Naah,

I don't buy any of it Cees - sorry (although it's hard to follow what you are trying to say exactly).

As far as aerodynamics goes, once the wing is covered, wind sees nothing but a continuous surface. Also, while the LE sheeting holes do remove some torsional stiffness to the wing, since it is the interlocking continuity of sheeting that provides the stiffness, this wing is no weaker than one built with no LE sheeting and merely an additional spar between the main spar and the LE. You will find many many wings built like this, particularly extra light designs aimed primarily at electric power. Take a look at any of the "extreme light" wings from GP or Precision Aerobatics. Granted, they use laser cut rounded rectangular holes between ribs rather than circular holes which is a touch more elegant but round holes are actually stronger for the same reason that arches are - not that it matters. I know, they use CF in their wings but this model is not for 3D or for pulling 8G's. Besides, this wing is extremely stiff (especially for it's weight) and,... it also contains CF.

Wing construction using the shear "truss" technique with hard stick balsa is very stiff and lighter since you use about 50% of the material of typical shear webs. Since most all the bridges in New York, Paris and Rome are built like this (not to mention my house and just about every other interior frame wood lodge) and have been around for several centuries, I'm sure my wing will last a few seasons . Further, the wood may fail but my glue joints won't - a combination of aliphatic and CA ensures that.

Finally, and also to answer Greg's question, this is an electric Super Pacer - 600W - almost zero vibration. The original is somewhat overbuilt in my view using stock for the fuse which is too thick and especially spruce spars in the wing. Mine has balsa spars, half span doubled and CF sandwiched in between and retracts. It also has a 1/8" ply dihedral brace which spans two ribs either side. It is flex and torsion free - uncovered - from the retract rib inward. The original is designed around a 48 oz (3 lb) glow 25 target weight. This electric version (which also has a 48" rather than 46" span) stands, uncovered with retracts and 5 servos (1 standard retract), at 27 oz all up sans lipo (~7 oz) so I expect an AUW of less than 40 oz ready to fly. It was an exercise in "extreme light" building for e-power.

As a final point, while I respect early designers (actually, all designers) and their models, I should point out that the Taurus and the Orion are not the holy grail in either construction or aerodynamic design - they are merely vintage classic low wing models, which to me, today, qualify as "sport" designs (just like this SP). That is not to say they aren't good fliers or capable of aerobatics. However, keep in mind that 40 years have elapsed since they were designed and there are plenty of fine wing designs that happen to not be Taurus wings. Although I would likely favor a 40 year old wine over one that was bottled last year, we have learned a thing or two about designing and building since the Taurus. There, I've said it.

So, with that said, this is Ed's Deception thread and I don't want to contaminate it with SP or Taurus trivia. I just wanted to post a picture of the wing since I saw that Greg, smartly, also used truss construction in his Deception.

David.

P.S. I shouldn't ask but what does Gauss have to do with any of this!@? Are you making a comment about curved geometry!? If you want to reply, please send me a PM, not here on Ed's thread.