Ah, banktoturn you contradict yourself. CG is dependent on speed. The faster a wing travels through the relative air the more lift it attempts to create. Therefore, a fast pylon racer can utilize a cg farther forward of the center of lift. While a slower flyer will benefit more with a CG farther aft than that of a pylon racer. By the way, I understand the points that dick hanson was trying to make. I also respect his opinions (whether correct or incorrect). Calling them absurd is harsh. Reading his threads, his opinions and theories come from personal experimentation. He understands what he is doing and it works for him. Just because his logic is not traditonal doesn't mean it doesn't work. dick you should thank banktoturn for the criticism, for it will motivate you to be more thought provoking. dick you provoked my thinking with the threads in this forum.


Quote from banktoturn

“The effect of CG placement on stability, which is what I was commenting on, does not depend on the speed at which the plane flies.”

“You've pointed out the critical distinction between wing loading and speed. While the stability of a plane with low wing loading is dependent on CG placement, a plane which flies slowly enough can be flown even if it is moderately unstable. The Wright brothers demonstrated this with their unstable flyers. A plane with light wing loading, if flown fast, would be just as hard to fly with an unstable CG location as a plane with high wing loading at the same speed.”

“Your absurd comments are a poor way to "give some other lines of thought". As an alternative, you might consider simply articulating some "other lines of thought" directly, as the absurd comments are simply inaccurate, not thought provoking.”