This report took a bit more time as the effort to begin counting Part 103 ultralights altered our view of the FAA aircraft registration data. Most of you may prefer this simpler report, but the data hounds among readers can drill all the way down to the last aircraft on 
Many may be surprised. Registrations grew? …in 2020!? Indeed, they did, and that's without counting Part 103 ultralights that do not need to be registered with FAA. We'll have lots more on Part 103s in a couple months (the 
Why is this true? Many reasons might explain but affordability is a key element and, no question about it, investing your labor reduces the cash outlay to have your own airplane. At the same time, the sophistication of Special LSA has risen over the years. Features such as bigger, more powerful engines, autopilot, big fancy panel displays, leather interiors, complex manufacturing with carbon fiber, and the cost of complying with ASTM standards has increased the cost of some SLSA beyond $200,000. At this price point, some readers note a recreational aircraft can cost more than your house (not in California or New England, perhaps, but in many U.S. regions this may be true).
"Look at the slope of the lines," Steve advises. "The brown (kit) line is steeper, especially last year. That means two things: First, a lot of people finished their kit planes in 2020 – more than finished them in 2019 (so that’s how they spent their lockdown time). Secondly, people are buying more kits than factory-built aircraft. Of course, there’s a lag in the data
Whatever the explanation, Italy-based Magni surged from well behind the market leader to race ahead in the American gyroplane market for 2020.
"
"
Everyone knows 2020 was arguably the most unusual year in anyone’s recollection. In such a time of global upheaval, how did the light aircraft industry fare? This report took a bit more time as the effort to begin counting Part 103 ultralights altered our view of the FAA aircraft registration data. Most of you may prefer this simpler report, but the data hounds among readers can drill all the way down to the last aircraft on Tableau Public. As always, my sincerest thanks goes to our premier datastician Steve Beste. His work is the primary resource for this report. While I deeply appreciated the work done for years by former data guy (and personal friend), Jan Fridrich, Steve’s career in databases gave him skills that few others possess. Since he’s also “one of us” — a trike owner and pilot — Steve understands what we hope to achieve better than data experts outside affordable aviation.
In this context, how might the aviation industry be holding up? We read — and some brave travelers have experienced first-hand — how the airline industry is in a deep hole, prompting large layoffs.
In this third quarter report for the calendar year, I'll look at some numbers for general aviation manufacturers as well as the light aviation industry that has my full focus.
The short answer: some are doing surprisingly well.
It bears repeating. You can go poke around FAA's database yourself …but while you access the same information you won't get the same details as we have here without a lot of work.
What you see here is thanks to Steve's noteworthy skills at organizing data and solving the puzzles made by aircraft with varying registration information.
To better understand Steve's marvelous work, 
Steve summarized, "Some [producers] are doing stupendously better than last year. Others, not so much."
Some, like "Most Improved" 
FAA is moving forward on the rulemaking project yet everything remains in progress while the agency gathers internal assessments. What follows is as accurate as possible at this time but changes will occur.
FAA generally agreed with our back-calendar estimate that the NPRM may be forthcoming in late 2021 or early 2022. This was based on the perceived amount of work remaining.
The NPRM must be released about that time to allow FAA to have a finished regulation by the end of 2023. The 2023 date is a deadline set by the U.S. Congress as part of approving FAA’s budget — called the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.
While changes in wording are inevitable, it is the big changes on which we will focus here. Please remember, MOSAIC encompasses more than LSA, but LAMA’s focus remains entirely on matters of interest to the LSA producer community, to other businesses that serve that market, and to the recreational pilot community.
FAA functions under the Department of Transportation.
Repeating, FAA will not specify a particular aircraft weight (as it does not do so for Part 23 certified aircraft of today). Instead, FAA may employ something called the Power Index (basically a formula) to determine the size of an aircraft. Nonetheless, aircraft weight will increase, perhaps rather dramatically. Indeed, weight may rise to 3,000 pounds (1,360 kilograms).
If FAA will not set a specific weight, how do we know weight will increase and what can provide wise limits?
FAA may use “Power Index.” (Words like "may" are frequently used because this regulation is only a proposal at this time, however, FAA personnel have seen what we are reporting here and offered clarifying suggestions to our language.) For those more technically oriented, at the bottom of this post is an engineering analysis by 
A number of pilots and aircraft developers, surprised by the large potential increase in weight, have wondered what will keep these aircraft from becoming very large. If FAA will not specify a weight, what will prevent LSA 2023 from becoming heavier aircraft beyond the scope of LSA and the Sport Pilot certificate?
In addition to the Power Index concept, here are methods to describe and constrain unlimited weight as learned in LAMA's last conference with FAA:
At present, FAA has given no specifics on speed, but reading between the lines, LAMA expects maximum flight speeds could be 140-150 knots.
Pilot & Mechanic Certificates — Related to FAA’s ultimate decisions about what a Sport Pilot is allowed to fly and for what flight missions, what about mechanics? Specifically, what changes are coming?
FAA is examining what type of mechanics (LSR-M or A&P) can do what kind of work on specific systems of aircraft.
As an example, will a LSR-M be allowed to work on an in-flight adjustable prop, retractable landing gear, or electric/hybrid propulsion systems?
These questions are still being evaluated, but FAA acknowledges that the issue may work itself out through the industry consensus standards process as it has for similar maintenance issues.
However, matters regarding operation of LSA falls under Flight Standards, the people who manage Part 61 (airmen certification) and Part 65 (mechanics).
Because MOSAIC is such a wide-ranging rule, various other FAA departments will address areas of their expertise. Note that this is a central reason why the regulation will take all of the next two years to fully develop.
FAA is evaluating what type of mechanics (LSR-M or A&P) can do what kind of work on specific systems of aircraft but maintain their focus on the consensus standards process to sort out maintenance issues.
This report is current and was reviewed in March 2020. It is as accurate as we can make it at this time, but it bears repeating one more time: this is a regulation still in process. Many changes may occur. Despite that caveat, the report shows where FAA is generally headed with MOSAIC. Keep your seat belts fastened!
If the Ip value worked out to be less than 1.2, it was proposed at one point that the aircraft would fit within the definition of a Light Sport Aircraft. This formula would only work for airplanes, not applying to rotorcraft, powered parachutes and weight shift control trikes.
Earlier, an Excel spreadsheet escaped from the FAA that allowed a user to plug in different values for maximum gross weight, wing area, and maximum horsepower and it would instantly calculate the Power Index value.
Industry people played around with the spreadsheet, putting in different values. Soon they found that no matter what value they put in for the weight of an aircraft, it never changed the Ip. This became a topic of vigorous discussion.
However, there is a very simple explanation for the lack of sensitivity of the formula to weight. And in fact, the explanation comes from algebraically simplifying the equation itself. When you do that, you find that even though weight appears in the original equation, it quickly drops out since it is in both the numerator and the denominator.
So let’s start with the original equation:
Ip = {(W/S)/(W/P)}1/3
If you divide by a fraction, that means that you are multiplying by the inverse of that fraction. (The inverse meaning that you switch the numerator and denominator.) Doing that, you get this:
Ip = {(W/S) * (P/W)}1/3
That means that the weight is being divided by the weight, which works out to 1. The equation then solves to:
Ip = {P/S}1/3
That means that weight has no influence on the Power Index. Instead, the power index is essentially a ratio between the power of the engine in horsepower and the size of the wing.
Now that the equation is simplified, we can do something else interesting. Let’s solve for Max Power:
Ip = {P/S}1/3
Ip³ = P/S
Ip³ * S = P
In other words, the larger the wing, the more power you can use. That certainly makes sense from a safety point of view.
Solving for Max Wing Size:
S = P/Ip³
That says the same thing. The more power you have, the larger your wings need to be. Let’s see what that looks like with some real world numbers.
If you have a 100-hp motor (for example, the very common 100-hp Rotax 912ULS) then for an Ip of 1.2, your smallest possible wing size is:
S = 100/1.4³ = 57.87 square feet
As an example, the wing area of a Flight Design CTSW is 107.0 square feet indicating that it is considerably larger than the minimum 57.87 square feet defined by an Ip of 1.2.
This probably means that an Ip of 1.2 is unlikely to be the only way that a light sport airplane will be defined with MOSAIC. Perhaps a smaller number will be used or perhaps it is only going to be one way of defining a light sport airplane (see above constraints). Perhaps a minimum stall speed (above) may also be included. That way a maximum gross weight won’t be cooked directly into the regulations, but will still end up being a consideration for airplane designers.
If you like airplane statistics and facts, this article may interest you. Some pilots don't follow such things while others eat it up (you know who you are). For these readers, we have a new perspective that many may find intriguing.
The comparisons below relate to the numbers of Single Engine Piston (SEP) general aviation (GA) aircraft on the U.S. registry compared to an umbrella group including SLSA, ELSA, and kit-built aircraft that Sport Pilots may fly (or those using a different certificate but exercising the privileges of Sport Pilot) …in other words, all the aircraft we cover on this website.
Even after more than 15 years of LSA and the kits that Sport Pilots can fly, the GA fleet still seems immeasurably larger. The truth is, we can measure it; in fact, we have up-to-date info and both are as accurate as FAA's database allows.
When you go global with these two aviation sectors, you find the USA has 80% of the GA fleet with the entire rest of the globe flying the other 20%.
The table is turned upside down for LSA/SP kits, where the USA has about 20% of the global total and all other countries account for 80%. However, the U.S. share appears to be increasing gradually since the recession of 2007-2009. As you can note that recession hit GA very hard; the GA industry has yet to recover to pre-recession registrations.
Take Cirrus out of the count and GA registered 448 aircraft from 15 producers, only 65% as many as all LSA/SP kit producers registered.
Although we have clear leaders in LSA/SP kits (see chart), the 690 aircraft come from an impressive list of 171 producers, more than 11 times more manufacturers than for SEP GA aircraft. This clearly illustrates what happens when you free up the design energy and productive spirit of small aviation companies.
Given a means of market entry, we saw the arrival of a new batch of manufacturers with a flock of new models to satisfy the diverse interests of pilots: from those seeking speedy cross country cruisers to back country taildraggers to special flying machines like gyroplanes, weight shift trikes, and powered parachutes. 
A huge thanks to our supreme "datastician," Steve Beste for making such swift and accurate reporting possible. I assure you that I've looked high and low for every year LSA have existed to find no comparable information.
As always, be advised that our data comes from FAA's aircraft registration database. That means it is impartial — hopefully meaning reliable and dependable — but it also means some massaging of the information is needed to be completely accurate. (
Overview
However, as he added, "All did not have the same experience. Kitfox registrations increased by 60% (as the Idaho company appeared to lose some momentum in 2018). Van's Aircraft grew by 44% and Rans by 20% but Zenair/Zenith and Sonex were modestly off their previous pace (see chart below)."
For reference, here is our 3Q19 market share report with additional details you might find interesting.
Steve wrote, "Regarding Icon's numbers, note that historical figures often differ from what was previously reported," in this case with Icon and its A5. He continued, "This happens because FAA continues to perfect its data. For example, for 2018 the agency reported 57 Icon A5s as '2018' aircraft but FAA data clerks switched 11 of those to '2019' once their late-in-the-year paperwork was done. Thus, we now report fewer than 57 Icons for 2018."
Despite these necessary adjustments, we maintain the figures used in this report are the best available and are of very high reliability. In fact, the adjustments Steve and I make are proof of the effort to report accurate, dependable data.
As always, I offer a loud and heartfelt THANKS! to Steve Beste for his work to make this information available.
In general terms, Steve noted, "Alternate aircraft offer a mixed picture."
He reported, "We have no change from our third quarter 2019 report: Gyroplanes registrations are slowing slightly but are still hot. Trike registrations are holding steady. Powered parachutes registrations are off a bit (nearby chart).
Gyroplanes
Weight Shift Trikes
About this Report — “SP Kits” means Sport Pilot kit aircraft referring to amateur-built aircraft that can be flown by a pilot possessing a Sport Pilot certificate, or a pilot holding a Private Pilot certificate or higher who is exercising the privileges of Sport Pilot — meaning no aviation medical is required. Since Sport Pilot, as a form of pilot license, only arrived in late 2004, we collect information from FAA's Aircraft Registration database for all applicable kit-built aircraft that can be flown by a Sport Pilot plus, of course, all Special or Experimental LSA. Although some of the same kit aircraft existed before January 1, 2005, we omit them as it cannot be said those older aircraft could be flown by someone with a Sport Pilot certificate. This also evenly and fairly compares SP Kits with SLSA and ELSA.
** When using our online market share reporting system called 
If you follow light aviation intently as many readers do, knowing what aircraft and subgroups (within LSA and SP kits
Why? We don't claim to have all the answers but regular surveying of exhibitors at airshows revealed that many sellers say, "The market is good. People are buying." Of course, this is anecdotal not scientific but we heard it from enough vendors to believe they're feeling good about their enterprises. Many pilots backed up this finding with their own, personal assessment.
If you want to do your own analysis, you certainly can using our completely free-of-charge 
This is the first time you've seen this because earlier, we segmented SLSA from ELSA from SP kits. This made it appear kits were growing faster than the LSA groups. In fact, they are nearly matched with kit-built aircraft.
Viewing all light aircraft as a group, Steve noted, "The same six brands continue to lead the pack." He refers to the full fleet of light aircraft a Sport Pilot may fly — led by kit-built aircraft producers: Zenair/Zenith, Van's, Rans, Sonex, and Kitfox plus SLSA builder, 
Using 
However, fixed wing continue to be, by far, the biggest group of LSA (partly as very few kit-built aircraft are "alternative" types).
Among Special (fully built) LSA, Flight Design continues atop the ranking. They enjoyed a phenomenal start back in 2005-2006 and have never lost their leadership position. American Legend, Czech Sport Aircraft, CubCrafters, Tecnam, and 
As we head into the final quarter of 2019 — and the final LSA show of the year, the 
Regarding the much-anticipated max weight increase, FAA refers to a "Power Index." This term means a formula-based method to replace maximum takeoff weight in the definition of a LSA, involving wing area, horsepower, and takeoff weight.
FAA is also looking at up to four seats, “for personal use and for flight training.” Airspeeds — referring to maximum horizontal and never-to-exceed speeds (Vh and Vne) — may be higher than in the current rule, but will still be limited.
Neither will FAA be prescriptive about (that is, tightly defining) powerplants. The 2004 version of the LSA rule prohibited electric motors because rule writers wanted to discourage turbine power and therefore specified reciprocating engines, which knocked out electric. FAA will now consider both electric and hybrid.
Yet FAA was clear, “Movement of people for hire (such as the multicopter air taxis proposed by numerous companies) is not part of this.”
FAA is also reviewing what type of mechanics (LSR-M or A&P) can do what kind of work on specific systems of aircraft (examples: in-flight adjustable prop or electric propulsion systems).
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 includes a deadline of 2023 for implementing a key mandate that suggests the longest it should take. Once an NPRM is published, a comment period follows to hear from the public after which FAA needs time to address the concerns raised during that comment period. After closure of that comment period, the FAA has 16 months to publish the Final Rule.
Throughout the LAMA/FAA teleconference some ideas were repeated by FAA personnel…
“All of these requests are on the table,” FAA acknowledged in the June teleconference. Of course, this does not mean all are certain to be included, but they represent a “huge opportunity [for industry and for pilots].”
“The Flight Standards people are considering [aerial work],” said FAA.
This important topic has been a priority for LAMA because it could become a vital activity to keep manufacturers healthy by expanding their capabilities and the markets they can serve. Pilots could also gain as this would provide more compensated flying jobs and business opportunities.
Single Lever Control
Our first quarterly report in many years should have come about April 1st. It did not. That date came as 
Digging deeper, the chart shows that longtime market leader 
Strong SP kit suppliers include 
Looking at cumulative registrations, Zenith/Zenair clearly holds the top spot among Sport Pilot kit aircraft sellers. Rans, 
Yet the real surprise comes when you look at our final chart of this article. Kits appear ascendant since 2013, especially when compared to Special LSA that seems to have found a stable registration rate of around 200 aircraft per year. However, when you combine SLSA with Experimental LSA, you can see that all LSA types number closer to 300 units per year, compared to all SP kits at just shy of 400. Specialty registrations like Experimental Exhibition are steady but at a far smaller unit count.
Any ELSA must be shipped from the factory as a bolt-for-bolt copy of the SLSA model, as required under the regulation. No producer can sell an ELSA without first getting approved for a SLSA, so to my mind, combining SLSA and ELSA makes for a fairer comparison to Sport Pilot kit aircraft.
If you love these numbers, please visit 
