Originally Posted by
abgd
A 100% spitfire might look better, but presumably a 'spitfire' with 50% the regular wing loading would be mighty different in terms of flying qualities... It seems to me that if you're going to build a 100% replica, it may as well be a copy.
Hmmm, not I don't think I would.
There's a lot of expensive internal structure on a military aeroplane that you just don't need in civil use. The armament feeds and supporting structure can go, the carry-through for weapons back loads and vents for gun-gas become irrelevant, the level of structural redundancy to allow for battle damage is also no longer required and modern analytical tools would allow you to build a much simpler, and thus cheaper, structure. Plus much better more modern materials are available.
I think if I was running a project like that, I'd take a lot of persuading that a direct copy was a good idea. A 1:1 flying replica, with a facsimile cockpit is as far as I think I'd go. It can still have a big engine, still be aerobatic, and it's not that hard to match handling with a few design tricks.
G