ORIGINAL: dick Hanson
But it is true .
If the plane weighs ZERO- why bother with CG
If it is too heavy to fly - then the CG is of no importance.
These were both comments made to show that there are designs which -if taken to the extreme-- no longer fit into the accepted envelope of design criteria.
Once a craft has a finite criteria - then the relative design needs can be determined.
All of the carefully worked out airfoils for a B24 bomber - are of no use for a EXTRA 330 acrobat.
In fact the airfoils of the EXTRA are look unflyable to some.
The flate plate wing on a 8 ounce electric is the best airfoil - but is counter to any design needs for a General Aviation light plane.
On my IMAC models - the CG is very important -but on my extremely light electrics - it is of very little importance- these things have wing loadings of only a couple of ounces per sq ft.
Dick,
I don't think your analysis of the two extreme cases ( zero weight and too heavy to fly ) are of much use for someone looking for some "basic aerodynamics". Your final sentence is simply false: CG is of no less importance for a plane with low wing loading than for a plane with normal wing loading. This would be a bad nugget of false wisdom to pass on to someone looking for some advice to be used in building/flying his/her own plane.
banktoturn