RE: Trying to understand incidence
Bill the problem with using something actually on the airplane fuse is that you end up with negative WLs or FRS or whatever we call it. It is awfully easy to drop the negative sign when measuring below it. If you start really low everything is positive so you elinimate the possibility for 1000s of mistakes, especially for larger airplanes with multiple designers.
When thinking of different force setups don't forget Hal deBolts setup. The wing was at a +1 deg (trying to remember the exact number gave me a headache) with respect to the WL, the tail was at +2 deg or so. So the incidence angle was -1. The Kaos would be +1 (assuming Incidence = wing angle - tail angle). Two different ways of looking for a solution of a pattern ship.
I have come to the conclusion that the human pilot can fly a large range of model airplanes well and if the pilot is good enough he might win with almost anything (within reason of course).
Start of editoral
I get a kick out of someone that comes out with a "new design" but if we overlay the top view and the side view over several dozen other airplanes the only differ in the smallest nuances. But since the latest champion "designed" them it is looked on as the tool of choice for the pattern wars.
End of editoral