Homebuilts by State

[Ron Wanttaja]

I got asked the question "how many homebuilts are in each state?" off-list,
but thought others might like to see this data. For best insight, paste
into a spreadsheet or database, then sort and plot as desired.

The data is from the January 2003 FAA database, and includes only those
aircraft listed as Experimental- Amateur/Built. It does not include
homebuilts which do not have a definitive identification as such....which
total several thousand more.

Ron Wanttaja
--------------------------------------------

Homebuilts by state:

AK 282
AL 379
AR 242
AZ 779
CA 3063
CO 621
CT 202
DC 17
DE 260
FL 1808
GA 474
HI 61
IA 405
ID 304
IL 938
IN 557
KS 449
KY 191
LA 260
MA 218
MD 245
ME 135
MI 829
MN 581
MO 486
MS 210
MT 204
NC 512
ND 106
NE 216
NH 149
NJ 300
NM 263
NV 345
NY 643
OH 851
OK 826
OR 819
PA 627
RI 38
SC 212
SD 122
TN 402
TX 1978
UT 233
VA 388
VT 73
WA 1053
WI 779
WV 114
WY 103

[Barnyard BOb --]

>I got asked the question "how many homebuilts are in each state?" off-list,
>but thought others might like to see this data. For best insight, paste
>into a spreadsheet or database, then sort and plot as desired.
>
>The data is from the January 2003 FAA database, and includes only those
>aircraft listed as Experimental- Amateur/Built. It does not include
>homebuilts which do not have a definitive identification as such....which
>total several thousand more.
>
>Ron Wanttaja
>--------------------------------------------
>
>Homebuilts by state:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks so much for your outstanding efforts.


Barnyard BOb --

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:58:32 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>>Homebuilts by state:
>
>Thanks so much for your outstanding efforts.

I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the
US Army Artillery... :-)

Ron "BOb's the Infantry" Wanttaja

[Barnyard BOb --]

>>>Homebuilts by state:
>>
>>Thanks so much for your outstanding efforts.
>
>I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the
>US Army Artillery... :-)
>
>Ron "BOb's the Infantry" Wanttaja
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HOOWA ! <g>


Barnyard BOb --

[David O]

Ron Wanttaja > wrote:

>I got asked the question "how many homebuilts are in each state?" off-list,
>but thought others might like to see this data. For best insight, paste
>into a spreadsheet or database, then sort and plot as desired.
>
>The data is from the January 2003 FAA database, and includes only those
>aircraft listed as Experimental- Amateur/Built. It does not include
>homebuilts which do not have a definitive identification as such....which
>total several thousand more.
>
>Ron Wanttaja
>--------------------------------------------

Thanks Ron. I was curious about per capita figures so I calculated a
per capita column using state population data from the 2000 US Census.
The per captia figures are per 10,000 people in each state.

AK 282 4.48 (experimental homebuilts per 10,000 people)
DE 260 3.31
OR 819 2.39
OK 826 2.39
ID 304 2.34
MT 204 2.25
WY 103 2.08
WA 1053 1.78
NV 345 1.72
KS 449 1.67
ND 106 1.65
SD 122 1.61
AZ 779 1.52
WI 779 1.45
NM 263 1.44
CO 621 1.44
IA 405 1.38
NE 216 1.26
NH 149 1.20
VT 73 1.20
MN 581 1.18
FL 1808 1.13
ME 135 1.06
UT 233 1.04
TX 1978 0.95
IN 557 0.91
AR 242 0.90
CA 3063 0.90
MO 486 0.87
AL 379 0.85
MI 829 0.83
IL 938 0.75
OH 851 0.75
MS 210 0.74
TN 402 0.71
NC 512 0.63
WV 114 0.63
CT 202 0.59
LA 260 0.58
GA 474 0.58
VA 388 0.55
SC 212 0.53
PA 627 0.51
HI 61 0.50
KY 191 0.47
MD 245 0.46
RI 38 0.36
NJ 300 0.36
MA 218 0.34
NY 643 0.34
DC 17 0.30


I made a map of the per capita data. Dark blue for the highest per
captia figure (Alaska) and very light blue for the next to lowest per
capita figure (New York). DC isn't mapped.

http://www.AirplaneZone.com/NewsgroupPix/USA04b.gif

The map is public domain as far as I'm concerned. I'll leave it up
for a few days.

Of course, Delaware isn't really a hotbed of experimental homebuilding
activity. It's just that some people choose to own their planes
through shell corporations and Delaware is a popular state for such
corporations.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 13:45:39 -0400, David O >
wrote:

>Thanks Ron. I was curious about per capita figures so I calculated a
>per capita column using state population data from the 2000 US Census.
>The per captia figures are per 10,000 people in each state.

Hey, cool! Thanks!

I ran my database and got the breakdown between all aircraft registered per
state and the homebuilts. I've appended the results (plus your numbers) to
the end of this posting.

The results: The state which has the highest ratio of homebuilts per
aircraft registered is...Wisconsin (11.9%)! Followed by Iowa and Indiana,
then Washington and Oregon. Delaware, which, as you mentioned, is a hotbed
of dummy corporations for registering airplanes, actually comes out at the
very bottom (2.3%). Second from the bottom is Alaska (2.7%).

It's interesting that the two states to come out the highest in per-capita
homebuilt ownership are the lowest when it comes to the ratio of homebuilts
vs. total registered aircraft.

Ron Wanttaja
-------------------------------------------------------
Total Total David's Per Capita
State AC Homeb. Percent (homeb. per 10,000 people)
WI 6550 779 11.9% 1.45
IA 3767 405 10.8% 1.38
IN 5792 557 9.6% 0.91
WA 11103 1053 9.5% 1.78
OR 8832 819 9.3% 2.39
ID 3415 304 8.9% 2.34
AZ 8994 779 8.7% 1.52
RI 440 38 8.6% 0.36
WV 1320 114 8.6% 0.63
IL 10897 938 8.6% 0.75
NE 2590 216 8.3% 1.26
CO 7511 621 8.3% 1.44
VT 884 73 8.3% 1.2
CA 37308 3063 8.2% 0.9
MI 10128 829 8.2% 0.83
ME 1681 135 8.0% 1.06
FL 22657 1808 8.0% 1.13
OH 10818 851 7.9% 0.75
PA 8195 627 7.7% 0.51
AL 5065 379 7.5% 0.85
MO 6601 486 7.4% 0.87
MN 7973 581 7.3% 1.18
SC 2921 212 7.3% 0.53
KS 6213 449 7.2% 1.67
TX 27516 1978 7.2% 0.95
NV 4807 345 7.2% 1.72
MS 2927 210 7.2% 0.74
NY 8985 643 7.2% 0.34
NM 3710 263 7.1% 1.44
OK 11721 826 7.0% 2.39
HI 871 61 7.0% 0.5
MD 3542 245 6.9% 0.46
TN 5851 402 6.9% 0.71
VA 5662 388 6.9% 0.55
KY 2809 191 6.8% 0.47
CT 2982 202 6.8% 0.59
NC 7785 512 6.6% 0.63
AR 3768 242 6.4% 0.9
NH 2332 149 6.4% 1.2
WY 1619 103 6.4% 2.08
NJ 4872 300 6.2% 0.36
SD 2013 122 6.1% 1.61
LA 4313 260 6.0% 0.58
MT 3569 204 5.7% 2.25
GA 8327 474 5.7% 0.58
MA 4090 218 5.3% 0.34
ND 2187 106 4.8% 1.65
UT 4968 233 4.7% 1.04
DC 497 17 3.4% 0.3
AK 10483 282 2.7% 4.48
DE 11145 260 2.3% 3.31

[Del Rawlins]

On 11 Oct 2003 10:25 PM, Ron Wanttaja posted the following:

<snippage>
> Delaware, which, as you
> mentioned, is a hotbed of dummy corporations for registering airplanes,
> actually comes out at the very bottom (2.3%). Second from the bottom
> is Alaska (2.7%).
>
> It's interesting that the two states to come out the highest in per-
> capita homebuilt ownership are the lowest when it comes to the ratio
> of homebuilts vs. total registered aircraft.

I can't say what the deal is with Delaware, but Alaska has the largest
number of pilots per capita, so it would stand to reason that we would
also have the highest number of homebuilts per capita. On the other
hand, the vast majority of airplanes up here work for a living and thus
need to have a standard airworthiness certificate. So while there are
apparently plenty of homebuilts, they are overshadowed by the number of
certified planes.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Gig Giacona]

"Del Rawlins" > wrote in message
...
> On 11 Oct 2003 10:25 PM, Ron Wanttaja posted the following:
>
> <snippage>
> > Delaware, which, as you
> > mentioned, is a hotbed of dummy corporations for registering airplanes,
> > actually comes out at the very bottom (2.3%). Second from the bottom
> > is Alaska (2.7%).
> >
> > It's interesting that the two states to come out the highest in per-
> > capita homebuilt ownership are the lowest when it comes to the ratio
> > of homebuilts vs. total registered aircraft.
>
> I can't say what the deal is with Delaware, but Alaska has the largest
> number of pilots per capita, so it would stand to reason that we would
> also have the highest number of homebuilts per capita. On the other
> hand, the vast majority of airplanes up here work for a living and thus
> need to have a standard airworthiness certificate. So while there are
> apparently plenty of homebuilts, they are overshadowed by the number of
> certified planes.
>

Delaware is easy. It is a tax corporate tax thing. Lots of people register
their planes in Delaware. It is much less common for homebuilts to be
registered as corporate owned but there are enough that it spikes Delaware's
numbers anyway.

I'll bet that if you go to all the airports and start counting planes that
the number will be [Small%] of planes registered there.

[Russell Kent]

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

> I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the
> US Army Artillery... :-)

"On the way!" ;-)

Russell Kent

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:53:41 -0500, Russell Kent > wrote:

>Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>
>> I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the
>> US Army Artillery... :-)
>
>"On the way!" ;-)

I was thinking more along the lines of, "Artillery adds dignity to what
otherwise would be a vulgar brawl." :-)

Ron Wanttaja

[Russell Kent]

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

> I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the US
> Army Artillery... :-)

Russell Kent replied:

> "On the way!" ;-)

Ron Wanttaja replied:

> I was thinking more along the lines of, "Artillery adds dignity to what
> otherwise would be a vulgar brawl." :-)

Oooh, much nicer. Actually, I mis-spoke. "On the way" is the gunner's response
on board a tank immediately after firing. The sequence is usually:

Tank commander: "Gunner: battlesite, tank. Loader: Sabot" (or "Heat", or "Staff",
or "Canister")
Gunner: "Identified"
Loader: "Up"
Tank commander: "Fire!"
Gunner: "On the way!"
Tank commander: "Target" (hopefully. It means "target hit".)

Anyway, since tanks are *not* part of an artillery unit, "on the way" wouldn't
really be an appropriate artillery motto, official or otherwise.

Russell Kent

In article >,
Ron Wanttaja > wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:53:41 -0500, Russell Kent > wrote:
>
>>Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>>
>>> I like to think of myself as along the lines of the unofficial motto of the
>>> US Army Artillery... :-)
>>
>>"On the way!" ;-)
>
>I was thinking more along the lines of, "Artillery adds dignity to what
>otherwise would be a vulgar brawl." :-)
>

All I could come up with was "It's Hie, Hie, Hee, in the field artillery...."

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:25:44 -0500, Russell Kent > wrote:

>Ron Wanttaja replied:
>
>> I was thinking more along the lines of, "Artillery adds dignity to what
>> otherwise would be a vulgar brawl." :-)
>
>Oooh, much nicer. Actually, I mis-spoke. "On the way" is the gunner's response
>on board a tank immediately after firing.
>
[SNIP]
>
>Anyway, since tanks are *not* part of an artillery unit, "on the way" wouldn't
>really be an appropriate artillery motto, official or otherwise.

Oddly enough, your post reminded me where I heard that unofficial artillery
motto. It was one of a series of posters in the Army ROTC department, all
cartoons depicting the various branches, their nicknames or unofficial
mottos) and their own mental image of themselves.

I remember the artillery's motto and the cartoon showing a gent in a
17-century uniform (all gold braid, epaulets, spangles etc.) getting ready
to fire a shining cannon at a bunch of dirty, unkempt infantry. I remember
the Infantry one, showing the clean-cut soldier fixing a steely-eyed stare
at the cowed enemy and a wicked-looking bayonet on his rifle (plus a
nickname which, fortunately, BOb hasn't found out yet). The Armor poster
was especially funny (tankers with champagne glasses and formal uniforms in
a devastated landscape, accepting the surrender of legions of the enemy)
but I don't remember what the motto was.

What was a true-blue Air Force type doing hanging around a bunch of Army
pukes? Well, back when I was in Air Force ROTC thirty (thirty? Gawd!)
years ago, I got invited to join the Army ROTC "Ranger" program. I never
was sure why I was invited; whether it was just lack of warm bodies or the
fact that I already owned a set of very worn combat boots.

But anyway, there I was. In deference to my exalted status as a "f**king
zoomie," (how times have changed...) I was not required to participate in
the usual initiation ceremony involving killing a chicken with your teeth.
I did overhear one of the cadre telling one of the less-fortunate newbies,
"Hell, going though the thin part is the EASY way...."

Their appreciation for me was expressed in other ways. Upon discovering I
was also a CAP cadet (and thus supposedly trained in SAVING lives as well
as taking them), I was handed a nice heavy first-aid bag (along with my
M-16, magazines full of blank ammunition, and occasionally a field radio)
and designated the group's medic. I was dubbed the "Combat Gynecologist"
long before changes in national policy have made the term slightly more
realistic.

Fortunately, my limited first-aid skills were never called upon. I got
some hand-to-hand combat training, learned more than was safe about
interesting Army toys, played grunt for some small-forces exercises, shot
off a bunch of blanks, and got to be on the aggressor squad one weekend
when the full Army ROTC group had their semester field training.

Our group was also called out as aggressors against the National Guard
during their annual training, but I never got picked for that...probably
due to my unfortunate tendency to giggle during night ambushes.

Anyway, back to the point (Point? There was a POINT?), those posters are
probably available online somewhere. Guess I'll have to look....

Ron Wanttaja

[Dave Hyde]

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

> I was thinking more along the lines of, "Artillery adds dignity to what
> otherwise would be a vulgar brawl." :-)

And here I thought it was "Peace Through Superior Firepower"

Dave 'doing my part' Hyde

[Russell Kent]

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

> But anyway, there I was. In deference to my exalted status as a "f**king
> zoomie," (how times have changed...)

Speaking of "zoomies", unoffical mottos, et al., my father (an ex- B-52 EWO) told me
years ago that the unoffical motto of SAC (or maybe his wing or aircraft?) was "we
dig ditches: 100 yards wide, mile-and-a-half long". This was back when his unit spent
183-day rotations in SE Asia bombing the heck out of the jungles of Vietnam,
Cambodia, Laos, ...

Russell Kent