When the aircraft had reached a height of about 300 feet agl the winch motor lost power. The pilot released the launch cable and attempted to land straight ahead but the aircraft overshot the end of the landing area and collided with trees. It was considered that at the time of the winch failure, sufficient strip length remained to permit the aircraft to land safely. However, the pilot had not deployed the dive brakes early enough to prevent the overshoot. The reason for the loss of power from the winch motor was not established, and subsequent operations were reported to be normal. This accident was not the subject of an on-scene investigation.

Circumstances:

At the completion of a local flight the pilot selected the landing gear down but there was no subsequent indication that it was down and locked. He cycled the landing gear and actuated the emergency lowering system. The aircraft was directed to remain clear of the circuit for some time before it was cleared to return and fly past the tower five times to allow a visual inspection of the landing gear. After the last fly past, as the aircraft was climbing to the left the engine began to surge. The pilot continued the turn, intending to land on runway 14, and attempted to restore power. However, the engine did not respond, and the aircraft landed heavily in a field 400 metres short of the runway. Inspection of the aircraft after the accident indicated that the landing gear had been down and locked at the time of impact. As the landing gear had been dislodged in the accident, it was not possible to ascertain the cause of the malfunction. It was established that the pilot had flown with the left fuel tank selected until the engine began to surge. Examination of the aircraft showed that the left tank was empty, and the right tank contained approximately 85 litres of fuel. The pilot had evidently become preoccupied with the landing gear problem. He also had to contend with an increase in radio traffic as the airport controllers passed advice to him and prepared the airport for a possible landing with a gear malfunction, all on the one frequency. The pilot's preoccupation caused him to lose awareness of time, and he did not return to his check sequence and change the fuel tank selection before the left tank ran dry. Testing of the fuel system after the accident showed that it was unlikely that, with the limited time available to him, the pilot could switch tanks and get the engine re-started before he was faced with a forced landing. FACTORS 1. The pilot became preoccupied with a landing gear indication malfunction, and lost awareness of time. 2. Fuel starvation when the selected tank ran dry. 3. The engine ceased to deliver power at a height that was probably too low to permit the engine to be restarted. 4. The pilot was forced to land on unsuitable terrain.

As part of the final phase of the rating test, the pilot was required to spray a paddock. An inspection of the area to be treated was carried out. During the procedure turn at the end of the second spray run, the nose dropped and the aircraft struck the ground in a near vertical attitude. The pilot had incorrectly assessed the wind direction and had carried out the procedure turns at the end of the spray runs in the wrong direction. In an effort to align the aircraft for the next run, the pilot tightened the turn and the aircraft stalled.

The pilot intended carrying out a one-day return flight to Luskintyre. However, when in the Luskintyre area he misidentified the Elderslie strip for that of his planned destination and entered the circuit for a landing. It was reported that the later part of the approach was flat and the pilot stated that when the aircraft was about 10 feet above the strip it suddenly dropped. Full power and back stick were applied but the aircraft landed heavily and bounced. The pilot decided to go-around and during the attempt the aircraft struck a runway light and a fence before the throttle was closed. It is probable that the pilot allowed the airspeed to get too low in the later part of the approach and that the aircraft stalled.

The aircraft had made a number of flights spreading superphosphate in hilly country, partially covered by trees. After being loaded with a similar amount of material as previously carried, the aircraft took off and began a gradual climbing turn, downwind, towards the area to be treated. The pilot said the aircraft entered an area of sink and began to lose height. He increased power but failed to notice a large tree ahead of the aircraft until he had almost reached it. The pilot had insufficient distance to manouevre around the tree and elected to clear it by climbing. The aircraft struck the uppermost branches of the tree, at a low forward speed, before descending steeply and impacting heavily in a paddock. The aircraft skidded a short distance and caught fire. The pilot, who had been wearing a full safety harness, was able to escape through a side window.

Circumstances:

The aircraft was being demonstrated for a potential sale. The pilot reported that he was demonstrating a high-speed taxi towards a boat ramp when the aircraft struck a submerged object and cartwheeled sideways. However, the passenger reported that the pilot was demonstrating a touch-and-go. As the pilot applied power for the take-off, the aircraft commenced porpoising. On the third porpoise, the nose pulled into the water and the aircraft water looped to the right, tearing off the left float. The passenger had held a foreign commercial pilot licence but was not type endorsed or experienced in water landings.

The pilot intended to conduct a practice aerobatic flight, and had arranged for an observer on the ground to monitor and assess his performance. The planned sequence was commenced, but the observer noted that the second manoeuvre was not completed satisfactorily, and the aircraft apparently stalled while inverted. After recovering from this situation, further manoeuvres were carried out. Other witnesses suggested that the entries to some of these manoeuvres were performed at higher "G" loadings than normal. The aircraft subsequently entered a spiral dive, which was continued without any apparent effort being made to effect recovery. The aircraft maintained the spiral until it collided with power lines, then impacted the ground. A fierce fire broke out and consumed the wreckage. A detailed investigation failed to discover any defect or malfunction with the aircraft or its systems which might have contributed to the accident. The pilot had been in current practice for aerobatic flight, and there was no evidence of any physical illness or incapacity which might have affected his ability to control the aircraft. However, it was evident that the aircraft was not under control during the spiral dive. It was considered possible that the pilot might have lost consciousness as a result of either a rapid increase in "G", or sustained high "G" loads applied during the preceding aerobatic sequence.

The pilot had successfully carried out a series of seven circuits with touch and go landings. He subsequently advised that he had been experiencing difficulties in maintaining accurate height and tracking on the downwind leg, and while concentrating on these points on the eighth circuit he forgot to lower the landing gear. As he flared the aircraft, he heard a radio message instructing him to go around. Full power was immediately applied, but the aircraft contacted the runway and skidded to a halt. The pilot had been relying on a memorised check list and, when distracted, performed only some of the checks required.

After passenger loading had been completed but before the engines were started, the pilot remembered that a nosewheel chock was still in place. She disembarked and removed the chock, however the aircraft commenced to roll down the slightly sloping tarmac area. The chock was replaced but the aircraft rolled over the chock and the left mainwheel passed over the pilot's right leg. The aircraft came to a halt at the bottom of the slope. The pilot was subsequently unable to recall whether the parking brake had been fully applied, or whether she had inadvertently released the brake when pushing her seat back with her feet on the rudder/brake pedals prior to disembarking to remove the chock.

The pilot received a weather briefing before departing Townsville which indicated that the weather enroute was unsuitable for flight under the Visual Flight Rules. After being issued with a clearance to enter Cairns control zone no further transmissions were received from the aircraft and it failed to arrive at Cairns. The wreckage of the aircraft was located in rain forest on the lower southern slopes of the south peak of the Bellenden Ker Range. The weather in the area at the time was reported as low cloud with heavy rain. The pilot was not qualified for flight in other than visual meteorological conditions. Investigation revealed that the aircraft was serviceable prior to impact. Witnesses reported that they observed the aircraft passing in and out of the cloud base, which was at about 800 feet. They saw the aircraft tracking in a northwesterly direction towards high ground which rose to 4000 feet amsl. The wreckage was discovered at an elevation of 680 feet amsl. The pilot was known to have urgent business commitments and this may have influenced his decision to continue the flight in unsuitable weather conditions.