On approach to land, a slat fault indication was displayed when the flaps were selected. The crew discontinued the approach and obtained clearance to another area so that the appropriate checklist actions could be carried out. A normal landing followed. The crew indicated that the aircraft had a recent history of slat problems.

Maintenance staff conducted the specified maintenance checks, and no fault was found after the checks. On the following day a different flap problem was displayed, and the system was again reset, achieving normal operations. The aircraft had operated normally since then.

The pilot commenced a business trip to Boonah and return with 65 to 70 litres of fuel on board the aircraft. Approaching Toowoomba on the return flight, a landing gear down indication was not obtained. The pilot arranged for ground observers to inspect the landing gear while he overflew the airstrip, having pulled the landing gear pump circuit breaker. One pass was flown towards the east, followed by a reversal turn and an overfly towards the west. Conscious that the fuel was getting low, the pilot conducted a right turn with the intention of landing. Around this time the engine stopped. The pilot did not have time to select the other fuel tank, nor to reset the landing gear circuit breaker, as had been his intention prior to landing.

The aircraft was landed on a road but the left wing collided with a pole. The landing gear down light was reported to be on after the landing. Prior to undertaking the flight the pilot considered that about 45 litres of fuel would be used. He normally intended having about 30 minutes of fixed reserve, however he was pressed for time on this occasion and accepted less. The investigation found that the flight as conducted should have consumed about 67 litres of fuel. Only about three litres of fuel were recovered from the reservoir tanks after the landing. No fuel was found in the wing tanks.

The pilot of the Boeing 737 reported that after departing from runway 34L, whilst climbing through 2,400 ft with climb power set, three birds were sighted just before they impacted in the vicinity of the right engine. There was immediate vibration throughout the aircraft and smoke was evident in the cabin and cockpit. The right engine was shut down and the appropriate check lists were actioned. An emergency was declared and the aircraft subsequently returned and landed safely on runway 34L, with the vibration continuing throughout the flight. The aircraft was taxied back to the ramp on the remaining engine. There were no injuries to passengers or crew.

Inspection of the engine revealed major damage to the inlet duct and fan section, with the outer sections of two fan blades missing. There was no evidence of fire. Bird remains were recovered from the engine, and there was evidence of multiple bird strikes to the right-wing leading edge in the vicinity of the engine pylon. No data was available from the flight data recorder due to an unserviceability in the recording system.

Analysis of the bird remains indicated that feral pigeons were the most likely species. The engine manufacturer reported that the damage was not normal but was consistent with a radially orientated pigeon strike impacting near a fan blade mid span shroud section.

Soon after departure, the crew advised that the flight would be returning to Brisbane due to a hydraulic problem and requested that the fire services be placed on standby for the landing. The aircraft landed uneventfully a short time later and cleared the runway unassisted.

Post flight examination found that a piston seal on the right outboard elevator power control actuator had failed. The actuator was replaced and the aircraft returned to service without further problems.

An intoxicated passenger was cautioned in the terminal by security officers, for annoying other passengers. Although the passenger appeared to be slightly intoxicated, security officers decided to take no further action when the passenger appeared to cooperate with their request to behave. The passenger then boarded the aircraft and attempted to enter the flight deck. The flight attendant seated the passenger and offered to serve him some non-alcoholic refreshments once the aircraft was airborne.

The passenger continued to annoy the other passengers and was cautioned by the captain and advised that he would be removed from the aircraft if he didn't behave. A short time later, after a request by the flight attendant, the first officer again cautioned the passenger. As the aircraft was taxiing, the passenger began to assault another passenger by punching him in the head. The flight crew called security officers, who arrived shortly after and restrained the passenger. The passenger was charged and convicted of grievous bodily harm.

Soon after takeoff the crew were alerted to a pitch computer fault in the aircraft. As other indications were normal the pilot elected to investigate the problem when the aircraft was further away from the terminal area. The fault indication was reset. A short time later the same fault re-appeared in relation to another pitch computer, together with all other associated fault indications. The crew also became aware that the aircraft control mode had changed to alternate law. As weather conditions in the departure area were good, they decided to return for a landing at the departure aerodrome.

The pitch computer involved in the first fault indication was removed and tested. No fault was found. After further checking the pitch trim control actuator (the component common to both pitch computers in normal operations) was replaced. No further faults were found, and the aircraft was returned to service.

The pilot reported that he obtained a safe landing gear indication prior to landing. During the landing roll the right landing gear collapsed. The aircraft slewed to the right and the left and nose landing gear collapsed. There were no injuries. Subsequent investigation revealed that the landing gear extension mechanism was worn and out of adjustment. This was preventing the over centre downlock on the right main gear from positively locking the gear in the down position.

The aircraft was incorrectly co-ordinated whilst transiting Amberley military CTR. Amberley ATC are required to co-ordinate an estimate for Brisbane for traffic transiting their airspace for landing at Brisbane. The pilot is then assigned a standard transfer level of 4,000 ft. prior to his transfer to Brisbane approach.

The first co-ordination from Amberley in this case, was an attempt to handoff FIS to Brisbane departures when the aircraft was west of Amberley at flight level 150. The departures controller accepted the aircraft to avoid delays. The aircraft continued on an east/ south-easterly heading from Amberley and entered approach south's airspace without co-ordination from Amberley. The pilot eventually contacted departures, and was turned back into the departure controller's airspace for processing for a right circuit on runway 19. There was no breakdown in separation.

A Boeing 767 aircraft, VH-RME, departed Hamilton Island for Sydney at 1348 EST and was assigned an initial flight level (FL) 270 due to crossing traffic over Hamilton Island, which was climbing through FL280. Further along the aircraft's intended route there was another possible confliction with another Boeing 767, VH-OGM, tracking from Cairns to Brisbane at FL370. The tracks of the two aircraft crossed at a point approximately 95 NM south of Mackay.

As RME approached Mackay from the north, the Sector 7S controller asked the pilot at what distance south of Mackay the aircraft would be on reaching FL390. The pilot advised that he would reach FL390 by 40 NM south of Mackay.

The two aircraft would not be in conflict until approximately 80 NM south of Mackay, and the controller therefore issued a clearance to the pilot of RME to climb to the planned level of FL 410, with a requirement to reach FL390 by 70 NM south of MacKay. The pilot read back the clearance correctly. The controller subsequently noticed the aircraft at approximately 67 NM south of Mackay, climbing through FL350.

The controller asked the pilot to confirm that the requirement would be met. The pilot replied in the affirmative, but shortly after advised that he could not meet the requirement. The controller instructed the pilot to turn left 30 degrees for separation, and issued traffic information on OGM. The aircraft came to within 10 NM on parallel tracks. When RME had left FL 390, the pilot was cleared to resume tracking via the flight planned route.

The pilot of a SAAB 340 aircraft which had been cruising at flight level 170, had been assigned flight level 130 for descent into Coffs Harbour, and was told to expect further descent at 45 miles. The aircraft was later observed on radar, 45 miles south of Coffs Harbour descending through flight level 127. Attempts were made to contact the pilot but there was no reply. After liaising with Coffs Harbour tower, the sector controller was informed that the pilot had reported on descent to flight level 110. The pilot had not been authorised for further descent nor had he received a frequency change instruction. There was no breakdown in separation.