The pilot reported that as the aircraft became airborne, he noticed a loss of engine power and believed the aircraft may have touched the ground after the landing gear was selected up. He was subsequently unable to obtain a gear down and locked indication, although the gear appeared to ground observers to be fully extended. During the landing roll the right main gear collapsed. The right gear did not fully retract or extend because of damage sustained by the retraction mechanism, probably as a result of ground contact after the down lock had been released. The engine power loss was probably caused by an intermittent breakdown of one magneto, and/or a partial blockage of fuel injector nozzles by particles of corrosion from a fitting on the manifold valve.

Circumstances:

The aircraft took off, made one circuit of the field, and was flying parallel to the take-off direction at approximately 250 ft when it was observed to dive almost vertically into the ground. The engine was operating at a high-power setting at impact, and no faults were found with the aircraft which may have been factors in the accident. The factors which led to the loss of control could not be determined.

Circumstances:

The trainee pilot was undergoing initial endorsement training on the type. After landing on runway 29 with a slight tailwind component, the aircraft continued across the runway 36 complex at a relatively fast taxi speed. The pilot commenced a left turn and the aircraft nosewheel entered an area of soft dirt and collapsed. The instructor advised that the aircraft was not fitted with dual brakes.

The aircraft was engaged on a charter flight from Adelaide to Moomba and Dullingari. The flight from Adelaide to Moomba was without incident and after landing the pilot parked the aircraft adjacent to the refuelling cabinets. He then assisted the passengers from the aircraft and removed baggage from the nose locker. During this period a conversation took place between the pilot and the aircraft refueller. The exact content of that conversation could not positively be determined but it appears that the pilot did not specify the type of fuel to be placed in the aircraft, only which tanks were to be fuelled. As the refueller was fuelling the aircraft, the pilot accompanied his passengers to the airport terminal. When the fuelling was completed the pilot returned, with his passengers, to the aircraft. He signed the fuel release note which showed that 263 litres of Jet A-1 (Aviation turbine fuel) had been supplied, then completed a check of the aircraft's fuel tanks to ensure no water was present in the fuel. The pilot reported that the fuel sample taken was free of water and appeared to him to be the normal fuel used by the PA-31 aircraft, AVGAS (Aviation Gasoline). The pilot and the passengers then boarded the aircraft, the engines were started and the aircraft taxied for a DEPARTURE on runway 12. During the taxiing phase the pilot completed the pre-take-off checks, these including a check that the temperatures and pressure relevant to the operation of the engine were within limits. The pilot subsequently advised that the take-off was normal and after the landing gear was raised, engine power was reduced to the standard settings for the climb. However, at about 500 feet above ground level the pilot sensed a loss of performance and noted that the indicated airspeed was 115 knots, 5 knots lower than normal. He then noticed a further decay in airspeed, accompanied by the onset of engine surging and rough running. He was unable to diagnose the cause of the loss of performance and commenced a turn back towards the aerodrome. Shortly after entering the turn the right hand engine began to misfire and feathering action was initiated for the propeller. At about this time the indicated airspeed had reduced to 85 knots, the aircraft had developed a high rate of sink and the pilot realised that impact with the ground was imminent. The aircraft initially struck the ground with the right wing, then the nose section before the fuselage made heavy contact in a flat attitude, sliding about 45 metres before coming to rest. The aircraft caught fire during the impact sequence and was completely burnt out. The pilot and two of the passengers escaped from the wreckage but attempts to assist the third passenger were thwarted by the fire. The investigation established that JET-A1 fuel had been added to the fuel tanks of VH-DVX, and of the total fuel in the tank approximately 68 percent was JET-A1 fuel. The type of engine fitted to VH-DVX is not compatible with the use of JET-A1 fuel.

Circumstances:

The pilot and his passenger were engaged in a pig culling exercise. The weather conditions at the time were very hot and humid with light winds. The pilot was operating at low forward speed along a creek and just above tree top level, when he felt the helicopter begin to sink. He applied full power and turned right but could not prevent the helicopter from colliding with trees. There were no reported mechanical defects which may have contributed to this accident. It is probable the helicopter was being operated on the edge of its performance envelope and there was insufficient power available to maintain level flight when a down draught was encountered.

Circumstances:

The pilot was landing at a property prior to conducting crop spraying. During the landing roll, the aircraft veered off the strip and overturned in a wheat crop. A subsequent investigation established the left mainwheel hub had failed due to a fatigue crack, allowing the wheel to travel up the landing gear leg. A partial collapse of the left leg then resulted when the axle dug into the ground. The crack had originated from corrosion pitting on the inner wheel half interior surface, which was not visible with the wheel in situ.

The approach was made with full flap extended at an indicated airspeed of between 75 and 80 knots. As the pilot closed the throttle in preparation for landing, the handle of the throttle lever came off in her hand. The aircraft struck the runway heavily and bounced several times, collapsing the nose gear leg. The pilot had been distracted when the throttle lever handle separated during the landing flare. The handle had been attached by an unsuitable retaining bolt.

The pilot stated that when braking was applied after touchdown, the aircraft did not decelerate normally. A go around was carried out, and after the aircraft became airborne, the nosewheel struck a fence. As a result the nosewheel became misaligned and the nose gear collapsed during the subsequent landing at Townsville. Upon arrival the pilot had to orbit for 5 minutes to allow a rain squall to pass. Without overflying the strip he assessed that the wind favoured a landing direction which placed him presently in a wide base position. Due to standing water on the grass strip and a tailwind component, deceleration was minimal. By the time a go around was initiated the aircraft had entered an area of long grass. The flaps were left in the landing position during the go around, this further increased drag and added substantially to the ground run.

Shortly after VH-TJS entered the circuit for runway 14, as number three to land behind two light aircraft, the Aerodrome Controller (ADC) commenced vectoring a Boeing 737 aircraft for descent and approach to land on the opposite direction runway 32. On short final the pilot in command of VH-TJS became aware of aircraft lights approaching from the opposite direction. Shortly afterwards the Boeing crew advised that the aircraft was on final for runway 32, and was instructed by the ADC to continue the approach. The pilot in command of VH-TJS initiated a go-around from a height of about 100 feet above the ground. The Boeing 737 was then cleared to land, and VH-TJS carried out a circuit and landing on runway 14. The pilot of VH-TJS subsequently stated that he was not told of the opposite direction traffic, and said he believed the other aircraft to be following him for a landing on runway 14. Investigation revealed that, during the vectoring process, the ADC specifically mentioned that the other aircraft was for runway 32 on three occasions. At the time VH-TJS commenced the go-around the Boeing 737 was about 4 miles (7.5 kilometres) from the end of the runway at about 1000 feet altitude. There was no breakdown in separation standards or Air Traffic Control procedures.

The aircraft was crossing the threshold, about 300 metres behind an Iroquois helicopter, when the right wing dropped. The nose also dropped and the nosewheel contacted the runway heavily and was broken off. The aircraft slid along the runway for some 200 metres on its nose before coming to rest. The aircraft evidently encountered the wake turbulence created by the helicopter.