Can't cut and try, just have only math models. (No offense, just plain truth.)

At closer look, the (calculation) experiment turns out subtly different. Yesterday, I didn't consider the fuselage effect which is accounted for in the tool. Today, I re-set the incidence angles so that the fuselage centerline is level. The wing's angles of incidence and attack are the same: 1.64 degrees. The stab's incidence is 0.77 and it's AOA is virtually zero (0.03). Accordingly, the stabs lift (Cl) is virtually zero. That means decalage is 1.64 - 0.77 = 0.87 and the wing downwash at the stab is 0.77 - 0.03 = 0.74 degrees.

Both is noticeably smaller than the values I had yesterday with the fuselage slightly pitched down due to big incidences. That should mean the fuselage produced some down lift and/or down-pitching moment. If you look at the side view that may be plausible, or doesn't it?

Now imagine the airplane in knife-edge flight (the thread topic). Notwithstanding the other effects (fuselage lift, airflow around fuse and tail), the typical low- or mid-winger fuselage shape (especially with the popular cheeks) would produce a belly pitch. It's countered by opposite lift and pitching moment of wing and stab. Decalage required depends on C/G position. Fuse and wing/stab are "braced" (?) giving a directionally stable system.

Do you think that's possible? And considering all other influences, how to cut and try only for this one?