Homebuilts Deregistered in 2018

[rwanttaja]

About ten years ago, the FAA instituted a mandatory re-registration process for aircraft owners. Every three years, owners have to re-register their aircraft. If they fail to do so, the aircraft's registration is cancelled.

This has always had a big effect on the homebuilt ranks...in fact, in the first cycle of the process, almost a quarter of the homebuilts were removed from the FAA registry.

The number has been rising again... it was up to 2700 in 2018, which was a tenth of the entire fleet.

What was interesting was the *types* of homebuilt de-registered. I had expected a lot of older designs...projects never completed, planes scrapped years ago, etc. But there was a surprising number of "modern" kit aircraft in the mix as well.

Here's a summary of the planes de-registered in 2018:


Aircraft Type

# Deregistered in 2018


Avid

51


Baby Ace

33


Bede

21


Bensen

53


Bowers Fly Baby

20


Challenger

93


Glasair

38


Glastar

32


Kitfox

111


KR-1/KR-2

33


Lancair

57


Midget Mustang

28


Monnet (Except Sonex)

42


Murphy

20


Pietenpol

32


Pitts

68


Rans

63


Rotorway Helicopters

73


Rutan Designs

92


Searey

21


Sonex (Including Waiex)

32


Steen Skybolt

25


Stits

19


Stolp Starduster

29


Thorp T-18

19


Vans (All)

214


Velocity

17


Zenair

98


The types shown are basically from a "rough cut" of looking at the registered make and model and identifying the more-common name for the aircraft. There are probably more in most of the types.

This data is from the January 2019 FAA database.

Ron Wanttaja

[Floatsflyer]

Like you, I too am surprised by some of the "modern" kitplanes/homebuilt types and their high numbers on this list. Glastars, Glasairs, Lancairs, Rotorways and the very serious Velocity. Most of these are complex composites so I wonder if these are mostly made up of projects never completed?

[rwanttaja]

Like you, I too am surprised by some of the "modern" kitplanes/homebuilt types and their high numbers on this list. Glastars, Glasairs, Lancairs, Rotorways and the very serious Velocity. Most of these are complex composites so I wonder if these are mostly made up of projects never completed?

Note that the list is only of those aircraft deregistered in 2018. There are 148 Velocities listed in the overall cancellation list. All these aircraft are recorded as having airworthiness certificates, so they should, TECHNICALLY, have been flyable aircraft. I have noticed some problems with the records, though.

Here's the list of Velocities whose registrations were canceled in 2018, along with their "Manufactured Date" (which may or may not accurately reflect the year the aircraft was completed). Most are at least ten years old.


N#

Registration Make

Registration Model

Year


18KT

HERNANDEZ ARTHUR J

VELOCITY RG

1995


20PX

OSHMYAN MICHAEL

VELOCITY 173FG

2005


242JP

PRUDHOMME JEAN JOSEPH

VELOCITY RG173

1994


24TR

TROYER TIMOTHY R

VELOCITY RG

-


27GV

VITTONE JOSEPH

VELOCITY XL RG 82

2000


289AE

ESPINAL ANTONIO D

VELOCITY JET 900

2003


33SV

OWENS R WAYNE

VELOCITY 173

2000


389DM

FRITTS WILLIAM M

VELOCITY LW/RG

2008


4253M

MAHER D J

VELOCITY 173

1991


444YP

ADVERTISING MGMT & CONSULTING

VELOCITY SUPER XLRG5

2007


4PE

MICHALK BRIAN K

VELOCITY STD FG-ELIT

2009


642PT

WETMORE P L/VALLEE T

VELOCITY RG ELITE

1999


66XL

EYMANN BERNARD

VELOCITY XLRG

2001


6ZL

FRANKS ERIK

VELOCITY XL RG

2011


713MR

BROWN ROLAND L

VELOCITY 173 ELITE

2003


87BR

BRIM R M/COMPOSITE AERO

173/RG-EXL

1998


951DR

RIDER DAVID R

VELOCITY

2000



Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

This shows the effect of the deregistration program....


Year

EAB

Net Change

Deregistrations


2009

31914

672

464


2010

32682

768

309


2011

33038

356

666


2012

32041

-997

1951


2013

27946

-4095

5013


2014

27909

-37

1084


2015

28078

169

781


2016

28830

752

225


2017

28451

-379

1296


2018

26572

-1879

2767


Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

That's an alarming decline.
Do you have numbers for new EA-B registrations last 10 years?

[rwanttaja]

That's an alarming decline.
Do you have numbers for new EA-B registrations last 10 years?

I'm not concerned about it, because what we're seeing is the effect of a refinement of the registration process. The change in the FAA system provides a more-accurate record of the number of active homebuilts. At the same time, the new process has affected the overall registrations as well. About 2700 homebuilts were removed from the registry in 2018, but about 22,000 Standard aircraft were removed as well.

With that said, the number of new homebuilts each year does appear to be reducing a bit:



Year

New EAB

EABs Deregistered


2009

1136

464


2010

1077

309


2011

1022

666


2012

954

1951


2013

918

5013


2014

1047

1084


2015

950

781


2016

977

225


2017

917

1296


2018

888

2767


This can be due to a lot of factors, one of which might be the advent of Light Sport Aircraft...some people who might previously had built an EAB might be purchasing ELSA kits, or even ready-to-fly SLSAs. Another factor could be the economy; remember that the actual REGISTRATION of homebuilt aircraft lags the kit/plans purchase date considerably.

And of course, interest in aviation may be decreasing due to increased regulation and costs. But there's really not much more than speculation to go on.

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

There might some heavy but "near" ultralight homebuilts that are not registering as EA-B for obvious reasons.

[robert l]

If the de-registration has the owner contact information, perhaps someone wanting to take on a project could revive these lost souls. Just thinking with my fingers !
Bob

[rwanttaja]

If the de-registration has the owner contact information, perhaps someone wanting to take on a project could revive these lost souls. Just thinking with my fingers !
The original sequence of deregistrations probably primarily affected planes that hadn't existed for years. There was no incentive for an owner (or the owner's relatives) to cancel a registration, hence old planes remained on the registry. Since no one was willing to send in the $5 during the first cycle (2010-2013), the planes would be removed from the registry.

Not completely sure what's happening, now. Planes only remained on the registry after 2013 if someone cared enough about them to actually pay the fee. Yet, we're again seeing a rise in the number of planes being dropped.

It might be that the owners, faced with the notice for the second demand to re-register the aircraft, finally have realized that they're never going to get "old bessie" flying again.

It's also possible that the registered owners moved without changing the address in the FAA records. It would seem to me that this would be pretty constant, so we wouldn't be seeing a spike in the 2018-2020 timeframe.

It's also possible to re-activate a plane's registration; the FAA does not reuse the N-Number for five years. There are usually a number of aircraft that return to the registry after the owners discover theirs was canceled. I'm aware of one airplane on the 2018 list that this has happened to.

The FAA deregistration list *does* list the last known address of the aircraft owner, so if one wants to give Robert's suggestion a try, it'd be easy enough. I've saved an Excel spreadsheet of the homebuilts deregistered in 2018 at:

http://www.wanttaja.com/dereg_2018.xlsx

Ron Wanttaja

[martymayes]

I'm not concerned about it, because what we're seeing is the effect of a refinement of the registration process. The change in the FAA system provides a more-accurate record of the number of active homebuilts.

I think it provides more accurate numbers in general. I've know of planes that have been gone for many years but they still showed active on the registry. Now they have been purged and the registered aircraft numbers are more accurate. Now the number of FAA employees per plane is even higher!

[Frank Giger]

Ron, I think the line of thought that the economy lag might be slowing things down is right on the money.

If there was a sudden rush this year in folks buying kits (because few are true plans built anymore), we'd see the spike in registrations three to five years from now.

The Kitfox number raised an eyebrow, but then again, there are a lot of them out there.

[robert l]

Ron, I couldn't access the link you posted, got one of those 404 pages. Thanks for the info, if I go to the FAA website and look for de-registeration I should be able to find it. And Marty, I like the last sentence, " Now the number of FAA employees per plane is even higher!" Well, hopefully they can catch up a little, and maybe they can get a wiggle on and finish up my paper work. I've been going at it for over a year now.
Bob

[rwanttaja]

Ron, I couldn't access the link you posted, got one of those 404 pages.

Thanks...I botched the file transfer to my web page. Should work now:

http://www.wanttaja.com/dereg_2018.xlsx


Thanks for the info, if I go to the FAA website and look for de-registeration I should be able to find it.

There are search functions on the FAA page, but they're kind of crude. I get my data by downloading the complete FAA registry...

http://registry.faa.gov/database/ReleasableAircraft.zip

Open the ZIP file, and the deregistrations are in: DEREG.TXT. The 13th column is headed "Certification"; planes listed as "42" are Experimental Amateur-built (The 4 denotes experimental, and the 2 is the code for Amateur-Built).

Unfortunately, the dereg file does not directly show the aircraft type. The third column is "MFR-MDL-CODE," which is a cross-reference to the ACFTREF.TXT file. I use Microsoft Access to merge the files, but you can use the "VLOOKUP" function in Excel as well.

The page that handles the registry is:

https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/releasable_aircraft_download/

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

The looming ADS-B mandate is pushing some marginal unused aircraft away from the city. (or scrapped or deregistered)

[rwanttaja]

The looming ADS-B mandate is pushing some marginal unused aircraft away from the city. (or scrapped or deregistered)

It *is* interesting to note that the closer the deadline gets, the more aircraft are being deregistered....

Ron "Coincidence, not causality" Wanttaja

[cub builder]

I suspect a lot of it is aging pilots that are no longer flying. Looking through the Excel file Ron provided, I noted quite a number of planesI know quite well. Most are still owned by pilots that I know. In most cases, they are older pilots that can no longer fly, but haven't brought themselves to part with the plane they spent years building, and many years flying. In some other cases, they are planes that I know have been re-registered under a different registration number, but are still flying. And still another group are planes that have simply fallen into neglect and are likely sitting in the back of a hangar or a garage in pieces.

[rwanttaja]

I suspect a lot of it is aging pilots that are no longer flying. Looking through the Excel file Ron provided, I noted quite a number of planesI know quite well. Most are still owned by pilots that I know. In most cases, they are older pilots that can no longer fly, but haven't brought themselves to part with the plane they spent years building, and many years flying. In some other cases, they are planes that I know have been re-registered under a different registration number, but are still flying. And still another group are planes that have simply fallen into neglect and are likely sitting in the back of a hangar or a garage in pieces.

Pretty much my opinion, as well. With the recurring requirement to keep the registration active, more older owners are basically faced with finally having to finally face if they're going to be able to get their planes flying again.

I do have one slight disagreement with your post. When an airplane gets a new N-Number, it doesn't look like the old one is added to the deregistration list. The deregistration list isn't just a column of N-Numbers; it has the aircraft code that identifies the make, model, and serial number. So the FAA doesn't list the same aircraft in both the active and inactive list, even if the N-numbers disagree.

About a hundred EABs got new N-Numbers in 2018, and none of the old numbers appeared in the deregistered list under the same aircraft type. About 40 of the N-Numbers were listed in the deregistration list, but as different makes/models of aircraft (e.g., they got an N-Number previously used by another aircraft).

In some cases, planes that were previously deregistered are returned to the active list. I understand that the FAA doesn't re-use the N-Number for five years, to accomodate cases like this. One case pointed out to me was deregistered in March 2018, but restored to the active list in February 2019.

Ron Wanttaja

[cub builder]

I do have one slight disagreement with your post. When an airplane gets a new N-Number, it doesn't look like the old one is added to the deregistration list. The deregistration list isn't just a column of N-Numbers; it has the aircraft code that identifies the make, model, and serial number. So the FAA doesn't list the same aircraft in both the active and inactive list, even if the N-numbers disagree.

About a hundred EABs got new N-Numbers in 2018, and none of the old numbers appeared in the deregistered list under the same aircraft type. About 40 of the N-Numbers were listed in the deregistration list, but as different makes/models of aircraft (e.g., they got an N-Number previously used by another aircraft).

In some cases, planes that were previously deregistered are returned to the active list. I understand that the FAA doesn't re-use the N-Number for five years, to accomodate cases like this. One case pointed out to me was deregistered in March 2018, but restored to the active list in February 2019.

Ron Wanttaja

You are correct. I went back and looked at the instance I cited and found it was actually a different owner/builder by the same name with a very similar registration number. My mistake.

[SaltedTailfeathers]

What's the real story? Less aircraft and less pilots but at what rate?

I'm aware of more aircraft owned and operated by people without licenses/certified. Unfortunately I only know one person who has the traditional private pilots license and still flying. The people who got flight training but don't have a ride, haven't kept up with medical (several with cancer and two younger ones with fertility issues) or training.

[Grum.man]

I'd wager that the vast majority of these de-registrations are people who just forgot/didn't know/don't care. The other bulk are people who lost interest in flying be it for money or medical and don't want to hassle with selling in case they get back into the hobby again some day.

[rwanttaja]

I'd wager that the vast majority of these de-registrations are people who just forgot/didn't know/don't care. The other bulk are people who lost interest in flying be it for money or medical and don't want to hassle with selling in case they get back into the hobby again some day.

I don't think you're far wrong.

The first rounds of the deregistration process came from 2010 through 2013. In my opinion, most of the planes that were removed hadn't physically existed for decades. They were abandoned, scrapped, etc., and the registrations remained active until an owner was required to react.

I received my first copy of the FAA registry in 1998. My first step was to find out what the most common homebuilt was. I was very surprised at the answer: The Bensen Gyrocopter. Yet they seemed rare.

My hypothesis is that the first line in the Bensen construction manual was, "Obtain a registration from the FAA...."

One goal of the re-registration program was to eliminate these ghost homebuilts. Here's what the Bensen Gyrocopter registrations have done in the past ten years.
http://www.wanttaja.com/bensen.jpg

I strongly suspect most of the deregistered Bensens hadn't actually existed since the ~70s.

Ron Wanttaja