think we should all try to be a little more "fair and balanced" here. LOL

https://docs.google....wIVt2r6HPJGdxyw

Edited by TheMacGuffin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why shouldn't it be possible to invent something like this? I've neither heard of Welling nor have read Cooper's book but I do know that if we can invent airplanes and spaceships, its only a matter of time before the next level of inventions come about or rather are fed to us as new technology but in actuality have been around years before.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Mr. Oberg is just a little bit slanted in his views, and here to do a hatchet job on those who have opposed him over the years, including Gordon Cooper, who is no longer alive to defend himself.

Edited by TheMacGuffin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Mr. Oberg is just a little bit slanted in his views, and here to do a hatchet job on those who have opposed him over the years, including Gordon Cooper, who is no longer alive to defend himself.

Cooper and I exchanged letters for many years -- are you implying that once a person has died, it's suddenly unfair to disagree with them? I look forward to your consistency when/if you outlive me. Folks who remain -- be sure to hold McG to his standard!!

How about Cooper's psychic warning from space aliens story? Too ashamed of it to admit you don't believe it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You failed to mention that according to this Wall Street Journal article, Cooper also lost most of his own money in one of these failed businesses. In another one, he was also being used and manipulated by a con artist.

I think we should all try to be a little more "fair and balanced" here. LOL

https://docs.google....wIVt2r6HPJGdxyw

You fail to mention that the document you link to is MY synopsis of the copyrighted WSJ article.

So let's look at your argument -- you accuse me of 'failing to mention' some fact and as proof you offer an article written BY me to document that fact.

No wonder you are so impressed by these UFO stories -- you get lost in the logic of a single sentence.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You fail to mention that the document you link to is MY synopsis of the copyrighted WSJ article.

So let's look at your argument -- you accuse me of 'failing to mention' some fact and as proof you offer an article written BY me to document that fact.

No wonder you are so impressed by these UFO stories -- you get lost in the logic of a single sentence.

If that is YOUR synopsis--there is no name on it--you failed to to bring out many of the points that were made in it.

That makes it look like even more of a hatchet job against Cooper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooper and I exchanged letters for many years -- are you implying that once a person has died, it's suddenly unfair to disagree with them? I look forward to your consistency when/if you outlive me. Folks who remain -- be sure to hold McG to his standard!!

How about Cooper's psychic warning from space aliens story? Too ashamed of it to admit you don't believe it?

I'm perfectly consistent in that I have always criticized you while you're still alive, and that will not change when you are no longer with us.

I never heard that story about Cooper being in telepathic contact with aliens, which is why I didn't comment on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is YOUR synopsis--there is no name on it--you failed to to bring out many of the points that were made in it.

That makes it look like even more of a hatchet job against Cooper.

There's no 'if' about it.

You have royally beclowned yourself and I'm going to giggle over a glass of wine in honor of the delicious moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.