RA-Aus Forums

[JohnMcK]

Hi All

 

The new Ops. Manual Has been approved and signed off by CASA. All RA-Aus members will soon receive a free copy on CD, and the new regulations will probably become effective one month later after everyone has had time to read them. Check out http://www.ragandtubeaviator.blogspot.com/

 

John McK

 

 

[Guest airsick]

John, I just had a quick look at your blog and there is some interesting stuff on there. One thing I did note though was this from the Feb board meeting.

 

"It was decided that we would develop our own web forum. In this way we can better inform our members of developments in an appropriate and timely manner."

 

Why recreate the wheel and incur extra costs? These forums here provide a great medium for communicating news to the members. It would also save time in the sense that many members already frequent the site anyway and would be forced to check yet another site to stay up to date with RA-Aus developments. Why not use them?

 

Seems to me that our funds could be put to better use than developing another site which simply mimicks something that already exists.

 

I realise there would be issues in using this site but I am sure Ian would be co-operative and even encouraging in the use of this existing resource as a formal channel of communication.

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi All,

 

The discussion on setting up an RA-Aus forum was not to compete with this site which is very general, and covers all topics, and all aviators, but to have a platform to quickly put up relevant RA-Aus material for RA-Aus pilots.

 

We tried an open forum like this one some years ago, and got burnt as we didn't have the ability or resources to moderate it effectively.

 

John McK

 

 

[Guest airsick]

With all due respect John your statement doesn't make sense.

 

Firstly, if you didn't have the resources to moderate an existing forum such as this then how is it logical to embark on developing a new forum, financing it, maintaining the gear to run it, and keeping on top of administering the software behind it. Seems a bit backwards to me to suggest the resources don't exist but then offering up a new solution which requires even more resources. I'm confused.

 

As for ability to moderate (asides from the technical know how which isn't addressed with your solution anyway) this seems a little perplexing as well. There are forums here which are moderated by others besides the site moderators. Ian has just set up club forums with the ability to appoint specific club members moderator rights. An RA-Aus sub-forum already exists so why not just appoint certain employees within RA-Aus the right to moderate and post within these forums?

 

Ian has suggested he would be supportive of a move like this (see above post), surely this would represent better value for money for RA-Aus members. And it would serve the purpose of getting relevant RA-Aus material to RA-Aus pilots. I for one would rather see my money spent in a useful way rather than promoting a site which I will probably not visit all that much.

 

 

[Admin]

I will stay out of this and let you all make your comments however I will say and without any further comment by myself, that I would strongly support the RA-Aus if they and these forums could come closer together. :big_grin: Information distribution on the Internet is offcourse only available to those with the internet so only a % of the membership would hear about it anyway and any announcement that the RA-Aus would place on their forums would be placed here as well as I being a member of the organisation would have the right to do to advise every other RA-Aus member in any way I can so in my opinion it could just end up a waste of money and time and I know how much money and time it takes to run forums like this. PLUS, we have here the News Box at the top of the forums home page which I have used to announce RA-Aus news items and which anyone can read - you don't have to be a forum member, you don't need to have anything to do with these forums, but if someone wishes to comment on the news item then they will need to register, pretty well as much the same as you would have to, I assume due to moderation, with the RA-Aus one. I could very easily just change the news box to a heading of RA-Aus News and that could assist them. I vigorously support most of the Board Members as they are devoting their time to represent the members in their area much the same as I do here although for ALL RA-Aus members Australia wide and if the RA-Aus and these forums could come closer together then perhaps I wouldn't need to stand for Victoria in the next Board Elections

 

Our sister site Australian Flying which is dedicated to helping GA Pilots has the AOPA Board fully supporting it and I am discussing the same with the SAAA. The Australian Flying Magazine is also supporting it. Their support is in no way financial or any other way nor have I asked for anything in return - just simply saying they support the good that the site will do for pilots and after all isn't that what is trying to be achieved here.

 

I would love to have a box on the left of the forums saying..."Supported by the RA-Aus...Become a member today!"

 

 

[farri]

Ian,

 

You make sense,to me.

 

Regards.

 

farri.

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Hmmm! Returning to John McK's opening post do I interpret that will NOT be getting a printed version as we have done in the past?

 

If not then this is impractical, elitist and will do nothing for standards and flight safety.

 

Just a CD may make economical sense for RAAus but will do nothing for people without computers or are not computer literate. Further - When running a school I found it essential to have a copy of the Ops Handbook on the airfield with me so you could refer to it at any time as needed.

 

Perhaps John would like to respond to this point?

 

Aye

 

Tony Hayes.

 

 

[Guest FreeLance_Flyer82]

Hi TOSGcentral,

 

If my understanding is right.......from what i have read recently, a cd is being sent to all members of raa. The reason for this is to reduce printing cost of the publications. There will however be a printed copy available upon request but there will be a cost involved for the printed copy. The cost will be no different from the usual cost of the manual. see the raa web site for further detail.

 

Regards,

 

Matt

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Hi Matt,

 

I had deduced (feared) that would be the case but will await John's response.

 

So if your scenario is correct then those blessed with a couple of thousand dollars worth of computer, and the ability to use the device, will get a free CD. Meantime those members who are not so well endowed will have to pay ($35 on the cover of Edition 5 but probably more now) to see what they are supposed to comply with? Because after all both AUF and RAAus made sure to underline that it is 'members responsibility" to comply.

 

I dislike this accounting mentality (as well as the implicit standards control philosophy) as much as I disliked the very blunt offer that I was made that if I wanted to continue advertising my break even basic training and information articles in the RAA mag then it would cost me over double because they had to be in colour - for a simple list of titles and prices????

 

So I simply withdrew and thought that a mag. which is basically an official information source for the members, has been taken over by a glitzy production to get in yet more members.

 

Now, with all those members (8500 now? you would have thought there would be some dollars about - but none for our basic standards control?

 

Sure I know the present movement is now dominated numerically with people who will disagree with my view - you are getting exactly what you want and far cheaper than in GA. Good on ya! I do not begrudge you one bit of it nor say that you should not have it.

 

What I do say is that was once a very low key movement, flying simple aircraft, very cheaply, steadily getting its act together, now has to pay a membership fee AND have to pay for essential compliance information that always has been part of that membership fee.

 

Something seriously seems to have gone wrong and can you recall the members being consulted about it? However before I go totally bananas I will await John McK's response to my question

 

Tony

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Tony, I agree with the basic premise of your response and it seems to reinforce my statements from earlier. The implication of John's comments above are that RA-Aus resources are spread thinly and I am sure they are. But to resort to spending money on communication methods that favour a few (developing a forum from the ground up and distributing new operational requirements in electronic form) as opposed to spending some money to ensure we are all able to comply seems to be steering towards a profit maximising mentality versus a safety first type attitude.

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi All

 

First, I did not start this thread. I replied to a question about the new ops manual in a medical thread, and it went from there.

 

Ian perhaps if you pull out a discussion from a previous thread that is off target you could make mention of that fact. Not make appear that I have started a new thread.

 

Second, re the ops manual. Yes it was an economic decision. You do the maths and add on the postage. For that kind of money we could hire another badly needed senior or two junior staff members. Flying schools and perhaps clubs will get printed copies sent free to them as will special hardship cases on request. Others, who wish, will be able to purchase a hard copy at cost plus postage.

 

Mr Airsick, re the "discussion" about our own forum for "outward" information at the last board meeting, I suggest you seek out all the facts first from your local board member, and give him or her your personal input. That is what they are there for. As with your initial comments about Middos accident, you appear to shoot from the hip, and aim to kill the messenger without getting the full picture. We discussed ways to put "information out". We don't want a me too, tit for tat forum. We want information "in" to come through the board members. And/Or come along as an individual to the AGM and have your say personally. My personal view is the more members we get at the AGM the better.

 

For the record, I personally support this forum, and don't wish to set up a copy cat forum (although to the best of my knowledge the RA-Aus did it first) I also know Ian is supportive of our association, and wishes to work with us. I would be most interested to know the mix of members here, GA, RA-Aus, Dual, Professional etc.

 

However, as a board member, I also believe I must consider and discuss the long term view of our association (30-50 years). EG. What happens if Ian sells out. What happens if Ian starts to hate our association, or becomes very biased towards, say balloons, and wants to ban powered flight. (I know, unlikely considering his new purchase) But you people are the association. If you have an opinion, tell your board member. As for me, my phone number is in the magazine or on my blog site. Phone me. Tony, if you need further clarification please phone me.

 

If you are unhappy with the performance of your board members, vote them out.

 

Cheers

 

John McKeown

 

 

[Geoff]

Well said John McK

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Hi John,

 

Thanks for the feedback. This to me satisifes my curiosities and answers my questions as to why. But think of it from our (members) perspectives.

 

The aviation fraternity (RA and GA both) tends to be an older community. In general the older community do not have as good a grasp on technology as some of the younger folk. When you come out and say that you want to save money by distributing critical information in an electronic way that may alienate a large portion of the membership base then why wouldn't we question it?

 

As for the shoot from the hip comment? Well if you want to take it that way then fine, that's your perogative. Middo's accident was unfortunate. I don't have anything to do with him and certainly do not know him but this does not mean I don't sympathise with him for what happened. But at the same time people have posted in these forums about various accidents that have occurred in the past and have speculated as to what may or may not have happened. When I speculated I was quite open and honest by admitting that I did not have the facts and did not post anything here and misrepresent it as fact. It seems however that when it is a little close to home and it is someone who is well known amongst us then all of a sudden it is no longer alright to discuss what happened and instead many think it best to wait the months it takes for official investigations.

 

I am not sorry for raising the topic. I am not sorry for posting my opinions. I am sorry that you (and some others for that matter) feel the need to flame me (and send less than complimentary PM's) for doing so. In this instance I was the messenger bringing information and photos (that were requested by others here) yet I seem to have been the one to get shot. Must be karma for all the messengers I shot!

 

As for being unhappy with the organisation? I have only been a member for a short period so it is too early for me to judge. I can say however that if I put tough questions to board members and they are met with the disdain you have shown here then I certainly won't be happy. It seems to me you like to shoot from the hip. I am however happy to be convinced otherwise, just like I was earlier when I said it seems there is a bit of a problem re safety vs budget concerns.

 

 

[Admin]

John, I know I did say that I wouldn't further comment but as you have brought into the conversation statements about me personally I feel I should respond.

 

Firstly, let me say I hate balloons ;) and re my new aircraft - it can always be done through the SAAA but as you have pointed out and to which I confirm whole heartedly, I support the RA-Aus and as seen over the years there may be times that I disagree with the board, as we all do from time to time, but the Board is ONLY a small part of the RA-Aus.

 

I firmly believe it is the 8,500+ members that make the RA-Aus what it is, not the board, . I will always (subject to me obeying the rules) be able to go and get in my Gazelle and just go and fly and this is what the association is all about and what most of us just want to do. The board will never change that as that would infringe on why we exist in the first place so really the board is relatively minor in the scheme of things. Irrespective of what aircraft I have I also have on my wish list to learn to fly a trike and a thruster - again this is what the association is all about and what I hold dear to me.

 

If any of the scenarios that you have pointed to about my feelings/actions towards RA-Aus ever did occur, which is highly unlikely, the RA-Aus always does have the option of starting their own forums at that time, and they would have not lost anything but rather gained by it all for that duration.

 

What is being offered to the RA-Aus completely FREE is such a huge range of communication tools and RA-Aus sociality (as in the meaning of the word "Association"). Anything can be achieved within reason to suit the RA-Aus needs without any cost, without any time requirements by anyone else.

 

For example if you look at the TOSG website (http://www.thrustersupport.org) there is a menu item there that says "Forums" just like what could be done on the RA-Aus website. Clicking on that menu item opens up just the Thruster forums and there is a link at the top of them to click to go back to the TOSG website. TOSG utilise all the infrastructure and functionality here, at no cost, for a dedicated Thruster group of forums and so to can the RA-Aus. The fantastic group of moderators here can continue to moderate an RA-Aus section or an RA-Aus person can moderate it themselves. All the security is in place, forums can be locked to password only, they can be set for title viewing only but post reading only to RA-Aus members, there are so many combinations that can be configured to suit the RA-Aus's needs. All the regular software updates are done for you, the hosting is free (forums require a high amount of resources in disk space, ram etc) and everything overall is maintained without RA-Aus having to lift a finger or cost them, and the members, a single cent.

 

Imagine the RA-Aus having available to them for free, absolutely for free, the ability to conduct secure Instructor forums to instructors all around Australia by video and speech without any of them leaving their home or requiring anything other then a speaker on their PC. Imagine the RA-Aus having available to them for free the ability to conduct surveys by using the survey software here. Imagine the RA-Aus being able for free to hold informative interactive discussions on possible RA-Aus policy change using the Video Chat Room. Imagine the RA-Aus being also able to again for free use the disk space and traffic to distribute documents such as the new Ops Manual to members who have a PC and internet connection by using the Downloads software here - it even tells you who downloaded a copy for your records. There is so much being offered to the RA-Aus all completely free enabling members money to be used for bigger and better things yet I just can't seem to understand nor have I been given any specific reason why the RA-Aus don't capitalise on this offering.

 

Are you aware that an independent 3rd party's opinion on setting up an RA-Aus forum was sought and the report they received back was advising AGAINST setting up your own forum, so why was that advice ignored? We also need to consider the political reasoning of this initiative - are you aware that I will be standing for the Board at this year's election? Last time I could have used these forums as a means of sending out an email to all Victorian members to vote for me, unlike others who used their database to do that I didn't as that would be an improper use of these forums for political gain. Is it possible that there are some people who are scared of these forums no matter how much common decency I may have.

 

I feel we need to look just at the objective that is trying to be achieved then to play any political games - there is a far better offer on the table - for the future sake of the "Association" and its members.

 

With ALL due respect!

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Thank you for your response John.

 

 

No I shall not be telephoning you – you have answered the question and that is about as close as we are likely to get for a formal notification by the Board to the members that it was elected to represent (other than very retrospective).

 

 

I do not choose to pick a fight with you John – particularly as I am given to understand that you are the only Board member who is really active in ‘rag and tube’ style flying. I am also aware of how pro-active you have been for this Association. Neither will I use you as a convenient ‘whipping boy’ because you do have the guts and integrity to involve yourself publicly on these forums.

 

 

However I do have some serious problems with this situation!

 

 

One is that to my knowledge Honorary Control Bodies have a direct responsibility to maintain direct contact with their members and ensure that those members are acquainted with what they need to know – whether they want to know it or not! This does NOT encompass creating situations where members have a choice on whether they receive the information (eg by paying for it) as many will not so choose.

 

 

The RAAus magazine falls into this category very firmly. It is NOT some newsstand effort to make an alleged profit (which none of us know if it is or is not because that information is not given to the membership along with most other financial matters) but is the ‘Official Organ’ of the RAAus and the free issue to the Members is actually ‘Sufficiency of Notice’ of changes to the structure of this Movement that honorary control groups are obliged to supply.

 

 

As it is not practical to publish an entire Ops Manual in the magazine then we go to another level and that is free issue of new information. Now consider this:

 

 

We pay an annual membership fee. Any new joining member receives a free copy of the Ops and Tech manuals. That is required because they have to be clearly informed of their responsibilities to comply with the freedoms that we are given.

 

 

Existing members still pay the same membership fee, have the same obligations for compliance with the regulations, but now have to pay for that information if they do not have computers and printers (if they want hard copies for practical use and reference). That cannot be reasonably classed as sufficiency of notice/information on the part of the controller as the member is given a choice of whether to have that information.

 

 

Certainly the member is liable for an issue of neglect on their part but that is cold comfort if they have just killed a third party through not knowing what they are supposed to have been doing.

 

 

The other issue I have is that I really do get impatient with these pious pleas that members should go exclusively through their local Board Members. It would be OK if it worked but it does not! I have dealt with the AUF/RAAus Board at levels of member, CFI running a school, Pilot Examiner serving a Region, and as a serving Board member. I know exactly how the system works (or can be made to work) when outwardly it is quite legal and members can (as they do on these forums) gaily say ‘take it to your Board Member’ when that too often is just a Black Hole that swallows member questions and leaves them unanswered.

 

 

The very great value of forums such as this is that we can in fact have open discussion on problems and could have a much more healthy interchange between Board and Members as opposed to one on one’s that may or may not be resolved and anyway nobody else is likely to be acquainted to the topic. That is probably exactly why the Board has not been in favour of forums such as this – as a point of principle – and the AUF Chat forum was closed down overnight with a promise of review and explanation to the membership – but that also got swallowed by the Black Hole and nothing further was done other than the gagging!

 

 

High time RAAus management grew up! It is getting too big for what was originally set up and there are plenty of working examples of how the Members, Board and Managers can have a much more productive life – but any suggestions down that track have been either refused or shelved until they died.

 

 

Tony

 

 

[farri]

Hi Tony,

 

I am RAA member 993,so that shows how long I have been a member.I was president of the ,Far North Queensland Ultralight Association, for several years,this clubs name has now been changed to ,(Atherton Recreational Aviators).

 

On the issue of going to the Board through the local area Rep,We went through our,then,local area Rep several times on several issues,I cant ever recall getting a positive outcome, because, our Rep would be outvoted at meetings,how does this represent the individual member?.

 

The area Rep for NTH QLD is listed in the RAA mag as being ,Andrew Hicks,Oak Valley Queensland.,no one up here wants the job anymore because of all the B..S.IT

 

On the issue of the Operations Manual,we pay quite a large membership fee,therefore I believe the Ops manual and any amendments should be free of charge and in book form because not every member has a computer,I`ve just learnt through this forum that a new Ops manual will be in CD form,convenient for some but not acceptable as a way of keeping every member notified, the RAA mag is not an acceptable way either and I dare say that the RAA has a duty of care to keep everyone fully notified.

 

I believe that the RAA has become big buisness and may be loosing sight of what, I ,and others like me setout to achieve in the first place,which was,Safe,affordable,minimum requirement,flying.

 

Regards.

 

farri.

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Hi Farri,

 

We have never met nor even conversed – had any contact at all to my recollection. But I know you of old! You hung in there with your Drifter and your strip carved into your cane fields. You made it happen – provided a basic but good quality standards school that was sorely needed in your region. Good on Ya for making it happen as long as you did.

 

Your impressive membership number makes no difference my friend – that is the past and people are only interested in today. I have an impressive membership number - #5 at my home airfield. It did not stop a couple of idiots coming in, carefully waiting for the permissions and approvals that I obtained on a Development Plan that took three years in the creating – and totally usurp it for their own greedy ends that had nothing to do with aviation at all.

 

It took us seven years to correct the damage they did, a huge amount of skilled work by a dedicated bunch of very experienced professionals, very wary authorities, and consequent increased costs that alienates the basic flyer that Watts Bridge was set up to service. But not quite, we are still on some basics and most of the low key flyers can have a huge airfield very cheaply to use.

 

But let me wax slightly philosophical on time lines and politics.

 

We can say that the past is the long barrel of a rifle aimed at the future that the people who originally picked up that gun had a target in mind. The present is the muzzle of the gun and the direction the gun is pointing in is the intended future.

 

The art of politics is to sway the original direction of the point by bending the barrel and give every reason that they can think of for doing so because it suits them. The past, and former main purpose, is now just old hat – we have a ‘better direction and what came before can be forgotten’.

 

Bollocks it can!

 

I have said it before in print, I have put out warnings enough! AUF was thoroughly raped and then prostituted to suit a new ideal of weak kneed twits who did not have either the guts nor intellect to assemble their own movement that was screaming to come into existence! In consequence we got the management philosophy that we so richly deserve – because we allow it to exist and allowed it to come into being.

 

Pilots are not interested in politics or movement power – they just want the freedoms of the movement that they joined. They are therefore easy meat for those who have different ego needs because they trust them. But that is not a fair comment because I am talking about Board members and so many get elected and go there with shining eyes and find they are powerless against a rolling machine – they may even be expelled if they create too much fuss, they are certainly neutralised if they do so!

 

Dirty? Sure it is – what do you expect?

 

Aye Farri what you and I, and many others, wanted and worked so hard for day after day is now just ‘the past’. Except it is not! There were once 3000 members of grass roots AUF – a lot of them are still there clinging to the freedom of flight until they are costed out by their own movement – or as so many have done- just go cowboy and do their bit to destroy the overall movement by their non safety supported antics.

 

There are answers to this but I have spelt them out in detail before and nobody seems inclined to answer – so I will get on with what I do and want to do.

 

Aye

 

Tony

 

 

[Guest brentc]

For those that read their new Ops manual where it says the bit about flying into controlled airspace with an endorsement, think again! because whilst the new ops manual exists, it's not allowed under 95.55 which we still operate, so no joy until 103 goes through! Same goes with many of the other goodies in there.

 

John while you're here - from your webpage, what is the meaning of this paragraph:

 

"Also please note that under the current CASA regulations, LSA aircraft cannot be used for Hire and Reward. A SCoA for aircraft being used for Hire will not be issued. The basis of the regulation wording states LSA aircraft can only be used for Private Ops, Flying Training and Glider Towing. Chris Kiehn has emailed Bernie Hole from CASA for his understanding of this. This could be a serious blow for anyone wishing to make money with LSA aircraft..!"

 

 

[Guest aircraft1]

I think this is wrong because there are already lots of LSA aircraft in flying schools.

 

 

[farri]

Tony,

 

You are right,we have never met but I have known of you from the begining and you were always held in high esteem by me and those I knew.

 

I congratulate you for the courage to speak your piece publicly,you are right about the machine but I don`t think it can be stoped,it`s gathered too much speed and us blokes have got tired of trying to stop it,the best we can do is try and work within it.

 

I`ve said it before on this forum,"THEY`VE REINVENTED THE WHEEL".

 

I agree with you also that the guys who are the real recreational pilots simply want to enjoy their flying with the least amount of cost and fuss.

 

I still have the strip in the middle of the property and I`m almost finished on a complete overhaul of my Drifter,it will be back to almost new condition however I`m not farming anymore which will give me more time to fly.

 

Take care and keep enjoying what you enjoy most.

 

Regards,

 

farri.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

For those that read their new Ops manual where it says the bit about flying into controlled airspace with an endorsement, think again! because whilst the new ops manual exists, it's not allowed under 95.55 which we still operate, so no joy until 103 goes through! Same goes with many of the other goodies in there.John while you're here - from your webpage, what is the meaning of this paragraph:

 

"Also please note that under the current CASA regulations, LSA aircraft cannot be used for Hire and Reward. A SCoA for aircraft being used for Hire will not be issued. The basis of the regulation wording states LSA aircraft can only be used for Private Ops, Flying Training and Glider Towing. Chris Kiehn has emailed Bernie Hole from CASA for his understanding of this. This could be a serious blow for anyone wishing to make money with LSA aircraft..!"

G'day Brent,

 

what's your source for your comment on the CTA endorsement? As I understand it from Mick Poole - albeit a couple of months ago - the option of modifying 95.55 was the way that RAAus and CASA proposed to proceed in the short term. I think one sentence needs to go from a couple of paragraphs.

 

Your second para about LSA should be no surprise to any of us. It is the exact same situation which applies to a 24-xxxx registered aircraft under any of the other paras.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Perhaps yes Mike, modify 95.55 if that is possible, however I believe it hasn't happened yet and will require approvals from CASA. We shall just have to wait and see.

 

Re paragraph two, what are you referring to with regard to 24.xxxx. 24 rego aircraft can be used for hire and reward and ex-GA 24 aircraft also can, hence why I was asking the question because LSA can be used for hire and reward ???

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Perhaps yes Mike, modify 95.55 if that is possible, however I believe it hasn't happened yet and will require approvals from CASA. We shall just have to wait and see.Re paragraph two, what are you referring to with regard to 24.xxxx. 24 rego aircraft can be used for hire and reward and ex-GA 24 aircraft also can, hence why I was asking the question because LSA can be used for hire and reward ???

G'day Brent,

 

with respect to 95.55 para 1.6 & 1.7 these aircraft can only be used for pilot training in a "hire and reward" sense. What I was saying was that para 1.8 (LSA) are exactly the same except for glider towing in addition to private use.

 

Just what I would expect.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[John Brandon]

I put the Operations Manual issue 6 on the website yesterday.

 

See www.raa.asn.au/opsmanual/index.html

 

John Brandon

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Two things:

 

1. Why can't we download the whole thing? You can only get one section at a time.

 

2. Each page is dated July 2007. Should this be 2008? Does this mean it is effective as of July 2008 (assuming 2007 is a typo)?