Generally I found it to be a very interesting read.
However, as I plowed through it I noticed statements that were "red flags" to me:
pg 14: 1914 Ricotti wasn't just plans; it was built.
pg 15: Odd how the early aero heavyweights were omitted- Jaray, Porsche, etc.
pg 16: Retractable gear doesn't matter on planes going less than 250mph?? Wrong!
pg 23: Rounded rear corners on "shoebox" better than sharp? Really?
pgs 41-42: Yah, the chopped-off tail worked just as well because the full tail tapered too rapidly- that's why the separation was so bad.
pgs 50-51: Ignorant candy-arse truckers :/
pg 59: COE inherently less aero? Pointy nose better? Less frontal area? From what I've been taught, that's all B.S. Footnote had it right: better ride.
pg 66: Tire nitrogen? Air tabs? Eyebrow rising; starting to lose me...
pg 67: Generate lift, reduce trailer weight 15% = more efficiency? Uh-Oh. How much more of this article is suspicious or worse yet, garbage?
pg 78: Efficiency = effeminate; inefficiency = macho... TRUTH! SUVs and PUs...
There was more good than bad by a long shot though; to list the good would test my and anyone's A.D.D.