A lot of food for thought here,
First let me say that there was hardly any breeze, and it performed the same in any direction.

I only said that his first effort was "wingless" for want of words to describe it, but it was just a term rather than a description.

I like the one about the ground repelling it! . - and yes, it's a bit ugly, but not as ugly as the first one!

I understand the ( Bernoulli ? ) principle of air speeding up etc. and I understand that it is actually the higher air pressure underneath, which is pushing it up, but a lot of people look on it as being sucked up by the vacuum which is technically incorrect of course.

Talking about wing loading, I guess the plane is quite light as it hasn't got a U/C, but with such a small wing area, surely the wing loading must be a little higher than the average plane, and the average plane needs quite a lot of airspeed over the surfaces ( as obtained by forward motion) to fly at all? let alone sit at hovering speeds, - I do realise that at a high angle of attack, the prop will contribute a little - ( miniscule amount maybe?).

Remember I don't really know much about this plane and the statements I make on it are just my thoughts on the subject, but I distinctly heard the guy who built it say on the day the photos were taken, that it was flying in a stalled condition ( when not moving forward), and that it was being kept aloft by vortices, and I guess the evidence seems to support that, - this guy always thinks outside the square in everything he does, so no doubt he's put in a lot of thought to this.

I do remember reading somewhere that some fullsize ultralight aircraft use a wing with a flat angled end to obtain more lift by forcing the vortex outward ( in effect increasing the span a little) and I see that this thing has airfoil ends like that, - don't know if this has any significance.