I've had the outline of an all-aluminum, scale F4U for a few years now. It rivals the S-51 in concept and also shares the 70% scaling. This seems to be the perfect size to bring warbird aircraft down to a realistic scale for general aviation. The great thing about the F4U is that it is about 1/4 larger than the P-51 overall with a bigger cockpit to boot. Due to this, the cockpit restrictions are less critical in a scale example.
Having the scaled airframe drawn up is not the real problem. The one nagging fault with the 70% scale Corsair (and all radial powered warbirds to date for that matter) has been the powerplant. So far, various scale kits of the Corsair have offered engine options that were less than ideal. The W.A.R. replica utilized an under powered inline (yuck) Continental engine to power its ½ scale offering of the F4U. IMO ½ scale is far too small to be considered anywhere near comfortable. The ‘Corsair 82’ is a very promising 82% scale F4U replica that will use the P&W R-985 for motivation. This is a great engine, but the lack of horsepower (450hp) necessitates the use of a small two-bladed propeller. The resulting size of the aircraft due to engine diameter coupled with the small prop kills the illusion of the real Corsair.
About 4 years ago I discovered the perfect engine – a Russian unit called the M-14P that outfits some of the new breed of Russian aerobatic aircraft. It is a 9-cylinder radial that offers a perfect 70% diameter when compared the Corsair’s P&W R-2800, thus allowing the cowling and airframe to be downsized accordingly without any glaring discrepancies in scale image. Though it is much smaller than the R-985 to be used on the ‘Corsair 82’, it still offers the same 450+hp. This mated with a smaller 70% scale airframe would really be a performer. The ‘Corsair82’ was originally going to use this engine, but the manufacturer didn’t like the fact that it turned the opposite direction (counter clockwise) compared to the R-2800. He also has affinity for the Pratt & Whitney logo.
The M-14P also has an inefficient inverted oiling system.
In the name of performance and scale realism, I’ve come up with the idea to create a prototype ‘scale R-2800’ by using components of two relatively inexpensive M-14P radials to create a double row 18-cylinder engine. This would necessitate a custom fabricated crankcase, crank, cams, and gearbox for proper prop rotation, but the stock cylinders, rods, and other redundant parts could be retained. The unsatisfactory oiling system could also be reengineered in the process. Once the concept engine was proven, producing them in numbers should be inexpensive enough to form a viable basis for recreating a fairly affordable scale F4U. This engine would also validate (finally) the creation of true to scale P-47’s, F6F’s, FW-190’s, etc. as well. In theory this potent little powerplant would offer close to 1000 horsepower and would make these scale, radial powered fighter replicas perform on par with the Thunder Mustang and Stewart 51. Imagine the new category of air races at Reno – the ‘Mini-Unlimiteds’!
As far as a two-seat version of the 70% Corsair is concerned, the only viable option would be to offer an F2G ‘bubble canopy’ version. Even on the full sized Corsairs, altering the rear fuselage and cramming a passenger in there is an obtuse concept. This is another factor that makes the Corsair a risky investment in the scale aircraft market. The F2G would work great, but only 10 of them were produced making them an obscure candidate for satisfying the popular desire for two seats in a scaled version of the famous WWII fighter. I, for one, would sacrifice the second seat for the chance to operate my own scale F4U Corsair. I’d just have to convince my flying buddies to build one of their own, and to come fly formation.
So far funding (of course) has been the only obstacle in seeing the project through. Due to my involvement in other projects, locating an engineer to nail down the specs on the new engine components, and contracting a fabricator to build up the proof-of-concept prototype is a possibility that’s out of reach for moment. In the future (once I put enough capital together or locate willing investors) I plan on at least seeing the prototype engine through. If I can’t follow through with the entire ‘true to scale’, radial-powered warbird concept, I might at least be able to jumpstart it by offering up the first operational proof-of-concept scale powerplant. As I stated before, drawing up plans for the airframe design is relatively painless compared to fabricating a new, composite-engine prototype. For a flying example of a true 70% scale F4U constructed in an authentic fashion using authentic materials, including the concept engine, the cost would easily reach over the $1M mark. This is a relatively inexpensive investment IF one could prove there is a large market for the aircraft. The fact that a popular style second-seat version of the F4U would be practically non-existent narrows these possibilities down to a point where serious investment in this idea is questionable at best. One alternate possibility would be to offer another model (such as the bubble-canopied version of the P-47) that would have no second-seat restriction, and use it to open up this niche market. Following the projected success of this scale P-47 model, an F4U could be offered based on initial profits. The problem for me is that I don’t have a deep passion for the P-47 like I do for the F4U. As far as my involvement goes, if I find the chance I will probably follow through with the engine proof-of-concept and, if I’m lucky, create a single prototype example of the 70% scale F4U itself with no intention of marketing the aircraft. At that point I would see where the demand stood. If the prospect was promising, I (with a functional prototype in hand) could rally investors to fund the project based on initial orders placed by interested builders (much like the Flug Werk FW-190 project).
All in all, a no-holds-barred true to scale F4U project is indeed doable, but taking into consideration all of the above factors you can see why no one has jumped in with both feet to tackle the idea. The market is waiting for a creative mind with more money than sense to throw together a prototype and prove the viable reality of such a machine. Once someone shows up at Oshkosh with a living, breathing proof-of-concept vehicle the investors will flock. It’s working up to that point that’s made the creation of this wonderful idea so difficult.
------------------
~Lt. Jg. Windle~
VF-17 The Jolly Rogers 8X
Skychrgr@aol.com 
