Eric,

 

Balderdash!

 

<<<I think the only data needed is how the airspeed changes as
the weight is incrementally shifted to the rear. This should be done in ONE
setup with all other variables constant. >>>

 

The airplane was trimmed for level flight.  It is fact that a weight shift to the rear is the same as a trim change.  The aerodynamic weight changed by -20# as did the down force on the tail.  The h-stab is not the same wing as the main wing.  The Lancair 320/360 is not a Piper or a Cessna whose h-stab negative incidence was set to handle the most forward CG of a plane designed to carry 4 people and baggage - and a rather large CG range to boot.  The fastest airplane in level flight will be trimmed for level flight.  Remember that trimming can take many forms - move the entire h-stab or move the elevator, whether by springs or tab.  Tabs introduce drag and we can't move the h-stab - although maybe this is what Larry would like to do most of all.

 

<<<Someone smarter than me should comment on what effect this may
have. What is your AP connected to anyway? It probably should be aileron and
rudder only.>>>

 

Please review your basic flight manual.  Only a yaw damper would care to manage the rudder unless you mean the ruddervators on a V-tail.  In my airplane, as it is in most, the autopilot can manage the ailerons and the tail flap (elevator).  By moving the tail flap, it effectively changes the h-stab MAC, hence AOA.

 

<<<Digital level: I'll wager it was never used in this environment. Delete it.
If the airspeed indicator is digital you won't see small changes.
AOA: Keep this for another test. Simplify.....>>>

 

The digital level confirmed the basic airplane design  - especially for this one, designed to operate optimally at 8000-9000 feet pressure altitude beginning with the first line laid down, the longeron.  Gee, maybe I should have relied on another useful instrument, the vacuum AI.  The wing incidence is established along with design speed and airplane weight range. etc, etc.  The level had the longeron level (within .2*), close to it's design speed, altitude and about 97% of the original design target gross weight. 

 

I have both an analog (meaningless) and a digital (Rocky Mountain) airspeed indicator.  You are right, the digital airspeed indicator only changes in whole knots.  I should have used the GPS ground speed  - accurate to 1/10 of a knot - Oh, thats too bad as it only shows .1 knot data below 100 knots.  Maybe next time I could switch it to kilometers per hour for a finer measure. 

 

AOA provides data about how the main wing is operating - It's information increases our knowledge base, but you can ignore it.

 

<<< It's often hard to isolate the truth for a specific case.>>>

 

Exactly.  Bleriot's wing doesn't fly like mine.

 

<<<Here's my suggested test: Arrange a way to transfer in flight, by hose, 5
gallons of water from the cockpit to the baggage compartment at 1-2 gallons
per minute. Carefully monitor the TAS and make sure everything stays constant
while the water is flowing. Repeat a couple of times. Record results.>>>

 

You do it, I won't waste my time on fooling around with something that probably returns less than a knot.  I get a better benefit out of my secret wing coating and reducing things like cooling drag.

 

PS See you at the next Air Venture Race