The most popular homebuilt or kit plane

[1600vw]

Ron great work like always. I expected nothing less. But the list is skewed so to speak.

What I mean, how many airplanes where built that never was registered. I know a man in my area who built a hand full of minmax's and only one was registered. He built these from scratch, did not buy kits so contacting the manufacturer to get numbers of kits sold would be a skewed number too. If you ask how many of the handful he built flew, they all flew. Are they flying today, I have no idea, but you get my point.

Tony

[ssmdive]

But that list doesn't count different models of 172 differently...from the original 172, through 172S, retract, turbo, etc. With the exception of the LSA RV, one could argue they should be counted together (or even two-seaters all together vs RV-3 and RV-10).

Well, its wikipedia. Add them.

[rwanttaja]

But that list doesn't count different models of 172 differently...

Here's the 2 January 2015 registrations of Cessna 172 models:

172: 2033
172A: 493
172B: 466
172C: 412
172D: 530
172E: 685
172F: 824
172G: 801
172H: 873
172I: 382
172K: 1154
172L: 937
172M: 3954
172N: 3520
172P: 1266
172Q : 16
172R: 744
172RG: 587
172S: 2012
P172D: 32
R172E: 107
R172G: 6
R172J: 1
R172K: 678

Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

Ron great work like always. I expected nothing less. But the list is skewed so to speak.

What I mean, how many airplanes where built that never was registered. I know a man in my area who built a hand full of minmax's and only one was registered. He built these from scratch, did not buy kits so contacting the manufacturer to get numbers of kits sold would be a skewed number too. If you ask how many of the handful he built flew, they all flew. Are they flying today, I have no idea, but you get my point.

It's a little-known fact that over four million Fly Babies were built, only a few of them bothering to "go legit" and get an N-Number. The rest skip Ground School, hang out on street corners comparing their scarf joints, and whistle at passing Pietenpols.

Seriously, though, the only thing we have to work with is the FAA Registration Database, which only includes registered, N-Numbered aircraft. When it comes down to the real light stuff like Mini-Maxes, Challengers, and Kolbs, there may be thousands being operated as ultralights. We just don't know, and there's no way OF knowing.

Another factor is the Make/Model used in the registration. The builder is the manufacturer; he or she can call the airplane anything they damn please. A builder's RV-6 could be registered as a "Throckmorton Air Chariot Model 6", and no filter I come up with will classify it as a Vans RV-6. Back in the day, some BD-4 builders registered their planes as "BEDE FOUR".

So the lists aren't perfect, but as these unusual names aren't that common, I expect my tally to be fairly close.

Ron Wanttaja

[Jeff Point]

Ron,

Another design I didn't see on the list is the Breezy. While it likely won't crack the top 10, I've heard estimates of 100-200 that were built and flown. Heck, we had 13 at Oshkosh last year!

Would you mind running your search again with the terms "Breezy," "Unger," RLU," and see what comes up?

[Mayhemxpc]

The same is true for some production aircraft. Not all airplanes built to the C-172 type certificate will appear as C-172 on the FAA registry data base. T-41's being a case in point. I imagine the Rheims manufactured planes might be registered as R-172's and will not appear as C-172. (I am guessing on that one.) I do know it is true for Skymasters. For example, O-2's are registered as O-2A, M337B (the actual model number), and C-337. If you want to know how many military skymasters are still around you have to look at all three variations and then separate out the one's registered as C-337. (Serial numbers help there.) Some Piper Cubs are J-3's and some are L-4's. Those L-4s do not appear if you just look for J-3. For the C-47's and DC-3 you have to look at both lists (and under R4D, too!). I suspect that some C-47's are registered as DC-3s. Name variations becomes have greater effect for small run airplanes, like E-AB, where a significant number may be registered as something else. As Ron alludes, it is not likely that the difference would move any E-AB into the top ten GA aircraft list.

[rwanttaja]

Ron,

Another design I didn't see on the list is the Breezy. While it likely won't crack the top 10, I've heard estimates of 100-200 that were built and flown. Heck, we had 13 at Oshkosh last year!

Would you mind running your search again with the terms "Breezy," "Unger," RLU," and see what comes up?

101 total, with the "Lil Breezy" models eliminated (Rotax two-stroke power, obviously not the same thing).

Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

The same is true for some production aircraft. Not all airplanes built to the C-172 type certificate will appear as C-172 on the FAA registry data base. T-41's being a case in point. I imagine the Rheims manufactured planes might be registered as R-172's and will not appear as C-172. (I am guessing on that one.)

Kinda interesting, really. The French-built aircraft are listed as "Reims" as the manufacture, but the model includes the Cessna name and designation.

N# | MFR Name | Model Name
4291P | REIMS |CESSNA F172H

Ron Wanttaja

[Richard Warner]

I am surprised that none of the Wag-Aero Replicas showed up. Great job, Ron. Looks like the RV's are way out front, outnumbering many type certificated makes.

[Jeff Point]

101 Breezys, not too bad a showing.

I notice that the returns for the RV models are almost exactly 75% of the number of flights reported by Vans. While your numbers obviously don't take in oversees aircraft, I don't see 25% of the total fleet being outside the US. To what do you attribute the difference?