Now I am thoroughly confuse or even more than normal. Guess I will pull my Ringmaster off the hook and go play.
If, two flapped wings , say 1.5+ O/A Chord seperation ,in tandem.as the mathematical model.
seeing front engined is the relevant configuration , the sums would start with were the C.G. is located ,
and what we do with the areas. So ,seeing the C.G. is pretty much defined, out of intrest ,assume
for and aft wing are eqal areas and equal control surface areas. (assue existing plane thus.) O.K.
Where are the movements for desired flight envelope. Define .
THEN , cals @ curent rear wing % of mainplane area to provide same manouvreability .
Tho its not nessesarily possible due to mass to create such an airframe , the comparison
would presumably be, that @ some 1/3 of the 100 % area, the movements of the
convention rear control surfaces would require vasrtly more movement to equal the force at the
rear hinge.Probably exceed adheshion (stall?) other problems turning moment from flap deflection.
AND its effect on the centre of lift in relation to the c.g.
SO . . . after 3 days calcs on the slide rule , hed probably say "increase the flap chord".
Now where did I see that ! particularly if its airfoil is flatish surfaces aft of the max depth.
A more curved airfoil would lend itself to larger flap movements,
looking at the airflow on the top surface of the wing . =contiuity of curve / re disruption of air momentum .