OTTrue, but that doesn't mean that bulbous fairing doesn't disrupt flow, and I'm rather positive that I've seen flow enhancers on the bottom and top of similar "junctures" on biz jets or???
antennae do NOT have to be airfoil shaped,,, so I'm not going to concede entirely,,,, I'm going to politely,,, (see how this works guys),,, its easy, concede under protest...Master Delft and I became friends, after our old friend BD Popeye PMed me, and educated me, reminding me that my friend is quite bright..
to be honest Delft, I didn't really process this, but to add to my friends point, the aft mounted horizontal stab provides down force on the aft end of the aircraft, whereas the all flying canard adds to the total lift... leading us to the conclusion that canards are no doubt more efficient,,,,
though in my humble opinion, maybe not quite as effective in the low speed regime?
You might expect that with a canard increasing lift and a horizontal tail decreasing lift the canard configuration will have a better lift drag ratio. However the tailplane living in the down wash of the wing reduces its drag and the canard in the up wash of the wing experiences an increase in drag so to a first approximation the lift drag ratio is not influenced by this gross difference in configuration.
The antennae should have air foil profiles just to keep drag down.