It's a trend alright but one due to the dollar rather than any aerodynamic reason. You said the 'A' word that explained it all when you said ARF! There are some so-so planes and some that are in the 'not too bad' group and there is a whole bunch that are absolute dogs.

Please DON"T use BARF wieghts and loadings as desirable criteria because it simply isn't so.

IMO you picked BARF's as a model for design criteria--------there is a difference between a 'model' for criteria such as wing loading -----there is also a 'bad example'----I feel you are confusing the two. Your original numbers are still right------build it yourself and enjoy the right criteria.

No, I'm not very high on BARF's as the best I've flown were ahhh acceptable --------sort of------if you didn't have anything else. But real flyers----haven't flown any (no I haven't flown them all and with any luck at all I won't. They, IMO are for the appliance operators in our hobby. Yes, you can exclude the four grand and up composites-----different deal entirely.