90% If its gonna be that big anyway, why not just go for 100%? I am genuinely intrigued.
Although a 10% reduction in scale may seem trivial (and indeed is, to the eye; most people wouldn't realise it had been scaled down without a full size for reference) it makes a big difference to the weight. Even if you just scaled everything, it would cut the weight by ~30%, but the wing area is cut by ~20%, so the stall speed goes down, and that means a much less powerful engine for take off, which cuts weight even more, which reduces loadings so you can lighten the structure further etc. etc. A standard early model Spitfire has an MTOW of about 2 tonnes. Strip out the armament, reduce the engine size and then reduce the structure by 30% and you can get down to the 600kg FAA MTOW limit for 'Light Sport' aircraft; presumably similar weight limit classes exist in Europe.
Although a 10% reduction in scale may seem trivial (and indeed is, to the eye; most people wouldn't realise it had been scaled down without a full size for reference) it makes a big difference to the weight. Even if you just scaled everything, it would cut the weight by ~30%, but the wing area is cut by ~20%, so the stall speed goes down, and that means a much less powerful engine for take off, which cuts weight even more, which reduces loadings so you can lighten the structure further etc. etc. A standard early model Spitfire has an MTOW of about 2 tonnes. Strip out the armament, reduce the engine size and then reduce the structure by 30% and you can get down to the 600kg FAA MTOW limit for 'Light Sport' aircraft; presumably similar weight limit classes exist in Europe.
For the larger, heavier, Mustang (MTOW 5.5 tonnes), a scale of 75% still leaves you with a nice looking replica within the 600kg limit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_T-51_Mustang