"You may have misunderstood Paul."

Exactly my point, Bruce. I believe that anyone, especially someone not already familiar with these airplanes, could have misunderstood what Paul wrote, the way he wrote it. Hence my use of the word "imply" as in "please stop implying...."

So, to set the record straight, I am not implying but am flatly stating as fact that the layup schedule for the QAC LS-1 canard wing skins is not adequate for either flight or landing loads if said canard is built without the factory-supplied round, tapered carbon spar or an equivalent substitute structure. Further, the Waddelow canard structure is an engineered structure that is much more than "just" the omission of the round, tapered spar from the otherwise "stock" construction of a QAC LS-1 canard.