Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Registration Red Tape, Ain't This Fun!

  1. #11
    Joe Delene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    327
    I only had to send mine in twice to get it right. At 1st they didn't seem to like my make-shift 'bill of sale'. All was fine the 2nd time.

  2. #12
    MEdwards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Las Cruces, NM
    Posts
    363
    For me the re-registration was an absolute cinch. Worked exactly as it was supposed to. I paid attention and did it the last month and therefore got the expiration as late as possible.

    Of course, that was a simple re-registration with no changes. If you have bought or sold, or want to change the registration somehow, then you'd have to re-register the plane anyway, so I don't see how you can complain about the new system not working in that case.

    I can see how the FAA would want to clean out their database. The previous approach (asking us "any changes?" every three years) had to be prone to error. I agree it won't do us any good, however. Not only will we be a smaller group to be dealt with, but the estimate of hours flown will almost have to decrease, and therefore our estimated accident rate will increase.

  3. #13
    Jim Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Prairie Cottage Airport, 8KS8, Chapman KS
    Posts
    111
    First lets look at the problem: The FAA registration database was 70% crap. I know this because we recently built a program to print Fly In registrations from the Federal database download to use at the National Biplane fly In and saw first hand what a load of s@#$ the information on the books was.
    I have re-registered 4 of 6 airplanes and it was simple and easy. Sure I don't like the extra 5 bucks but I do think it is important to have real data on aircraft in todays world. Just recently I received a call from the feds asking if I had operated my aircraft N618N from Florida to South America, specifically Columbia, and back. I advised them I had not and the agent replied, "Didn't think so as the number was registered to a 1929 Waco CSO that really couldn't muster 230 kts." He assured me that they would get to work on tracking the aircraft using my registration number. Gosh, maybe that is a reasonable purpose to have a valid data base.
    I have changed N#s on multiple aircraft with no problems and have bought basket cases, put them back in the air, and processed registrations without a hitch. I guess I just don't see the problem
    Jim Clark, Chairman National Biplane Fly In, www.nationalbiplaneflyin.com. Currently flying: 1929 Waco CSO, 1939 Waco EGC-8, 1946 Piper J-3, 1955 Piper PA22/20, 1956 Beech G35, 1984 Beech A36 & 2001 Vans RV9.
    You love a lot of things if you live around them, but there isn't any woman and there isn't any horse, nor any before nor any after, that is as lovely as a great airplane, and men who love them are faithful to them even though they leave them for others.
    - Ernest Hemingway

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Jim , you say you "don't see the problem".

    Well, mostly in my opinion, it is just more pointless red tape and paperwork. Unlike you, I don't fear or suspect that someone is using my N # in Columbia.

    But to be even more specific, this morning I went on line to the FAA site and tried to print out these forms. First page you come to it has a blank to fill in your N number; no problem with that. But next it asks some other registration code. I look over the paperwork, no such code. So I phone the FAA number to ask for help. After a reasonable hold time, perhaps 8 minutes, I get a nice lady. She tells me the # should be on the paperwork, and where to look, but it ain't there. She tells me to click "forms" on the website, but "forms" ainlt there either. So she tells me she will mail me the forms. I asked her why they just didn't mail me the forms needed when they sent out all these notices. She doesn't know, it was all done by a computer, no logical thinking was involved.

    I tried to go back on line, and even called the FAA back about this supposed re registration code. Another short wait on hold ( a hello of a lot better than United Airlines) and another nice lady. She expalins that this mysterious code was on the first notice sent out months ago , but for some reason is not on the paper the FAA just sent me. So I can't get this code and can't get the paperwork on line.

    Now if I had not been put off by the whole idea when I got the first letter months ago, I might have tried to register then , and if I had read the whole page of bumf, I do see half way down the page that the FAA will mail you the correct form if you phone or fax them, so that is what we are doing, and probably what I should have done back then. Frankly, I think I also had in mind that the FAA might even change or get talked out of this nonsense over the winter, but no such luck.

    So, let me say that both ladies were very polite, but it is still a waste of our time, and I am certain that it is not going to benefit me and doubt if it is anyone else, except maybe give full employment to the FAA.

    And Jim, did you guys ever have that Biplane fly in over the years before the FAA decided to add this in ? Was it successful then? I have particpated in dozens and organized some fly ins and even airshows and never needed any FAA database. Some of the best ones I ever went to were when there was no FAA to gum things up.

    And no, M Edwards, I didn't buy or sell any planes recently, just trying to continue to own them as before. One I have had since 1983 until the FAA decided that maybe I don't really own it or shouldn't own it.No changes in N number or titles, no registering in any other name, real or corporate, no shell names.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 05-21-2012 at 05:28 AM.

  5. #15
    rosiejerryrosie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    392
    Hey guys - if there is gonna be a registered airplane database at all, what's wrong with trying to make it accurate? My personal experience - when I was contemplating changing the Lycoming engine in my Aeronca 65LA, I went to the FAA database and found that there were 52 Aeronca 65LAs registered in the US. With the magic of the computer, I wrote letters to all 52 asking about their expereince with the engine and their source of parts. Fully 50% of the letters were returned as undeliverable by the post office. Of those that were delivered, one generated a reply asking why I was bothering her father who had been dead for 12 years, one indicated that the airplane had burned in a hangar fire and one that the airplane was currently in a museum somewhere. Why have a database at all, if it is going to be that inaccurate? Asking me to fill out a form on my computer, give my credit card number and hitting send does not appear to be that much of a problem. It is just about as hard as buying a coffee mug from eBay, or renewing my EAA membership.....but then it is not the Federal Gomment requiring it, which makes all the difference...
    As one writer pointed out above - the Feds didn't require him to re-register his car. Guess that it was the state and not the Feds made it all the more palitable....
    Cheers,
    Jerry

    NC22375
    65LA out of 07N Pennsylvania

  6. #16
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    I've been working for 12 years to get my wife's name changed to her married name
    There's a reason why we're not putting our aircraft in our names but rather in the name of the company. Actually, there are several, but that's one of them.

    But, there must have been at least one employee with time on their hands and/or perhaps a grudge against private general aviation.
    I think they all work at either CAMI or the Indy FSDO. I've yet to run into anyone at either location who has anything I could classify as a 'grudge'. Hell, several of the FSDO guys were volunteers for one of the GA based charities I'm sort of involved with.

    And not one pilot will be any safer, or have any benefit at all from having any more red tape on file with the FAA
    Remember that the true role of any government agency is to ensure it's continued existence by doing as much busy work as possible so that they can show how important they are. Whether it serves a practical purpose is beside the point...

    The Aircraft Registry has always been a pain in the butt to deal with even BEFORE the new system.
    Even the guys I know at the FAA tend to use a lot of four letter words describing that branch. One of the senior guys I know at CAMI actually refers to the Aircraft Registry division as the "pre-retirement parking lot".

    I advised them I had not and the agent replied, "Didn't think so as the number was registered to a 1929 Waco CSO that really couldn't muster 230 kts."
    Jim, if it could, I would be begging you for a ride in it even more than I already do.

    Unlike you, I don't fear or suspect that someone is using my N # in Columbia.
    You'd be surprised how many times it happens. I've seen two planes with the same N number at the same airport before. Someone had some (*cue Ricky Ricardo*) 'splaining to do on that one I bet. Rule #1 of stealing someone's N-number: try to avoid parking two planes down from the guy whose number you're using.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Clark View Post
    First lets look at the problem: The FAA registration database was 70% crap.
    Quote Originally Posted by rosiejerryrosie View Post
    Hey guys - if there is gonna be a registered airplane database at all, what's wrong with trying to make it accurate?
    I agree with both! However, there was already a mechanism in place to register aircraft and keep the database current. It's called regulations. The only thing missing was compliance. So how do we solve that? Hummm, I know, lets create more regulations! I bureaucrat's dream for sure. But that's not what this is all about. It seems every time the term "user fee" is mentioned, aircraft owners and pilots get their feathers in a ruffle. Certainly there must be a way to create a revenue stream, like a user fee, but do it in such a way that the fees are indirect and not really noticeable. Not not only will the owners and pilots be oblivious to the fact they are paying a user fee, they will think it's a great idea. Looks like the bureaucrats were right.
    Last edited by martymayes; 05-19-2012 at 02:24 PM.

  8. #18
    FlyingRon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NC26 (Catawba, NC)
    Posts
    2,627
    They already had the Triennial survey, there just was no incentive to fill it out. Oddly enough, the triennial was EASIER to deal with (and free) compared to the current preregistration scheme.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by rosiejerryrosie View Post
    As one writer pointed out above - the Feds didn't require him to re-register his car. Guess that it was the state and not the Feds made it all the more palitable....
    if i implied it was more palatable, i implied wrong. i specifically cited an incident of national import which proved that registration did NOT deter auto theft nor facilitate speedy apprehension of criminals, including serial murderers. i'd have as much value from making up my own license plates and posting them on facebook. where in the Constitution does it authorize the federal government to register ANYTHING you own? but the tenth amendment reserves that right for - kaCHING - the states, so i gotta qicherbichen there.

  10. #20
    rosiejerryrosie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by cdrmuetzel@juno.com View Post
    where in the Constitution does it authorize the federal government to register ANYTHING you own?
    Prolly in the same place it authorizes the creation of the various classes of airspace. After all - the air is free how can someone even propose to regulate it?
    Cheers,
    Jerry

    NC22375
    65LA out of 07N Pennsylvania

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •