Circumstances:

The pilot reported that the aircraft was at a critical stage of the approach when it was struck by a severe wind gust. There was insufficient height available to manoeuvre the aircraft and remain clear of the ground. A go-around was considered, however the pilot felt that any application of power would make matters worse. During the attempt to counter the effect of the wind gust the right wing struck the ground, the aircraft landed heavily and the nosewheel collapsed.

Circumstances:

The pilot intended to conduct an aerial inspection of one of his properties prior to departing for his home base. The pilot reported that during the take-off the engine misfired, so he abandoned the take-off and returned to the threshold of the airstrip where he carried out a complete engine run which satisfied him that all was normal. The subsequent take-off was uneventful, and the pilot completed the property inspection. Several minutes after setting heading the engine again misfired, accompanied by backfiring and a loss of power. The pilot attempted to return to the airstrip on his property, but the lack of power committed him to a forced landing. He selected a suitable flat open cultivated paddock and made a successful landing. Vacating the aircraft the pilot noticed a fire burning in the engine bay area, which increased in intensity and completely consumed the aircraft. This accident was not the subject of an on-scene investigation.

On final approach, the pilot reported that the aircraft encountered a strong headwind. At about 30 feet above the ground the aircraft began to sink and the stall warning sounded. The pilot applied some power and selected a higher nose attitude, but the aircraft landed heavily on the mainwheels, bounced onto the nosewheel and the propeller struck the runway. The aircraft ran off the runway before the pilot was able to regain control.

Circumstances:

The aircraft was being repositioned to base after an aerial application operation. The pilot reported that on downwind leg the pre-landing check revealed a soft left brake. He pumped up pressure by engaging the park brake and working the brake pedal. Due to concentrating on the other pre-landing checks and on flying the aircraft he inadvertently left the park brake on. On touchdown the aircraft pulled to the left pitched forward onto the nose and came to rest inverted.

Circumstances:

A report was received that indicated that a jet aircraft struck power lines during an approach to land on Runway 33 at Cairns Airport. The resident of a house approximately 600 metres from the threshold of Runway 33 and on the extended centreline, claimed to have seen what she described as the wheels of the aircraft hitting the power lines after overflying her house during its approach to the runway. Examination of the particular aircraft showed no evidence of it having been in contact with the wires and the pilot reported that the approach was normal. The aircraft flight path was reconstructed using data from the Digital Flight Data Recorder, and this indicated that the height of the aircraft above the ground at the position of the failed powerline was approximately 50 metres. The height of the wires at mid span is approximately 8.6 metres, and the pole height is approximately 9.5 metres. Extensive checks did not reveal any evidence to support the resident's claim. The wires which were allegedly struck by the aircraft wheels showed no evidence of damage. The Far North Queensland Electricity Board (FNQEB) did receive a report of lines down in the area shortly after the arrival of the aircraft. However, the affected lines were not adjacent to the resident's house but were around the corner in the adjoining street some 75 metres away. The damaged wires had been in contact with each other resulting in an explosion, and a blackout in the area. Separators are sometimes fitted to prevent wires from touching and have since been placed on the affected wires when they were repaired. The adjoining span had been similarly dated in the past, and it all so had been fitted with separators to prevent a recurrence. The cause of the wires fusing together could not be positively determined but was probably the result of wake turbulence (wing tip vortices) generated by the aircraft passing overhead. Wingtip vortices are narrow horizontal whirlwinds rotating in opposite directions and streaming rearwards from each wingtip. The wingtip vortices of large aircraft are most intense when the aircraft is flying at low speed with high lift devices extended, such as during an approach to land. The vortices tend to settle behind the generating aircraft and then spread out laterally upon reaching the ground. Under the conditions prevailing on the night of the occurrence, a light wind straight down the runway, it is likely that the vortices developed and caused the power lines to come into contact.

While manoeuvring to commence a clean-up spray run parallel to a power line, the helicopter collided with a spur line. A broken section of the cable struck and severed the tail boom, control was lost and the aircraft struck the ground 150 metres beyond the spur line. The pilot was aware of the presence of the spur line and had crossed it on a number of occasions during the operation. He elected to carry out a previously unplanned clean-up run to dispense the remaining chemical and temporarily overlooked the proximity of the wire. There was some evidence to indicate that the pilot was suffering from fatigue at the time of the accident.

Circumstances:

The weather in the Melbourne area was clear, with good visibility. Runway 34 was in use and visual approaches were required. The aircraft, which was approaching Melbourne Airport from the west, was radar vectored onto base leg and descended to 3000 feet. At 1704 hours Melbourne Approach Control advised the crew that their position was nine miles south-west of the field. They were asked to advise when they had the runway in sight and also to say when the runway 34 lead in strobe lights were sighted. Shortly after, the crew responded that they had the runway and strobe lights in sight. Approach Control gave the crew their position as six miles south-west of the field, told them to make a visual approach and not to descend below one thousand five hundred feet until established on final. At 1706 hours the controller told the crew they were approaching the runway extended centre line. The Approach Controller noted that the aircraft was passing through the extended centre line and had not turned to line up with runway 34. He promptly issued instructions to the aircraft to climb to 2000 feet. At about the same stage the crew realised that the runway they had been looking at was too short for their operations and also decided to go around. Further radar vectors were given and the aircraft subsequently landed normally on runway 34 at Melbourne without any other problems. Runway 35 at Essendon Airport was the runway sighted by the pilots. It does not have lead in strobe lights. The crew indicated they must have seen reflections near Essendon which they mistook for strobe lights. On the approach the crew had seen a runway from a long way out, which they thought was the north/south runway for Melbourne Airport, but was in fact runway 35 at Essendon Airport. In the lighting conditions at the time, they did not see Melbourne Airport, until on the go around. Runway 34 at Melbourne does not have an instrument approach procedure. However, the 165 radial from the Melbourne VHF Omni Range (VOR) radio aid at Melbourne Airport can be used to give an indication of the extended centre line for runway 34. Distance information from Melbourne was also available from the Melbourne International Distance Measuring Equipment. On the approach the minimum height descended to was just over 1000 feet above the elevation of Essendon Airport.

Circumstances:

The pilot was conducting a clean-up run on a crop of tomatoes, which involved flying under a main set of power lines and a branch line. He was aware of the positions of both lines. The pilot flew under the branch line and started to pull up when he suddenly saw the main line. He then attempted to go under that line but made contact with the rudder, part of which was torn off by the impact. The pilot advised that he applied full power and full forward stick to try and counter the nose high/slow speed situation. The aircraft was vibrating badly with associated noise coming from the rear. This was later determined to be from the detached portion of rudder attached to the wire deflector cable, flailing in the slipstream and striking the rear fuselage and elevators. Because of this the pilot decided to land straight ahead immediately, however, the landing area subsequently proved to be unsuitable resulting in further damage to the aircraft.

Circumstances:

During descent, approximately 20 kilometres from the destination aerodrome, the engine lost power. The pilot turned on the electric fuel pump, resulting in the engine briefly regaining power before stopping. By this time the aircraft was near the edge of a thunderstorm with associated rain and turbulence. The pilot attempted a forced landing onto a grass field but overshot the approach due to poor visibility and a tailwind. While manoeuvring to avoid obstacles, the left wing struck the ground, resulting in the aircraft landing heavily, collapsing both nose and right main landing gears. The pilot advised that the engine had lost power due to fuel exhaustion. He attributed this to the use of extra power during the flight to maintain altitude in the hot and turbulent conditions. The mixture had not been leaned to best economy due to an instruction to avoid high engine temperatures following recent maintenance work.

The pilot established two-way communications with Brisbane Flight Service Unit whilst taxiing for take-off. After take-off he attempted unsuccessfully to pass a departure message - checks revealed an electrical failure. The pilot elected to return to Toowoomba and noticed enroute that the radio operated intermittently. In the circuit he selected wheels down and stated that he saw the "gear down and locked" indicator illuminate monentarily and heard the gear motor run. The aircraft was subsequently landed wheels up. Investigation revealed that the connector for the battery earth strap was broken, causing an intermittent electrical supply. The pilot had not checked the emergency gear system to verify the position of the gear.