Documentation about "drag stabilized flying wings using non-reflex airfoils"? What provides lift is the wing, but it is unstable without one stabilizer.

Flying wings airfoils, or reflex airfoils, carry their stabilizer inside them, through a reversed camber of the trailing edge section. Those airfoils provide less lift and more drag than "standard unstable cambered" airfoils.

Long time ago I (don't know where anymore) saw images of one particular wing longitudinal stabilization method, which could allow one "standard unstable high lift" or let's say Clark Y airfoil, to fly stabilized by the drag produced by one surface placed quite far above the trailing edge.

This looked like this, and models of it fly pretty well :



Who thought about this configuration and does anybody have documentation about this? 

What interests me in this is : What kind of max L/D ratio and finesse could this Clark Y (or RG 14 or else) drag stabilized config could reach, compared to reflex airfoil (Eppler 187 or else) of same wingspan, same wing loading, same geometry glider.

Note the impossible sustained reverse flight.
If you’re going attach a boom and surface, why are you comparing to a reflexed airfoil?  Attach the boom and surface conventionally and you get far better LD than either. The effective trim drag is lower. And you can get it thru the door of the hangar.
  Planks are cool, but applying the restoring force without much lever is the basic problem. The required force and resulting drag is much higher. 
  The new config exposes the whole boom to flow and the vane is 100% drag. A conventional surface generates force with the L/D of the tail surface, only 20% drag if the LD of the tail is 5. 
    Conventional boom or even a swept tailless is far superior to this config or reflexed plank. I don’t think anyone will spend time calculating the diff between two poor config. Sorry.