The Café (There is no Topic)

I can remember models folding up in the middle though this has a one-piece wing with the two halves joined by plywood(?) formers except they are narrowest in the centre.
And being a biplane it is stronger.

To me both the conventional tail & the T-tail both have wobbly fins.

As Eric points out the elegant wing root shape of the Wasp does have a draw back, just look at the depth of the spar at the root compred to the rest of the wing.
   
i would also suggest the wing has no joiner but is built up in one piece that includes a section in the fuselage. It is then bolted down.
Advantage? Yes. it means as a biplane you can do away with the cabane struts but at the expense of considerable manufacturing difficulty.
Now if you are flying at 400+mph there is a drag advantage if the wing joins the fuselage at 90 degrees, like the inverted gull wing of the Chance Vought Corsair fighter, although in that case it also allowed the undrcarriage to be a bit shorter and still give ground clearance for the biggest ever fighter prop so was deemed worth the construction difficulty.
 

The same really applies to a V tail. A straight V is easier to construct than a curved one so there has to be a good reason to go to the trouble. Most V tails have full length control surfaces to generate the required effect. A working curved control surface would be a mechanical nightmare.

On one of my planes I use a V tail so it is less likely to get damaged in a long grass belly landing. I selected a fairly wide angle V to give adequate elevator authority but I found it then lacked sufficient tail vertical area so had marginal directional stability in a turn. The simple solution was a "compound" V with vertical bits at the tips of the V.
 
It worked very well for my particuler set of circumstances.
I hope this helps.        

Apparently because of a lack of spares. I can't really imagine flying with 7 rather than 9 will make a huge difference in the spare requirements but on the other hand I suspect airframe life is becoming critical. They are simply cutting down the hours on the oldest so they all reach the limit at about the same time.
They have been flying the Hawk T1 since 1980 that's 26 years. There are some airliners older than that but the Red Arrows Hawks have been doing high g aerobatic manoeuvres  regularly ever since.
The end date for the Red Arrows Hawks is 2030. I wonder how many planes they will be using in their aerobatic displays by then!  

Have they repaired the roads err tracks